Conciousness and Turing undecidability

  • Thread starter haael
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Turing
In summary, the speaker identifies as a dualist and believes that consciousness and intelligence are not driven by material particles and laws of physics. They also believe in God. They argue that the physical world has its own computational complexity class and that the world is exactly Turing complete. They suggest that consciousness can solve undecidable problems and that the world could be over-Turing complete. They also mention the possibility of time loops and the limitations of using allegory and metaphor to understand consciousness.
  • #1
haael
539
35
Hello, guys. I'm a dualist - that is, I believe that conciousness, thoughts and intelligence are not driven by material particles and laws of physics as we currently know. I also believe in God, for that matter.

Now check this: physical world has its own "computational complexity class", i.e. the "strongest" machine that can be built according to laws of physics. My thesis: the world is exactly Turing complete. Fact 1: it's at least Turing complete, because we can build physical Turing machine (the computer). Fact 2: it's no more than Turing complete, because the fundamental laws of physics are merely some differential equations not capable of embedding any Turing undecidable problems.

World, however, could be over-Turing complete. The problem of checking, if two five-dimensional manifolds are homeomorphic, is undecidable. Maybe we could prepare such two manifolds and let physics do the work. The manifolds would deform into some canonical lowest-energy form and prove their homeomorphism. But I doubt it really would be possible.

Another way to bring higher complexity classes to the physical world is to claim existence of time loops. A computation could loop literally forever and compute anything that requires infinite number of steps.

On the other hand, conciousness can solve Turing undecidable problems. That is, we are not Turing machines, but something more. Have you ever solved some diophantine equations? It's an undecidable problem, so it would be hard for a Turing machine.

However, we still could be just Turing complete. Some "simple" solutions of diophantine equations could be just written into us, and we are not solving them, but simply look up in some database. This would mean that some day we will "hang up" on some equation instance.

And what are your opinions? I can see 3 possibilities:
1. We are not over-Turing and our ability to solve undecidable problems is just a trick.
2. The physical world is over-Turing.
3. We are over-Turing, world is not.

I'm for the third option.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
haael said:
Hello, guys. I'm a dualist - that is, I believe that conciousness, thoughts and intelligence are not driven by material particles and laws of physics as we currently know. I also believe in God, for that matter.

Now check this: physical world has its own "computational complexity class", i.e. the "strongest" machine that can be built according to laws of physics. My thesis: the world is exactly Turing complete. Fact 1: it's at least Turing complete, because we can build physical Turing machine (the computer). Fact 2: it's no more than Turing complete, because the fundamental laws of physics are merely some differential equations not capable of embedding any Turing undecidable problems.

World, however, could be over-Turing complete. The problem of checking, if two five-dimensional manifolds are homeomorphic, is undecidable. Maybe we could prepare such two manifolds and let physics do the work. The manifolds would deform into some canonical lowest-energy form and prove their homeomorphism. But I doubt it really would be possible.

Another way to bring higher complexity classes to the physical world is to claim existence of time loops. A computation could loop literally forever and compute anything that requires infinite number of steps.

On the other hand, conciousness can solve Turing undecidable problems. That is, we are not Turing machines, but something more. Have you ever solved some diophantine equations? It's an undecidable problem, so it would be hard for a Turing machine.

However, we still could be just Turing complete. Some "simple" solutions of diophantine equations could be just written into us, and we are not solving them, but simply look up in some database. This would mean that some day we will "hang up" on some equation instance.

And what are your opinions? I can see 3 possibilities:
1. We are not over-Turing and our ability to solve undecidable problems is just a trick.
2. The physical world is over-Turing.
3. We are over-Turing, world is not.

I'm for the third option.

I really don't think allegory and metaphor are a good way to explore a phenomenon of nature such as conscious/awareness. Using the word machine to describe nature is a de-evolutionary trait where the accomplishments of humans become the benchmark to which all else is compared. This is the sort of practice that can lead to mad cow disease... as in feeding cows to cows.
 

1. What is the concept of consciousness?

Consciousness is the state of being aware of one's thoughts, feelings, and surroundings. It is a complex and subjective phenomenon that is still not fully understood by scientists.

2. How does the Turing undecidability relate to consciousness?

The Turing undecidability is a mathematical concept that states that there are certain problems that cannot be solved by any algorithm or computer program. Some scientists argue that consciousness is one of these undecidable problems and cannot be fully explained or replicated by artificial intelligence.

3. Can consciousness be measured or quantified?

There is currently no consensus on how to measure or quantify consciousness. Some scientists use brain imaging techniques to study brain activity, while others focus on subjective experiences and self-reporting. However, there is no universally accepted method of measuring consciousness.

4. Is consciousness a product of the brain?

There are different theories on the relationship between consciousness and the brain. Some scientists believe that consciousness emerges from the complex interactions of neurons in the brain, while others suggest that consciousness may be a fundamental aspect of the universe that is not limited to the brain.

5. Can consciousness be explained by science?

The question of whether consciousness can be fully explained by science is still a topic of debate. While many scientists believe that consciousness is a natural phenomenon that can be studied and understood through scientific methods, others argue that it may be beyond the scope of scientific explanation.

Similar threads

  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
863
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
881
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
1
Views
690
  • Computing and Technology
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Computing and Technology
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
2
Views
718
Back
Top