On Friday, February 21, 2020 at 7:26:26 AM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 8:25 AM Alan Grayson <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > *> how does mechanism reduce the apparent indeterminacy to the computable?* > > > Determinism doesn't mean every fact is computable. >
*I was referring to "mechanism" as Bruno defines it; namely, that a human being can be replicated by a computer. AG* > We know for certain the first 5 Busy Beaver numbers are 0, 1, 4, 6 and 13, > but after that things get dicey. Someday we *might* be able to prove the > 6th one is 4098 (it can't be smaller) and we know the 7th Busy Beaver > number can't be smaller than 1.29*10^865. And we can prove that even with > infinite computing power nobody will ever be able to know what the 1919'th > Busy Beaver number is, it hasn't been proven but I wouldn't be surprised if > the same thing was true for the 6th. > > >> *> On of the things I seriously dislike about MW, which makes it utterly >> REPELLENT (Steven Weinberg's word), is that there are too many damned >> worlds! * > > > Repellent is a very emotional word, and I think that's the primary reason > MW didn't become the standard quantum interpretation 50 years ago, it was > rejected for emotional reasons not intelectual ones. But nature is what it > is and doesn't take our delicate sensibilities into account before deciding > what to be. > > John K Clark > -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/220ce5a6-8fbe-4710-9288-19098a217946%40googlegroups.com.
