I don't think we can have hyperturing stuff. No Malament-Hogarth if I can help it.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
One of the properties of Malament-Hogarth spaces (and some types of hyperbolic spaces) is precisely the non-Turing computation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mcarberg
that is why someone came up with them, no? but I currenty don't think that our universe has such a feature
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
This is a priori rather unlikely, indeed. But in my opinion it's so elegant and aesthetic that I hope it captures a piece of reality.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mcarberg
It means that God has to buy a hypercomputer. I am unwilling to sell him one, unless you prove that I must.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
What if another god comes round having one, and his universe boots faster? (Insert complexity classes that don’t fit tweet)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
The big question at the moment is really if quantum computers can truly outperform parallel classical ones.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Okay. This rises the question of time. If you haven’t time yet, “outperforming” is what exactly?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
time only exists as the rate of change of the input vector with respect to the clockspeed of the observing computer
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Okay. The usual way. But as we are INSIDE the world, I deem the speed of the simulation/computation as not so interesting.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.