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