I think I found a way to get computationalism fully to work, and its fundamental algebra is the boolean automaton, but I am worried that fully accepting the solution will turn me in into a boolean automaton. If I am wrong, I will lose consciousness, if I am right, I never had it.
If I understand correctly, a quantum computer would operate at least in BQP, and if BQP is not fully within P, then the inverse is not true, i.e. a TM could not efficiently a quantum TM. But digital physicists mostly think that the the Church Turing thesis is a physical law.
-
-
Regarding physical law, an alternative view (
@DavidDeutschOxf ): “computation is very fundamental but is not the thing the universe is made of." Information exists at every level, but *as a law of nature* only in explaining people & computers.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UohR3OXzXA8 … -
Imagining 'the original Turing machine that runs our universe' might be a mental trap that leads to turtles all the way down.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.