Newsgroups: comp.theory.cell-automata,comp.ai.alife,comp.ai.genetic
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!caen!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU!mjd4c
From: mjd4c@uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU (Michael J. Daniel)
Subject: Re: Help for new student of ALife, GA, and CA programming
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: cobra-fo.cs.virginia.edu
Message-ID: <D3nG09.AL2@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia Computer Science Department
References: <3fkk97$av7@spool.mu.edu> <3fmd3h$djo@network.ucsd.edu>  <3g3psu$cnf@scratchy.reed.edu> <3gna9j$nlp@hptemp1.cc.umr.edu> <3goke5$cos@hptemp1.cc.umr.edu>
Distribution: inet
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 21:36:09 GMT
Lines: 62
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.theory.cell-automata:3298 comp.ai.alife:2268 comp.ai.genetic:4886

In article <3goke5$cos@hptemp1.cc.umr.edu>, fenian@saucer.cc.umr.edu (Christopher Rickey) writes:
> Christopher Rickey (fenian@saucer.cc.umr.edu) wrote:
> : John Hopson (jhopson@reed.edu) wrote:
> : : In article <3g1i2o$fjm@network.ucsd.edu>
> : : dblaettl@waynesworld.ucsd.edu (Dave Blaettler) writes:
> 
> : :     But really, we don't even need that criteria.  If the Life world
> : : were big enough, and allowed to run long enough, the creation of an
> : : intelligent creature is inevitable.  It may take longer than we're
> : : willing to wait, but it must happen, by the "monkey sonata" principle.
> 
> : monkey sonta principle? can you point me to a proof of this principle?
> : how about this. give an infinite number of grad students each a calculator
> : of infinite size. have each add 1 to 2 and continue the process 
> : of counting odd numbers for an infinite period of time. now will one
> : eventually get an even number? probably not. isn
> : t that the same principle?
> 
> nevermind. i realized the error in my logic after i posted. i am still 
> interested in a proof though.


I think you were closer the first time.

It is by no means clear that if we placed one monkey for each atom
in the universe in front of a typewriter and had them type for
1,000,000,000,000,000,000 years, that we would create any interesting works
of literature.
You may say, "You have not waited long enough!"
And I would reply, "Your concept of 'long enough' has no meaning
in this universe, but you expect the results from it to live in this universe."


Similarily with the chinese room problem.
I submit that there is no, and never will be any such, book
that a non-chinese speaking person can sit in a room,
receive intelligent, relevant chinese text, (ie a chapters
from a book of philosophy, along with questions on the chapter)
and using just the book, translate the questions into intelligent 
answers. You can not capture intelligence on a piece of paper.
Or even 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 pieces of paper.
You still only have a stack of paper.


Similarily with the idea non-deterministic polynomial time.
Reality is an intertwining of forces.
If there were really such a thing as an oracle, it would upset the current
balance and all our current laws of logic woudl need to be revalidated.
You cann't simply take the world as we know it and "add" something that can see
the future and not fundatmentally alter the laws of our world.
You cann't change the one thing and keep everything else the same.


Infinite is not a simple concept.


Sorry about the rambling,


Michael


