2015-06-10 13:00 GMT+02:00 Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>:
> Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 10 Jun 2015, at 02:41, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >> Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >>>> On 09 Jun 2015, at 15:11, Bruce Kellett wrote: >>>> >>>>> Bruno Marchal wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 09 Jun 2015, at 09:11, Bruce Kellett wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why not? If it can emulate a specific purpose Turning machine, it >>>>>>> can emulate a universal Turing machine. I think Putnam's argument for >>>>>>> unlimited pancomputationalism implies this. >>>>>>> >>>>>> I am not convince by that argument. Show me a rock program computing >>>>>> the prime numbers. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Show me a Turing machine that can compute the prime numbers >>>>> >>>> Easy but tedious, and distracting exercise. >>>> Show me how to emulate just K, that is the function which send (x, y) >>>> to x. it is not obvious this can be done, because y is eliminated, you need >>>> a black hole for it, and a proof that it does not evaporate. >>>> >>> >>> You are becoming a physicalist, Bruno! >>> You seem to be concerned by Landauer's principle, and the difficulty of >>> eliminating physical information. This is not a problem for a Turing >>> machine. It is a finite state machine, so define one state as (x,y) and >>> another as (x). Then the operation when the machine finds itself in the >>> state (x,y) is to move to the state (x). Not a problem. Even a rock can do >>> it! >>> >> >> How? The physicist in me is pretty sure that there is no K, nor S, in the >> physical core. >> >> But I could agree that with pebble, we can argue that we can implement an >> approximation of K. >> But not of much more complex program. If you believe that, you will first >> need to show me how you read and retrieve the information for the rock, and >> how the rock computes. >> > > Digital computation is just a sequence of states. With the rock, as we > warm it gradually (by the sun, or in the fire), it passes through a > sequence of states. We identify these correctly to give whatever > computation you want. Then the computation will be in the mapping which is the interpreter... the rock itself is missing the machine interpreting the state and relating all the sequence of states of the rock... The rock and the interpreter is a computation, the rock alone is not. Quentin > This is the basic pan-computationalism thesis -- everything is a > computation, and everything is a computer. > > > Bruce > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
