Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!dlogics!dsa
From: dsa@dlogics.COM (David Angulo)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Artificial vs. ''real'' intelligence
Summary: Once again, YOU CANNOT make QM deterministic
Message-ID: <598@dlogics.COM>
Date: 6 Jul 90 21:17:48 GMT
References: <1990Jul2.182411.4441@king.mcs.drexel.edu> <5734@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>
Organization: Datalogics Inc., Chicago
Lines: 34

In article <5734@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>, ins_atge@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Thomas G Edwards) writes:
> 
> Whether QM functions can be computed by a Turing Machine has not
> to my knowledge been explicitly proven, and probably will never
> be.  

QM "functions" cannot be "computed" by any means.  All you can "compute" are
amplitudes and probability densities.


> 
> One thing for sure is that QM functions, being physical functions,
> can be determined by physical devices.

No they cannot.  Please stop saying this.  It is incorrect as has been pointed
out here many times.


> This may include
> an external Gieger Counter hooked up to the machine if you
> insist on having QM functions neccessary for intelligence

Well, I don't insist that QM is necessary for intelligence (outside of
how it is important for the world); however, to say something like this
you need to understand QM better.  "Hooking up a Geiger Counter" will
probably change the result of your experiment.
> 


-- 
David S. Angulo                  (312) 266-3134
Datalogics                       Internet: dsa@dlogics.com
441 W. Huron                     UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!dsa
Chicago, Il. 60610               FAX: (312) 266-4473