📄 Extracted Text (964 words)
From: "jeffrey E." <[email protected]>
To: Joscha Bach
Subject: Re:
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 12:00:00 +0000
Thx perfect
On Sunday, 14 August 2016, Joscha Bach < > wrote:
Jeffrey, there are several sides to this:
1. Computers that are technically different from our current digital computer architectures, but can do the same
things, because they can mathematically be proven to be equivalent, and we can build a digital equivalent.
Examples are computers with ternary logic, neural networks, factor graphs etc.
2. Probabilistic computers: instead of deterministic state transitions, they change state with a certain
probability. We can get them to approximate determinism with arbitrary precision by stacking the probabilistic
gates. Many cognitive scientists and AI researchers believe that brains are in that category. (We can also
reproduce their behavior on a digital computer by adding random noise.)
3. Computers that are technically different from our current digital computers, but are still mathematically
equivalent, yet it may not be practical to build a digital equivalent, because it would be too large or too slow.
Examples are DNA computers, chaotic computers etc. Digital physicists (Steven Wolfram, Ed Fredkin) believe
that even the universe is in this category. Chris Eliasmith thinks the brain is in this category (we need to build
electronic simulations of spiking neurons).
4. Quantum computers: they still cannot do anything but manipulate information, but they can (hopefully one
day) do a few things efficiently, like factoring large numbers, so they are in principle more powerful than
conventional computers. Seth Lloyd thinks the universe is in this category, and Penrose thinks the brain is in
this category.
5. Hypercomputers with true continuum dynamics. Such computers can solve the 3 body problem with infinite
precision in finite time etc. (Most of) traditional physics believed that the universe must be continuous, and
even contemporary physics usually has continuous time etc. Such computers can be approximated to an
arbitrary degree by digital computation, but not reproduced exactly. Most computer scientists with an opinion
on the matter think that such hypercomputers cannot exist.
6. Hypercomputers with true infinities, which can use an infinite number of inputs to compute a result in finite
time. For instance, in this view, all of the universe (not just a finite amount of information in its lightspeed
cone) could affect a single point.
7. A-causal computers: For instance, a universe with time machines could send information that you compute
today to help you in your past. Mathematically, such computers can be described, but there is no indication that
they could exist.
0. Reversible computers: A reversible computer cannot delete information, i.e. every state has exactly one
preceding state. Reversible computers can be easily implemented in a normal digital computer, but a reversible
computer that tries to implement a digital computer will accumulate entropy in the form of garbage bits. I
believe that our universe is a reversible computer (our brain is obviously not).
The list is not exhaustive, but I think these are the most relevant categories of unconventional/alternative
computation, from a theoretical perspective. Additionally, there are notions of things that are "more than
EFTA00821390
computation" in any of the senses above. They involve referential semantics, normative/social semantics and
other dark magic. Leibniz, Searle and many other philosophers believe that our brains and the universe do
"more than computation", but they do not have good concepts to explain or formalize their ideas. They
probably cannot have such concepts, because they would have to leave the domain of mathematics (i.e. formal
languages) for them, so there is very little to talk about except for negative claims ("computers cannot do X").
> On Aug 13, 2016, at 15:55, jeffrey E. <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://uncomp.uwe.ac.uk/LCCOMP/Anuncios/Entries/2015/8/31_UCNC_2015.html
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Joi Ito wrote:
> Looks interesting. Haven't seen it before. Sounds like something Joscha would know.
>> On Aug 13, 2016, at 6:23 AM, jeffrey E. <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Natural/Unconventional Computing and Its Philosophical Significance - MDPI
» MDPI > pdf
» Have you guys looked at this?
» --
» please note
>> The information contained in this communication is
>> confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
>> constitute inside information, and is intended only for
>> the use of the addressee. It is the property of
>> JEE
>> Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
>> communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
>> and may be unlawful. If you have received this
>> communication in error, please notify us immediately by
>> return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and
>> destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
>> including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
• please note
> The information contained in this communication is
> confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
> constitute inside information, and is intended only for
> the use of the addressee. It is the property of
> JEE
> Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
> communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
> and may be unlawful. If you have received this
> communication in error, please notify us immediately by
> return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and
EFTA00821391
> destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
> including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
please note
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
EFTA00821392
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
24bb0a5c9df6af6f8422c983c26a85bacef69f67006df667136dc815ea0941af
Bates Number
EFTA00821390
Dataset
DataSet-9
Document Type
document
Pages
3
Comments 0