Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mmintl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Machines
Message-ID: <764@mmintl.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Nov-85 22:39:39 EST
Article-I.D.: mmintl.764
Posted: Sun Nov  3 22:39:39 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Nov-85 07:43:15 EST
References: <2464@sjuvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Distribution: net
Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT
Lines: 19

In article <2464@sjuvax.UUCP> tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody) writes:
>Proposed definition 1: A Machine is any deterministic system.  That
>is, its current states are exhaustively determined by its prior
>states.

(I will assume you want to say "by its prior states and its inputs";
otherwise this is nonsense.)

Even with this emendation, I don't think this definition of Machine
encompasses the standard meaning of machine.  If I build a device which
includes a geiger counter, and performs differently depending on when
that geiger counter detects a particle, this is not a deterministic system.
(Some of the particles picked up by the counter will have been emitted
from the materials the device is made out of, so cannot be counted as
inputs.)  Most people would have no hesitation about calling this a
machine.

Frank Adams                           ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
Multimate International    52 Oakland Ave North    E. Hartford, CT 06108