Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.10 $; site uiucdcsp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcsp!leimkuhl
From: leimkuhl@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU
Newsgroups: net.math
Subject: Re: Mind as Turing Machine: a proof
Message-ID: <9600024@uiucdcsp>
Date: Thu, 7-Nov-85 13:27:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcsp.9600024
Posted: Thu Nov  7 13:27:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 10-Nov-85 07:04:41 EST
References: <509@klipper.UUCP>
Lines: 30
Nf-ID: #R:klipper.UUCP:509:uiucdcsp:9600024:000:1212
Nf-From: uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU!leimkuhl    Nov  7 12:27:00 1985


/* Written  6:09 am  Nov  1, 1985 by biep@klipper.UUCP in uiucdcsp:net.math */
/* ---------- "Re: Mind as Turing Machine: a proof" ---------- */
>
>[]
>	The problem in the discussion in that nobody has stated clearly
>	which equivalence relation he is using. Psycholinguistics has
>	found that humans can search their memory in < log n time, n
>	being the number of items. Turing machines clearly can not do
>	better than order n time. Proof that humans are not Turing machines.
>	(Note I took an equivalence relation which did look at time.)
>

This is crap.  Human beings do not have perfect recall--computers do.  Thus
humans execute imperfect searches on large sets.  The computer must perform
a complete search.

Furthermore, if data is stored in an ordered binary tree (who's to say that's
not how the mind stores data) then searches can be conducted by turing
machine in log n time.


> 1) Before you flame me: yes, I have a masters of mathematics.

What the heck does this mean?  Most of the people reading this notesfile
have at least a bachelors in mathematics, many have Ph.Ds.  A master's
in mathematics is certainly no license to spout nonsense without rebuttal.

-Ben Leimkuhler
(uiucdcs!leimkuhl)