Interessant. Sehr. Ziemlich nah an meiner Denkweise.
-
-
I'm sure the way of cellular automata in hyperbolic and Malament-Hogarth spaces (plus a few other doodads) is not free. Wait and see.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mcarberg
I don't think we can have hyperturing stuff. No Malament-Hogarth if I can help it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
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 -
Replying to @Plinz
'God' is a word that has no meaning for me. Nevertheless, non-Turing computability is an outgrowth of turingian universes.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mcarberg
'God' is only used metaphorically. We need to have a working computer (state memory + transition function, at least).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
I understood. But I don't like usual and boring metaphors with 'God'. I'm sorry.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
For Aristotle, God is simply the First Mover, i.e. a label for the universe computer itself. I am afraid we need _some_ machinery
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.