Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
On Jul 13, 7:28 pm, David BL <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:
> On Jul 13, 2:54 am, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > Various claims are sometimes made about possibilities
> > in physics that might account for some special mechanism
> > the brain has access to. Usually these are some kind
> > of quantum effects. My understanding is that the idea
> > that the brain takes advantage of quantum effects is
> > not generally accepted, but even if it were true,
> > that doesn't change the situation. Quantum effects
> > are computable. Quantum computers cannot compute
> > anything that regular computers can't. Even if some
> > hitherto-undescribed quantum effect exists, it will be
> > possible to build an abstraction for it. I would be
> > astonished to find that our computational models
> > aren't already up to the task, but even if they aren't,
> > we can simply expand them.
> We donít have a TOE and we donít know whether
> the universe is computable.
"Computability" is a term used to classify functions, not something that describes physical objects. So I don't know what it means to ask whether the universe is computable.
> Since noncomputable problems abound in mathematics I
> would avoid being too presumptuous.
I don't follow.
Marshall Received on Mon Jul 14 2008 - 18:54:01 CEST