Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #2549

Re: The halting problem revisited

Show all headers | View raw

On 29/03/2011 16:39, Lew wrote:
> On 03/29/2011 08:22 AM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>> On 29/03/2011 12:49, javax.swing.JSnarker wrote:
>>> On 29/03/2011 12:21 AM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>>>> On 29/03/2011 00:05, Stefan Ram wrote:
>>>>> Joshua Cranmer<Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> writes:
>>>>>> Heisenberg's uncertainty principle only states that we don't know the
>>>>>> (P)RNG of the world.
>>>>>
>>>>> Only since as recent as 2010 we have
>>>>>
>>>>> »evidence that quantum randomness is indeed
>>>>> incomputable. That means that it could not
>>>>> have been be generated by a computer.«
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25041/
>>>>>
>>>>> »Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1004.1521:
>>>>>
>>>>> Experimental Evidence of Quantum Randomness
>>>>> Incomputability«
>>>>>
>>>>> http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.1521
>>>>
>>>> I do not see that the paper demonstrates that the process underlying QM
>>>> randomness is not algorithmic.
>>>>
>>>> However, I do not believe it is algorithmic.
>>>> QM randomness seems to be a result of asking questions for which there
>>>> is no physical answer.
>>>
>>> Actually, QM randomness is a symptom of indexical uncertainty about
>>> which exact universe you're in out of many that look identical up to a
>>> certain point in time and then diverge, more or less.
>>>
>>> In fact, copies of you end up experiencing each possible universe that
>>> has you in it, so the uncertainty is really about which *you* you are
>>> out of many that have had thus-far-identical experiences.
>>>
>>> Which means the randomness is actually in data from a source external to
>>> any computer inside the universe. But if you simulated the whole
>>> multiverse, by just running Schrödinger's wavefunction for the initial
>>> state forward without collapse, in that simulation would be implicit
>>> emulations of the smaller computer, each receiving a different random
>>> bit-string -- and all embedded in a deterministic whole.
>>>
>>
>> That's what I said (in a different way)!
>> But I agree with you that it is a plausible mechanism in the MWI context
>
> A full model of how the state space collapses must account for Mind,
> mind and consciousness, and must somehow seek to formalize whimsy.

The MWI does not require mind or consciousness because there is no collapse.

> Nothing is determined but that nothing is determined.

I assume you are a friend of Wigners friend...

-- 
Dirk

http://www.neopax.com/technomage/ - My new book - Magick and Technology

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: The halting problem revisited "javax.swing.JSnarker" <gharriman@boojum.mit.edu> - 2011-03-29 07:49 -0400
  Re: The halting problem revisited Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere@gmail.com> - 2011-03-29 13:22 +0100
    Re: The halting problem revisited "javax.swing.JSnarker" <gharriman@boojum.mit.edu> - 2011-03-29 08:35 -0400
    Re: The halting problem revisited Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-03-29 11:39 -0400
      Re: The halting problem revisited Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere@gmail.com> - 2011-03-29 16:55 +0100
        Re: The halting problem revisited Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-03-29 11:59 -0400
          Re: The halting problem revisited Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere@gmail.com> - 2011-03-29 17:18 +0100
  Re: The halting problem revisited Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-03-31 13:15 +1300
    Re: The halting problem revisited "javax.swing.JSnarker" <gharriman@boojum.mit.edu> - 2011-04-04 20:36 -0400

csiph-web