In Computation, Parallel is Nothing, Physical Everything
- Selmer Bringsjord
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Andrew Boucher (1997) argues that ``parallel computation is fundamentally different from sequential computation'' (p. 543), and that this fact provides reason to be skeptical about whether AI can produce a genuinely intelligent machine. But parallelism, as I prove herein, is irrelevant. What Boucher has inadvertently glimpsed is one small part of a mathematical tapestry portraying the simple but undeniable fact that physical computation can be fundamentally different from ordinary, ``textbook'' computation (whether parallel or sequential). This tapestry does indeed immediately imply that human cognition may be uncomputable.
- Barwise, J. and Etchemendy, J. (1993), Turing's World 3.0, Stanford, CA: CSLI.
- Boucher, A. (1997), 'Parallel machines', Minds and Machines 7, pp. 542–551.
- Lewis, H. and Papaimitriou, C. (1981), Elements of the Theory of Computation, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Siegelmann, H. and Sontag, E. (1994), 'Analog computation via neural nets', Theoretical Computer Science 131, pp. 331–360.
- In Computation, Parallel is Nothing, Physical Everything
Minds and Machines
Volume 11, Issue 1 , pp 95-99
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- artificial intelligence
- parallel computation
- simulation proofs
- Turing machines
- uncomputable functions
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Philosophy, Psychology and Cognitive Science, Department of Computer Science, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI), Troy, NY, 12180-3590, USA