Bruno Marchal writes:
> > Are you suggesting that of two very similar programs, one containing a
> > true random
> > number generator and the other a pseudorandom number generator, only
> > the former
> > could possibly be conscious? I suppose it is possible, but I see no
> > reason to believe
> > that it is true.
>
>
>
>
> It *has* been proved (by diagonalization) that there exist some problem
> in number theory which are soluble by a machine using a random oracle,
> although no machine with pseudorandom oracle can sole the problem.
That's interesting: does this imply it is possible to test a number sequence to see
if it is random?
> KURTZ S. A., 1983, On the Random Oracle Hypothesis, Information and
> Control, 57, pp. 40-47.
>
> But it is not relevant given that self-duplication is already a way to
> emulate true random oracle.
Do you mean by this an algorithm that explores every possible branch, by analogy
with the MWI of QM?
Stathis Papaioannou
_________________________________________________________________
Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail.
http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Sun Aug 27 2006 - 23:39:21 PDT