|
|
For those interested in the Algebraic Geometry thread, I have so far been very impressed with the text: Even if another text is chosen, I will likely continue to use this one as a supplementary text. Also, though not perhaps suitable as a reading group text, I have been working through 'An invitation to AlgebraicGeometry' by Karen Smith et al. It is very terse and moves very quickly, yet it is very insightful. Send Friam mailing list submissions to
[hidden email]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[hidden email]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[hidden email]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (John Kennison)
2. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (John Kennison)
3. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (Marcus Daniels)
4. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (Frank Wimberly)
5. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (John Kennison)
6. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (Frank Wimberly)
7. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (Nick Thompson)
8. Formalizing the concept of design (Nick Thompson)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Kennison <[hidden email]>
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:32:37 +0000
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Hi Marcus, Frank, et al,
I am a mathematician who knows category theory, which Rosen seems to have found exciting. My thinking about a machine that would learn how to reprogram itself is surely at a naive level, but it seems to me that it would
feel more like a being than a machine. All I know about Genetic Programming is what I just read after Googling that term and it looks like great idea. Frank's credentials are impressive but I don't know enough to, as yet, formulate a reasonable question to
him.
It looks that some very sophisticated programs can evolve and reprogram themselves which means, I think, that sequential machines can do amazing things. I guess my question would be:
Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?'
I have read Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" and Hofstadter's "I am a Strange Loop". There are parts of each book which still seem vague to me, but it seems likely that the answer to the above question is "No". But
then I would need a different approach to trying to figure out what Rosen might be driving at. (I once had s copy of Rosen's "Life Itself" but I can't find it now --so I ordered a used copy for about $9.).
On Geometric Algebra --my Googling of this term suggests that it has to do with what I would call tensors, which I saw briefly in an undergraduate Physics course, and very abstractly in a graduate Math course. I convinced
myself they were about the same thing
--John
From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 11:11:10 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
How idoes genetic programming with automatic function definition not achieve this?
I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I don’t see how to go about constructing such
a thing, unless I assume that there are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will settle on trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential machine. I think that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel machine (in which
various operations happen simultaneously) will not do the trick because given any parallel machine one can define a sequential machine that functions in the same way. One might make a machine in which the outputs only happen with a certain specified probability,
but I don’t think that is different enough. So I rephrase the problem as describing an entity that receives inputs and produces outputs that is cannot be duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic sequential machine (one in which the outputs happen
with a specified probability). I thought of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules for how to react to inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that the rules may change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems more
biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For example, if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous performance, then there is a new state, of being
dissatisfied, and the reprograming activity can, it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated rules for producing an output.
--John
From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Tom Johnson <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
To: Friam@redfish. com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Yes, but not with multiple signatories. Sorry.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks, Tom,
Still trying to figure out logistics. I have written the NM-ican to find out how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response. Do you have any experience with this?
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]]
On Behalf Of Tom Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
To: Friam@redfish. com <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
I will sign on, Nick.
Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University
Hi, all,
Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New Mexican’s requirements. I have a few signatories, would love some more. I will bring the letter with me to our service on Friday. Even if you don’t plan to sign, please
feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.
Nick
To the New Mexican
We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in Santa Fe. We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young voters and their parents. Institutions of learning and their students
are under stress. Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning as our best research students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as cashiers, ride hail drivers, waiters and waitresses. Under present conditions, these talented young people
cannot afford to go to university and, without that training, will never take up the leadership positions their talent should make possible. The nation will need these students as our generation retires from institutes, government laboratories, colleges,
and universities. Please take time to vote and to tell your representatives to support education at every level. The future safety and prosperity of our nation depends on it.
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Kennison <[hidden email]>
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:39:23 +0000
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
P.S. I just realized that when Frank said "Look no further than me" he was not referring to his considerable knowledge, but to himself. It's a nice point.
JK
From: John Kennison
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 2:32:37 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Hi Marcus, Frank, et al,
I am a mathematician who knows category theory, which Rosen seems to have found exciting. My thinking about a machine that would learn how to reprogram itself is surely at a naive level, but it seems to me that it would
feel more like a being than a machine. All I know about Genetic Programming is what I just read after Googling that term and it looks like great idea. Frank's credentials are impressive but I don't know enough to, as yet, formulate a reasonable question to
him.
It looks that some very sophisticated programs can evolve and reprogram themselves which means, I think, that sequential machines can do amazing things. I guess my question would be:
Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?'
I have read Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" and Hofstadter's "I am a Strange Loop". There are parts of each book which still seem vague to me, but it seems likely that the answer to the above question is "No". But
then I would need a different approach to trying to figure out what Rosen might be driving at. (I once had s copy of Rosen's "Life Itself" but I can't find it now --so I ordered a used copy for about $9.).
On Geometric Algebra --my Googling of this term suggests that it has to do with what I would call tensors, which I saw briefly in an undergraduate Physics course, and very abstractly in a graduate Math course. I convinced
myself they were about the same thing
--John
From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 11:11:10 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
How idoes genetic programming with automatic function definition not achieve this?
I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I don’t see how to go about constructing such
a thing, unless I assume that there are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will settle on trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential machine. I think that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel machine (in which
various operations happen simultaneously) will not do the trick because given any parallel machine one can define a sequential machine that functions in the same way. One might make a machine in which the outputs only happen with a certain specified probability,
but I don’t think that is different enough. So I rephrase the problem as describing an entity that receives inputs and produces outputs that is cannot be duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic sequential machine (one in which the outputs happen
with a specified probability). I thought of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules for how to react to inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that the rules may change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems more
biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For example, if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous performance, then there is a new state, of being
dissatisfied, and the reprograming activity can, it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated rules for producing an output.
--John
From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Tom Johnson <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
To: Friam@redfish. com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Yes, but not with multiple signatories. Sorry.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks, Tom,
Still trying to figure out logistics. I have written the NM-ican to find out how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response. Do you have any experience with this?
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]]
On Behalf Of Tom Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
To: Friam@redfish. com <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
I will sign on, Nick.
Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University
Hi, all,
Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New Mexican’s requirements. I have a few signatories, would love some more. I will bring the letter with me to our service on Friday. Even if you don’t plan to sign,
please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.
Nick
To the New Mexican
We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in Santa Fe. We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young voters and their parents. Institutions of learning and their
students are under stress. Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning as our best research students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as cashiers, ride hail drivers, waiters and waitresses. Under present conditions, these talented young
people cannot afford to go to university and, without that training, will never take up the leadership positions their talent should make possible. The nation will need these students as our generation retires from institutes, government laboratories, colleges,
and universities. Please take time to vote and to tell your representatives to support education at every level. The future safety and prosperity of our nation depends on it.
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]>
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:56:49 +0000
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
John writes:
“Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had an instruction to do that
random dispatching. To counter the arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical supercomputers, of course.
Marcus
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]>
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 15:53:53 -0600
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a book recommendation.
John writes:
“Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had an instruction to do that
random dispatching. To counter the arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical supercomputers, of course.
Marcus
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Kennison <[hidden email]>
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 23:16:29 +0000
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Hi Frank,
I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:
. . . there is a historical survey in
https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf
|
Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s): Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83, No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ...
|
If you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more
thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and Engineers'' (including computer scientists.
--John
From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a book recommendation.
John writes:
“Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had an instruction to do that
random dispatching. To counter the arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical supercomputers, of course.
Marcus
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC
http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]>
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 17:23:38 -0600
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Well, I'm not a sequential machine although my wife has her doubts.
Thanks for the algebraic geometry suggestions. Jon Zingale and I will try to master the subject. Others may join us on Saturday mornings if they wish.
Hi Frank,
I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:
. . . there is a historical survey in
https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf
|
Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s): Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83, No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ...
|
If you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more
thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and Engineers'' (including computer scientists.
--John
From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a book recommendation.
John writes:
“Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had an instruction to do that
random dispatching. To counter the arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical supercomputers, of course.
Marcus
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC
http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>
To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" <[hidden email]>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:05:12 -0600
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
Frank, Jon, John, etc., I wish you guys would look at Rosen. I would be happy to loan you my copy. In Chapter 4, The Concept of State, he is arguing that assumptions deep in Newtonian Mechanics preclude or constrain a discussion of biological organization (let alone, a psychological one) leading to a fallacious sense of reduceability. His argument is mathematical, and involves assumptions built into what he calls Newtonian “chronicles”, mathematical expressions that have time of occurrence on the x axis and position, or velocity, or acceleration, or … or etc. on the Y. Something about the manner in which Newton sets this all up is claimed to obscure organizational properties of systems. Somehow, the problem of organization is made to disappear. Best I can do. Nick Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:24 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2 Well, I'm not a sequential machine although my wife has her doubts. Thanks for the algebraic geometry suggestions. Jon Zingale and I will try to master the subject. Others may join us on Saturday mornings if they wish. Hi Frank, I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but: . . . there is a historical survey in https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s): Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83, No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ... |
If you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and Engineers'' (including computer scientists. --John
From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2 Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous. Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a book recommendation. John writes: “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?” A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had an instruction to do that random dispatching. To counter the arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states. https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941 There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical supercomputers, of course. Marcus ============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>
To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" <[hidden email]>
Cc: "'Jon Zingale'" <[hidden email]>, Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]>
Bcc:
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2018 00:32:56 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Formalizing the concept of design
Dear Frank, Jon, Eric, and anybody else, OK. Let me be blunt. I wish that the mathematically inclined among you would help me. As I have told you all before, my brother was a mathematician and I got one of his two math genes, which was enough to give me vague mathematical intuitions but not enough that I could actually make good on more than a few of them. I have long been carrying around in my head the notion of “design arrays" which I have offered as a kind of universal way of looking at such troublesome concepts as adaptation, motivation, communication, learning, development, etc., where our explanatory concepts seem to be fatally entangled with our descriptive ones. A design co-array is a co-listing of circumstances and adaptive techniques, with all the pairings leading to a common outcome. I guess I am wondering, Is this way of thinking about telic phenomena a mathematical way? It seems to me to relate to the idea of mapping. The motivated animal maps his behavior onto his circumstances and thence, convergently, onto outcomes. But I am also wondering, aside from making my deceased big brother proud, is there any benefit to formalizing it. It is my understanding of mathematics that the benefit of formalization is the capacity to be led, through the formalization to some unexpected prediction concerning the phenomenon. It’s hard for me to see what benefits such a formalization would provide. To make it as easy for you to think about this problem, I have ocr-ed its most lucid and concise description among my papers, cleaned it up, and attached it above. I am eager for anybody’s thoughts. Nick Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:24 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2 Well, I'm not a sequential machine although my wife has her doubts. Thanks for the algebraic geometry suggestions. Jon Zingale and I will try to master the subject. Others may join us on Saturday mornings if they wish. Frank ----------------------------------- Frank Wimberly My memoir: https://wacsequentisl mww.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly My scientific publications: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 Phone (505) 670-9918 On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 5:16 PM John Kennison <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi Frank, I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but: . . . there is a historical survey in https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra www.ime.usp.br Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s): Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83, No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ...
If you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and Engineers'' (including computer scientists. --John ________________________________________ From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2 Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous. Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a book recommendation. Frank ----------------------------------- Frank Wimberly My memoir: https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly My scientific publications: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 Phone (505) 670-9918 On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote: John writes: “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?” A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had an instruction to do that random dispatching. To counter the arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states. https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941 There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical supercomputers, of course. Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Friam mailing list
[hidden email]
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comFRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
|
Locked
