Re: Artificial Philosophizing

From: Russell Standish <r.standish.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 08:55:55 +1100

On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 08:17:05PM +0100, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we (as observer) perceive at any given time a finite amount of information...
> so what you could know (still as an observer of a system) is finite, hence
> digitalisable at the level of information that you could know about the
> object, so I don't see why a radioactive source and the click pattern on a
> geiger counter cannot be simulated... You could object randomness, but
> generating (and executing) all program by the UD will generate all "random"
> string as well.
>
> Regards,
> Quentin

A UD can generate the set of all random strings, but it still needs to
select a single string to be equivalent to a Geiger counter. AFAIK,
this is impossible for a Turing machine, but rather trivial from a
real, physical machine. I can do it on my computer, for example,
showing it to be capable of more than a Turing machine.

Cheers

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics                         	       0425 253119 (")
UNSW SYDNEY 2052         	         R.Standish.domain.name.hidden             
Australia                                http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Wed Feb 08 2006 - 16:58:17 PST