that is why someone came up with them, no? but I currenty don't think that our universe has such a feature
-
-
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 -
It's only necessary to explain some epiphenomena whose status is still unclear today (things that you can't do in your standard...
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mcarberg
if it is an epiphenomen you won't have to define it by definition, because it does not play any role in the causal structure
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
"An epiphenomenon is not to be defined by definition." You are probably joking.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Closed curves timelike create (could create) an equivalence between the class of classical computers and the class of...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
... quantum computers. In addition, a quantum computer running in P can be simulated by a classical computer running in PSPACE.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
So, quantum computers would be no more powerful than classical computers. Hence the futility of the QC.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
effectively, but not efficiently. that is only an argument against anticomputationalists, not for digital classical physics
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.