On Jan 6, 2008, at 15:02 , Ketil Malde wrote:
More seriously, perhaps "quantum" enters into the equation in how the
brain works, perhaps it is even necessary for "thought". However, I
get worried it's just another mystical mantra, a gratuitous factor
that, lacking any theory about how and what
Derek Elkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I don't understand your point. We know what swimming is: floating and
>> moving autonomously.
You're the first one I've heard who would use the term 'swimming' for
ships. (And to be pedantic, wouldn't you say that fish swim, except
when they float?)
On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 12:27 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[...]
> I don't understand your point. We know what swimming is: floating and
> moving autonomously. Thinking is different, since our thinking is (at least
> for some of us) conscious, and we have no idea what is the conscience.
> For good
That's why I like this group so much, very interesting stuff to read, even if
it isn't about Haskell. The problem is that I understand only 1% of it, even if
it is about Haskell ;-)
Regarding this "the universe is a turing machine": until a couple of years ago,
I also was someone that believed
