Re: Computing the Ineffable [was Re: OT: Quantum Computing -- NOT]

From: Franklin Wayne Poley (
Date: Sun Aug 13 2000 - 16:08:24 MDT

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Clements <>
To: <>
Date: Sunday, August 13, 2000 1:53 PM
Subject: Computing the Ineffable [was Re: OT: Quantum Computing -- NOT]

>Franklin Wayne Poley wrote:
>> <snip> If such a computer is operating beyond the physical limits of
>> the universe, is it metaphysical? Is it doing metaphysical computing?
>Dear Franklin,
>A great deal of discussion of this topic has happened on this list over the
last four years. If you
>start looking around in the archives at

Well I'm all for "giving the devil his due" but I couldn't use the search
engine on Lucifer's web site. My regards to the Old Boy anyway.

you can follow many
>ineffable and qualiatative threads. Unfortunately, the threads are not
indexed very well, so you are
>on your own.
>No one understands, yet, exactly what is going on at the quantum level. We
have plenty of
>experimental data that allow us to infer some rules, and we have made the
"Standard Model" which has
>worked well for the last 20 years. As we make models that have predictive
power, we gain the ability
>to use quantum properties to make devices. Whatever is happening at the
tiny scale of quantum
>mechanics, is happening in the physical universe, it is just that at the
scale of our daily lives the
>physical universe looks much, much, simpler than it really is. It turns
out that reality is stranger
>(and richer) than metaphysics, so who needs metaphysics.

Ahhh Grasshopper:
Dualist and Monist-subjectivist philosophies constitute metaphysics IMO. I
also think we can substitute "general scientific theories" for these names,
going by Runes Dictionary of Philosophy and its definition of philosophy as
"the most general science".
So these two theories posit that in theory one can hold numbers and their
calculations in mind by "mentalist" methods, without recourse to physical
computing. I am then the thinker and not the thought and always will be so.
A thought can be defined physically as is done in AI. The thinker is
metaphysical and always has the capacity to form thoughts at a level higher
than the physical. You might call that a "creative" power.
And quoting Genesis, man was FORMED from the dust of the earth like the
animals but CREATED in God's image and likeness. Watson's seminal 1913 ms in
"Psych Review" put an end to MENTALISM they said but isn't it ironic that
psychologists who reject mentalism still call that which is assessed by IQ
testing and related abilities, "MENTAL Ability"? So there is thinking and
meta-thinking; intelligence and meta-intelligence. And maybe the
Grasshoppers of Quantum Mechanics are catching up now. And as for me? I
dream of turning BC into "Happy Honda Land" by setting up a Honda Dealership
which will sell P3's and beyond with quantum robotic controllers.
If Hameroff is right I already have a quantum controller on my shoulders.

"Quantum mechanic
My Honda is erratic
I'll show you the schematic."

>From Thomas Dolby's tape "Armageddon"


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:35:53 MDT