Xref: utzoo comp.ai:2289 talk.religion.misc:7777
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!uwvax!oddjob!mimsy!aplcen!aplcomm!stdc.jhuapl.edu!jwm
From: jwm@stdc.jhuapl.edu (Jim Meritt)
Newsgroups: comp.ai,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: The Ignorant assumption
Message-ID: <1929@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu>
Date: 22 Sep 88 12:58:57 GMT
References: <1369@garth.UUCP> <2346@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> <1383@garth.UUCP> <372@quintus.UUCP> <1390@garth.UUCP> <388@quintus.UUCP> <7059@aw.sei.cmu.edu>
Sender: news@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu
Reply-To: jwm@aplvax.UUCP (Jim Meritt)
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: JHU-Applied Physics Laboratory
Lines: 22

In article <7059@aw.sei.cmu.edu> firth@bd.sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) writes:
}In article <388@quintus.UUCP> ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
}
}>But is there any reason to suppose that the universe _is_ a Turing machine?
}
}None whatever.  The conjecture is almost instantly disprovable: no Turing
}machine can output a true random number, but a physical system can.  Since
}a function is surely "computable" if a physical system can be constructed
}that computes it, the existence of true random-number generators directly
}disproves the Church-Turing conjecture.


Love it!

If the universe is random, you can have uncaused events.
If the universe is not random, it is (a type of) Church-Turing machine...


Disclaimer: Individuals have opinions, organizations have policy.
            Therefore, these opinions are mine and not any organizations!
Q.E.D.
jwm@aplvax.jhuapl.edu 128.244.65.5  (James W. Meritt)