From: John K Clark (johnkc@well.com)
Date: Sun Mar 08 1998 - 22:16:57 MST
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sun, 8 Mar 1998 Mark Crosby <crosby_m@rocketmail.com> Wrote:
>John K Clark claiming that all implementations can be boiled down to
>digital codes or signals; perhaps, but I don't think that means
>their execution or interpretation would necessarily be 'digital'.
I maintain that the genetic code is digital, its interpretation and execution
are too. When a ribosome in a cell finds 3 cytosine bases in a row in
messenger RNA that means "place a proline molecule as the next amino acid in
the linear sequence of the protein you're building". That's exactly what it
means, that's all it means, and that's precisely what it does.
>"calling it all 'computation' ... runs roughshod over the
>analog-digital distinction". Cariani explains:
But that's a good thing if the analog-digital distinction is bogus. It is.
>Peter Cariani:
>analog systems are useful for retaining the richness of perceptual
>inputs, in keeping around all those aspects of the sensed world that
>might not be readily relevant, but which could become so.
Sounds nice, but I can't think of even one example where it's true.
>Cariani concludes his discussion by warning that "the whole notion
>of 'computation' becomes meaningless when everything becomes a
>computation"
No, it still has meaning, it means that it's pointless to make distinctions
where none exist and if you understand computation then you understand
everything, including God's source code.
John K Clark John K Clark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQCzAgUBNQN7f303wfSpid95AQEStgTvSpF6n8onY36rAVjuf7FFcgN91HYDhHJ9
IJ3Fabh7dhz/qN2XDokpS/0UPUeVIDYTqS1+NNBcdWV48BOnlsPzqn4T8hAXB6a9
PIbtwD85uaYTZT/BFnhEat1wK6sFHKjgY/VOoV9HiQLtU4xiZdFA3HSCdPoLb3Sf
vDL7VFb9JDctmaP5ydCCLq/9jZZ5BAPndI3eQd9ryrzl3vD/x/s=
=AsqH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:42 MST