Re: Exploiting limitations of Turing machines in Turing tests?
- From: Tero Hakala <tero.hakala@xxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 11:39:33 +0300 (EEST)
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am not the person you asked to expand but, hey, this is Usenet...No, they can't. Because humans are subject to the same limitations.
You are right, there is no such proof. From a mathematical point of
view one could ask either side to prove the case: that an idealised
human brain either is == TM or is != TM, but from a scientific point
of view it makes more sense to expect those that image there is some
way for a wet lump of neurons to escape the limitations of formal
computation to propose how it does this, and to demonstrate the
mechanisms involved.
In one thing that TM's and brains seem to be different is that the
number possible of TM's is infinite, but countable (in the sense
that natural numbers are). While in working human brains, the
neurons get their information in analog manner from other neurons
(ie. real numbers come into play here) if we discount
quantization effects. So it seems that brains (or dynamics of brain)
are uncountable infinite and therefore exceed the number
of possible TM's. And if we take the quantum mechanics into
account, we seem to get into a bottomless swamp. (And TM's, being
deterministic, would have also some difficulty to handle quantum
aspects.. as far as QM is considered valid in the form as it is now)
Can this be considered a valid distinction between brains and TM's?
-T.H
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: Exploiting limitations of Turing machines in Turing tests?
- From: Ben Bacarisse
- Re: Exploiting limitations of Turing machines in Turing tests?
- Prev by Date: Re: maximum common subgraph
- Next by Date: Re: Exploiting limitations of Turing machines in Turing tests?
- Previous by thread: Re: Exploiting limitations of Turing machines in Turing tests?
- Next by thread: Re: Exploiting limitations of Turing machines in Turing tests?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
