Don't understand your point fully. Perhaps my English is too bad. I have had the impression, that pei wang thought that gödels theorem and the halting problem do not apply for human beings because they are open systems.
Perhaps he is right but not because of the open system issue but because it is not clear whether the universe can really be modeled as a turing machine. I only wanted to clarify this point and did not claim to have found "something new". -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Vladimir Nesov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Samstag, 26. April 2008 20:55 An: agi@v2.listbox.com Betreff: Re: [agi] How general can be and should be AGI? On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 9:39 PM, Dr. Matthias Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think, your argumentation is that an AGI system (e.g. human being) can > solve any halting problem because it can change > over time by making more and more experiences. But the even the "experience > making" human being can be regarded as a turing machine with a fixed and > finite algorithm. It's pretty bald to expect that many people could've been missing such a flaw in your straw man for years, isn't it? -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?&; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=101455710-f059c4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
