2 ms·
Are you trying to argue that reversible computing is classical computing, that the second law of thermodynamics doesn't exist, that modelling the brain as a cla
by Schroedingersat 4y ago
Are you trying to argue that reversible computing is classical computing, that the second law of thermodynamics doesn't exist, that modelling the brain as a classical computer/thermal process (ie. something that creates information) is presumptive, or something else? All of these concepts have been explored in depth for decades, and you don't appear to be acknowledging the existing body of work.
- mjburgess 4y agoNone of those things. My point is that logical models of computation dont, in themselves, have empirical content. That the language and ideas of theoretical computer science are, as with any area of pure mathematics, only empirically useful insofar as we establish how a system corresponds to a formal model.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoThis is patently untrue though. Information theory exists. Entropy exists. Irreversible computation is fundamentally tied to entropy increase. It doesn't matter what system you are using, if you create/delete a bit, you create heat. No known systems are limited by this, but is looming.
- mjburgess 4y agoAll of those words have different meanings in csci and in thermo, and in qm, and in many areas. They arent the same word. They are only connected when empirical-logical models are provided. p