Sun, 11 Jul 1999 13:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
> I've been reading GEB:EGB again, and late at nyte too I'm affraid and I have
> been trying to formulate some ideas I've had over the past six months or so into
> an more coherent idea.
> Here are some randomly generated strings for your consideration.
> -A computer is a construct of meta-information.
Hmm... i always thought a computer was a physical device that processed
> -Any unambiguous form of information can be used to make a computer.
> The above should be fairly standard... I hope =P Below are some ideas that are
> either quite profound or simply express my lack of understanding...
> -Any ordered set of numbers communicates a unique message.
No... a set of numbers doesn't communicate anything unless someone wants
it to; a set of numbers could communicate anything depending on the
language it was communicated in.
> -The code used for translating messages in any language into ordered sets of
> numbers is universal....
How do you "translate" something into sets of numbers? You'd need to have
a language that used sets of numbers as the syntax first; there'd be many
different kinds of languages, so there'd need to be different algorithms of
translation for different source and target languages.
> -With a system of ordered sets of numbers a "Natural Computer" can be created.
Well, maybe _with_ them you could (you could make a computer with cheese,
lettuce, and tomatoes too), but you're going to need some silicon or
something if you're really going to make a computer...
What are you trying to say? Are you really just saying that you find
sets of numbers interesting? I find them somewhat interesting too,
but it is silly to make these vague claims about what one can do with
> =\ Is this cool or are you calling the nearest mental hospital?