DAMIEN BRODERICK SAID: "...Researchers like those at the PEAR Lab have found
that a process needs to be non-deterministically random to be influenced
CYMM SAID: I've noted this PEAR observation..hence the tunnel diode and not
a psuedorandom algorithm.
Some time back I was fiddling both with this and the "non-computability" of
If the emergent Quantum Wavefunction in very complex adaptive systems is
indeed strongly coupled to a quantum potential in system space (equivalent,
I suppose, to what J Sarfatti thinks...); then I suspect that the
computational process carried out by some classes of such wavefunctions are
equivalent to Turing machines with densely packed cells on (finite or
infinite) tapes that move at finite speeds.
Such cell-sets could be of cardinality <c; c; or 2^c (...or different!).
Such machines (which cannot exist in "classical" 20th century physics) might
HALT on computations that a regular infinite Turing machine will never HALT
So certain classes of quantum computers may not only practically outperform
classical computers... but might outperform 'em in computability terms.
Aspects of consciousness & some PSI might then be in the class of
classically "non-computable" stuff.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:34:35 MDT