On  Mon, 16 Dec 1996  James Rogers <jamesr@best.com> Wrote:
                  
                >I have taken many courses in computer architecture.  I am                 
                >familiar with evolution of very low level as well as higher                 
                >level constructs. I have even designed and fabricated simple          
                >integrated circuits from scratch.  I could design a basic 
                >ALU from the ground up if I had to. I even understand how                 
                >and why different types of transistors and transistor                 
                >materials do what they do on a chemical level.
                   
I am sure that all of the above is true.
                     
                >What part don't I understand?
                     
If you understand how a computer does arithmetic you must understand what  
the machine will do, what its output will be, when it takes 5203 to the 127 
power. So tell me, what is 5203 ^127?  My point is that somebody could be 
very familiar with every one on the 26 letters in the English Language but 
still not understand the subtly in Shakespeare.
                  
                >I *do* understand turbulence (as well as anyone does).  
                  
I will concede that you do understand turbulence, as well as anyone does.
                  
                >our difficulty in adequately describing turbulence has to do                 
                >with the complexity of the system   
                  
I agree. 
                  
                >a level of complexity not found in the study of elementary                 
                >arithmetic logic structures.
                  
It's true that the sort of complexity seen in turbulence is not found in the 
structure of a CPU, but it is found in the operation of a CPU.
                  
                >It sounds like you are saying that it is impossible for                 
                >humans to truly understand anything.   
                  
No, I admit that you know a lot, I know one or two things myself, I'm saying  
it is impossible for humans to truly understand everything.
                  
                >You can duplicate the binary computational sequence by                 
                >arranging and moving pebbles.  
Certainly true, and then nobody would understand pebbles.
                                               
                                            John K Clark     johnkc@well.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQCzAgUBMrY95n03wfSpid95AQGsvQTvT+VBUot3KPcsYLgVls8q0+dPHygXzQH6
2BbnkbbLEcQ27JMhhjidHWYiBl50xdUdJCAKw5tDdvMS5id2c+JOIimOQwUqQMU3
BDPI/pRaxdixYwHQgrPM089MD7b/CMB6AJ+Ooh9BO7yQPY/l2QBduT6X2dc8Z5o2
3dQS71h1k1Sl96G7YpiOxhW4we0L6eUkXMFXfq3Mg//NgwFQ4io=
=bw9C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----