83/comments
2021-06-21 23:33:04 +0000
Comments on 83
Thatchaphol Saranurak has pointed out to me that computer programs, despite their deterministic nature, are not always entirely predictable. There's the halting problem, of course.
As a result, I think my focus on predictability was wrong. That's not where creativity and computer programs clash. I have crossed out the corresponding parts.
Notwithstanding, I think my conclusion that there is a *problem* to be solved still holds, only that it now focuses solely on determinism, not on predictability. In short, the problem is: computer programs are predetermined; creativity is not predetermined; yet creativity is also a computer program. And the "emergent approach" is still the only way I see out of that conundrum.
2021-05-24T17:39:48Z
Others have mentioned that there is *quantum* computation. To be clear, that's not what I have in mind when I speak of different *modes* of computation. I'm looking for something that doesn't adhere to the prevailing conception in programming. I'd guess that quantum computation adheres to it, too, but I'm no expert on quantum computation. Also, IIRC, the set of computable algorithms (i.e. runnable programs), which includes creativity, is exactly the same for both classical and quantum computers.
2021-05-17T18:02:45Z
Another way to think of the connection between the prevailing conception of physics and programming is this:
Computations are physical processes (Deutsch) and as such they *must* be deterministic, like all other physical processes.
So it's not just that the two prevailing conceptions are analogous as I wrote in the original post aboveāit's that computations are just one specific kind of physical process, and that is *why* computations are always deterministic.
2021-05-17T20:24:22Z