From: Eugen Leitl (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Aug 28 2004 - 04:47:28 MDT
On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 02:09:16PM -0700, Daniel Radetsky wrote:
> If you prefer to talk about it in practical terms, we can just say we'll keep
> adding more memory as the computer's use of it increases. We don't have to
Bzzt. Relativistically constrained signalling in an inflationary universe.
> actually give it infinite memory, just more than it needs at any given time. In
This spacetime doesn't allow for infinite amount of computation, either in
time or in space.
> this case, we're talking about getting all the possible partitions of a number
> into two numbers (I believe this is the correct terminology; someone please
> correct me if I'm wrong), and then checking the two numbers for primality. This
> is probably a "bad" algorithm, and so we could probably add storage space far
> faster than it would use it up. For practical purposes, this is infinite memory.
You can't store nor process infinite bit sequences in a finite universe.
-- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:48 MDT