Xref: utzoo comp.ai:2779 talk.philosophy.misc:1669 Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!microsoft!chrispi From: chrispi@microsoft.UUCP (Chris Pirih) Newsgroups: comp.ai,talk.philosophy.misc Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence and Intelligence Keywords: random? oh no! Message-ID: <1069@microsoft.UUCP> Date: 2 Dec 88 22:52:07 GMT References: <484@soleil.UUCP> <0XTukNy00Xol41W1Ui@andrew.cmu.edu> <42328@linus.UUCP> Reply-To: chrispi@microsoft.UUCP (Chris Pirih) Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA Lines: 22 In article <42328@linus.UUCP> bwk@mbunix (Kort) writes: >Andrew C. Plotkin writes: >>I maintain that a human can be simulated by a Turing machine. Comments? > ... I use a quantum amplifier in my coin flipper. >Correct me if I'm wrong. But a Turing Machine is obliged to follow >a deterministic program. Hence a Turing machine cannot simulate my >dice-tossing method. Nothing prevents the Turing machine from flipping a coin and acting [deterministically] on the [random[?]] result. (What exactly are we trying to simulate here, Barry? Is the coin, with its quantum randomness, a part of the human who consults it?) Besides, is it necessary that a simulated coin-flip be "truly" random, or just effectively unpredictable (i.e., that the Turing android eschew foreknowledge of its pseudo-random pseudo-coin-flip)? The latter seems sufficient to me. --- chris (Besides, I never toss dice to make a decision; your Turing machine should have no problem simulating me...)