Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!seismo!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: grammars in physics
Message-ID: <2194@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 29-Mar-86 02:25:48 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.2194
Posted: Sat Mar 29 02:25:48 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 1-Apr-86 07:23:29 EST
References: <898@spp2.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.ARPA
Distribution: net
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL)
Lines: 9

In article <898@spp2.UUCP> gross@spp2.UUCP (Howard E. Gross) writes:
>Since any calculation can be performed by a turing machine,
>and since the language accepted by a turing manchine can
>be generated by an unrestricted grammar, what is the grammar
>that describes nature? More specifically is there a grammar
>for quantum mechanics?

There are several things wrong with this idea, not the least
of which is:  Nature does not have to perform calculations.