- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Bruno Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:25:41 +0100

On 12 Jan 2009, at 17:24, Mirek Dobsicek wrote:

*>
*

*> Thank you for a quick answer! I'll take a look at it, my curiosity
*

*> approves additional items on my TODO list :-)
*

Manage keeping finite your todo list :)

I have finished the reading of the paper I mentioned (Deutsch's

Universal Quantum Turing Machine revisited) and I see they have very

similar problems, probably better described. The paper mentions (but

does not tackle) an old problem already described by Shi 2002, which

made me think at the time that the notion of Universality is a bit

dubious in the quantum realm.

To sum up: is there a (never stopping) quantum counting algorithm? I

think I can build a Quantum UD from it, well in case the Shi problem

is not too much devastating.

But here, and now, I got a feeling there is just no quantum counting

algorithm ...

Cheers,

Bruno

PS Note that AUDA (the arithmetical UDA) is in principle already able

to solve completely that problem. It is still possible that "the

material hypostases" of the self-observing *classical* universal

machine lacks both the kestrels and the starlings, and their

descendant combinators in which case comp predicts that physics is NOT

Turing Universal. Comp would predict that not all natural numbers are

in any possible nature or physics!

"in principle" only because the translation in arithmetic leads to

very complex arithmetical formula (bounded by PI_1 IN Arithmetical

Truth, if you know a bit of degrees of unsolvability. I will perhaps

explain a bit of this, but take it easy for not making explode the

todo list :).

Note the beauty of comp: even if there are no physical universal

machine in the physical universe (including the physical universe(s)),

*you* (and other persons) are and remains universal machine.

We do not live in physical universes, we just traverse them to be able

to chat some bits, perhaps. The first persons would be spiraling

through an infinite sequence of rotations, if said through an image.

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

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?hl=en

-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Received on Mon Jan 12 2009 - 12:25:49 PST

Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:25:41 +0100

On 12 Jan 2009, at 17:24, Mirek Dobsicek wrote:

Manage keeping finite your todo list :)

I have finished the reading of the paper I mentioned (Deutsch's

Universal Quantum Turing Machine revisited) and I see they have very

similar problems, probably better described. The paper mentions (but

does not tackle) an old problem already described by Shi 2002, which

made me think at the time that the notion of Universality is a bit

dubious in the quantum realm.

To sum up: is there a (never stopping) quantum counting algorithm? I

think I can build a Quantum UD from it, well in case the Shi problem

is not too much devastating.

But here, and now, I got a feeling there is just no quantum counting

algorithm ...

Cheers,

Bruno

PS Note that AUDA (the arithmetical UDA) is in principle already able

to solve completely that problem. It is still possible that "the

material hypostases" of the self-observing *classical* universal

machine lacks both the kestrels and the starlings, and their

descendant combinators in which case comp predicts that physics is NOT

Turing Universal. Comp would predict that not all natural numbers are

in any possible nature or physics!

"in principle" only because the translation in arithmetic leads to

very complex arithmetical formula (bounded by PI_1 IN Arithmetical

Truth, if you know a bit of degrees of unsolvability. I will perhaps

explain a bit of this, but take it easy for not making explode the

todo list :).

Note the beauty of comp: even if there are no physical universal

machine in the physical universe (including the physical universe(s)),

*you* (and other persons) are and remains universal machine.

We do not live in physical universes, we just traverse them to be able

to chat some bits, perhaps. The first persons would be spiraling

through an infinite sequence of rotations, if said through an image.

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

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?hl=en

-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Received on Mon Jan 12 2009 - 12:25:49 PST

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:15 PST
*