Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #2538
| From | Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: The halting problem revisited |
| Date | 2011-03-29 13:22 +0100 |
| Organization | Dirk Bruere at Neopax |
| Message-ID | <8ve17fFto9U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <slrnip235j.phi.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <imr30v$vo7$1@dont-email.me> <randomness-20110329010322@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <8vd51lFlq1U1@mid.individual.net> <imsh0v$11t$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
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 -- 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
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