Prev: Light cancel of energy never happens
Next: combinations of additive and multiplicative creation: Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #181; ATOM TOTALITY
From: rick_s on 19 Jun 2010 16:10
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem

The problem with computers or Turing machines is that they think the
world is made up of yes and no answers.

It never has been that way until the collapse of the wave function.

Until then, everything is in a superposition.

When we use our minds to think, we say maybe a lot.

We say "well based on that 'I GUESS' you are correct.

We almost always qualify our statements.

Yes no or maybe so.

Thats not zero and one. That has never been zero and one.

Cavemen believe that the world is based on a concept of opposites.

For every number there is a negatve number, plus you have hot/cold
fast/slow light/dark, but whats the opposite of a ham sandwich?

You see in programming we are forced to try to make this eroneous
incomplete system work with thing such as a null or a nil value since we
are already using zero as a one.

You have strings of characters that start at 0, sometiomes 1, some have
to be null terminated, you see we really need

if this then that,and if its not this, then maybe we aren't going to find
out what it is, so to keep asking the computer to try to solve an
unsolveable problem i sjust asking for it to wait for a condition that
may never be met.

That is why we never say while this do that, we set th enumber of
iterations if we are a good programmer.

You don't see too many of those freezes any more because good programming
practice tells us to not set ourselves up like that.

If you say do this until true equals false, it will.

If you only program within boundaries,

psuedo code

let x = 0
i is assigned 1 to 100 do
x = x+1

When its finished which it must, x will have a value of zero plus 100

Now lets suppose you have really no idea of what you are attempting to
discover and so you want to use while instead of a for loop, then unless
you use yes no and maybe, then you cannot solve the halting problem.

If yes, then this, if no then that, and if maybe, well maybe if we don't
put something in here we will have a program that doesn't halt and it
will have been our fault all along.

You need to build computers with yes no maybe so circuitry.

Cantor only goes so far with a Cantor set. You can exclude maybe since
the cat is alive or dead, after you open the frickin box but not before.

From: rick_s on 19 Jun 2010 16:38
In article <yxgTn.38803$TL5.31289(a)newsfe24.iad>, me(a)my.com says...
>
>
>Cantor only goes so far with a Cantor set. You can exclude maybe since
>the cat is alive or dead, after you open the frickin box but not before.
>

So when does the wave function collapse? When you look in the box.

So then will it collapse by itself? In some interpretations it will.

If you shoot the cat. If you don't properly administer the cyanide but then
thats like a bug that you find out about later.

So if we can determine if the wavefunction will collapse we can solve the
halting problem.

What does this tell us? We have to observe sonmething.

If the wave function does not collapse until we look, then the program might
not halt unless we look.

Is looking really enough? Looking requires opening the box.

So then we need to click the mouse. Or, we set a timer to perform that task.

If there is no way to determine if the wave function will collapse there is
no way with certainty to tell if a program will ever halt.

But since a computer halting is a simple process we can use maybe to satisfy
a condition IF IT DOES NOT COLLAPSE.

We can collapse the wave function.

So all we have to do in terms of a algorythm is check to see if the box is
open. We test to see if maybe is set to true or false.

If maybe is false the wave function has collapsed.

From: rick_s on 20 Jun 2010 05:55
Ok, while I'm still stoned...

You can use the Shoedinger Equation to solve the Halting Problem.

Go ahead and write papers on that and the next level of architecture will be
more suitable for mission critical systems.

IIn a nutshell, you need a zero one and two, and you need to assign these as
yes no and maybe and treat them with equal validiity. The value will be 2
(2="maybe") until the collapse of the wave function, when it will then be 0 or
1 (yes or no) Which order? Whatever the convention is. So you have to have a
convention and get a free lunch.

You must always be conscious of the maybe superposition because the other
states are going to happen instantaneously while the maybe can take forever.

So if with your Turing machine 2 point O you set "maybe" as a condition at the
same time you set yes or no, "true" or "false", And then this forces you to
consider all the possibilities and to have a 'decision' ready by way of a
function, in the event true false or maybe is triggered.


Use fuzzy logic if you want and say at 60% hit rate then collapse the wave
function.

Backward chaining inference engine, if C then B if B then A
Reverse engineering.
How does that fly?
It floats.
How does it float?
It is filled with Helium.
How does helium float?
It is a lighter than air element.


To get a balloon to float we need a lighter than air element.
Where do we get one - Helium you see we are now going forward after we reverse
engineered a process using a backward chaining inference engine.




 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Light cancel of energy never happens
Next: combinations of additive and multiplicative creation: Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #181; ATOM TOTALITY