Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.meta,alt.memetics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!torn!utnut!utgpu!pindor
From: pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor)
Subject: Re: Randomness and free will
Message-ID: <DMDB10.2A5@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca>
Organization: UTCC Public Access
References: <DMBo00.7A@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> <4f7oah$ec0@news.cc.ucf.edu>
Distribution: inet
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 18:50:59 GMT
Lines: 44
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.physics:169590 comp.ai:36780 comp.ai.philosophy:37461 sci.philosophy.meta:24275

In article <4f7oah$ec0@news.cc.ucf.edu>,
Thomas Clarke <clarke@acme.ist.ucf.edu> wrote:
>In article <DMBo00.7A@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca  
>(Andrzej Pindor) writes:
..............
>To me it is an empirical question about whether regular, classical
>computer hardware can do the job in a box that can sit beside
>my desk.
>
Absolutely. Lacking at present the proper empirical data we can only
extrapolate from what we have. So far, no relevant limits on classical systems
have been found (Penrose's argument notwithstanding).

><My usual advocacy of the possible relevance of QM deleted> 
>
>> >These are special times in computational research.
>
>> As I have pointed out above, a simple calculation of the number of possible
>> states in the brain (classical), taking just 10^11 0-1 neurons (and the brain
>> is definitely more complex than this) gives you enough states for any purpose
>> you can dream of (and much, much more) _without_ invoking QM.
>
>Computers now have memories with 10^9 bits or more.  They have clock
>rates of hundreds of megahertz, a factor of 10^5 or more faster than 
>the brain. Thus we should not have long to wait before we have a 
>conversation with a computer if you are right.  I forget exactly
>when its supposed to happen, but according to Moravec computers
>will equal the brain sometime in the next century.  
>Then the issue of the significance of non-classical effects can
>be settled once and for all.
>
Clearly, the number of states is not sufficient by itself (how about a wall
executing WordPerfect?) to achieve a required input-output correlations.
The issue however is that the phase space is vast enough to make arguments
about a need of QM effects void.

>Tom Clarke

Andrzej
-- 
Andrzej Pindor                        The foolish reject what they see and 
University of Toronto                 not what they think; the wise reject
Information Commons                   what they think and not what they see.
pindor@breeze.hprc.utoronto.ca                      Huang Po
