From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ub!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!libra.wistar.upenn.edu Mon Jan  6 10:30:24 EST 1992
Article 2481 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ub!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!libra.wistar.upenn.edu
>From: weemba@libra.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Edelman's non-computability non-argument
Message-ID: <61325@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: 2 Jan 92 20:08:09 GMT
References: <61194@netnews.upenn.edu> <1992Jan2.143651.3317@csc.canterbury.ac.nz>
Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
Reply-To: weemba@libra.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
Lines: 17
Nntp-Posting-Host: libra.wistar.upenn.edu
In-reply-to: chisnall@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz (The Technicolour Throw-up)

In article <1992Jan2.143651.3317@csc.canterbury.ac.nz>, chisnall@cosc (The Technicolour Throw-up) writes:
>From article <61194@netnews.upenn.edu>, by weemba@libra.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener):
>> Edelman, eg, took the outside world as the deciding factor against
>> the computability of his models.

>Could you elaborate on Edelman's reasoning?  I can understand using
>interactions with an outside world as an argument against real life
>predictability but how does he get non-computability?

There's nothing to elaborate. He just points out that Turing machine
computability is rather narrowly defined, and his model makes enough
of a role of the outside world that he thinks it hopeless to reduce
his model to a Turing machine.

I haven't the foggiest clue as to how to truly model the outside world.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@libra.wistar.upenn.edu)


