Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

Hi Bruno, Long time lurker here, very intrigued by all the discussions here when I have time for them! Earlier in response to Colin Hales you wrote: Actually, comp prevents artificial intelligence. Can you elaborate on this? If we assume comp (I say yes to the doctor) then I can be

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

Colin, Thanks for the paper. I have just browsed it. Two small notes. I like [Turing et al., 2008]. It seems that he has passed his test successfully. I find term Natural Computation (NC) a bit confusing. I guess that I understand what you means but the term Computation sounds ambiguously,

Fwd: The final TOE?

Thank you for your reply! My response is interleaved below: On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 1:03 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: This is a commonplace.  So far as I know there are *no* physicists who think there are singularities in spacetime (and haven't been for a long time).  Everybody

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

Hi Evgenii, I expect you are not alone in struggling with the Natural Computation (NC) vs Artificial Computation (AC) idea. The difference is in the paper and should be non-existent of COMP is true. The paper then shows a place where it can't be true hence AC and NC are different .ie. the