Skip to main content
Log in

The machine as data: a computational view of emergence and definability

  • S.I. : Logic and Relativity Theory
  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

In 1936 Turing developed the definitive theory of universal classical computers. His motivation was not to build such a computer, but only to use the theory abstractly to study the nature of mathematical proof. And when the first universal computers were built, a few years later, it was, again, not out of any special intention to implement universality. They were built in Britain and the United States during the Second World War for specific wartime applications. The British computers, named Colossus (in which Turing was involved), were used for code-breaking; the American one, ENIAC, was designed to solve the equations needed for aiming large guns. The technology used in both was electronic vacuum tubes, which acted like relays but about a hundred times as fast. At the same time, in Germany, the engineer Conrad Zuse was building a programmable calculator out of relays—just as Babbage should have done. All three of these devices had the technological features necessary to be a universal computer, but none of them was quite configured for this. In the event, the Colossus machines never did anything but code breaking, and most were dismantled after the war. Zuse’s machine was destroyed by Allied bombing. But ENIAC was allowed to jump to universality: after the war it was put to diverse uses for which it had never been designed, such as weather forecasting and the hydrogen-bomb project. — David Deutsch (The Beginning of Infinity, Allen Lane/Penguin, London, 2011, p. 139).

Abstract

Turing’s (Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society 42:230–265, 1936) paper on computable numbers has played its role in underpinning different perspectives on the world of information. On the one hand, it encourages a digital ontology, with a perceived flatness of computational structure comprehensively hosting causality at the physical level and beyond. On the other (the main point of Turing’s paper), it can give an insight into the way in which higher order information arises and leads to loss of computational control—while demonstrating how the control can be re-established, in special circumstances, via suitable type reductions. We examine the classical computational framework more closely than is usual, drawing out lessons for the wider application of information–theoretical approaches to characterizing the real world. The problem which arises across a range of contexts is the characterizing of the balance of power between the complexity of informational structure (with emergence, chaos, randomness and ‘big data’ prominently on the scene) and the means available (simulation, codes, statistical sampling, human intuition, semantic constructs) to bring this information back into the computational fold. We proceed via appropriate mathematical modelling to a more coherent view of the computational structure of information, relevant to a wide spectrum of areas of investigation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andréka, H., Madarász, J. X., Németi, I., & Székely, G. (2012). A logic road from special relativity to general relativity. Synthese, 186(3), 633–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arndt, M., Juffmann, T., & Vedral, V. (2009). Quantum physics meets biology. HFSP Journal, 3(6), 386–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackmore, S. (1999). The meme machine (Vol. 25). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, S. B., & van Leeuwen, J. (2013). Alan Turing: His work and impact. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. London: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D. (1991). Consciousness explained. Auckland, New Zealand: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, A. (1969). Autobiographical notes. In P. A. Schilpp (Ed.), Albert Einstein: Philosopher–scientist. La Salle, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, G. F. R. (2003). The unique nature of cosmology. In A. Ashtekar (Ed.), Revisiting the foundations of relativistic physics: Festschrift in honor of John Stachel (pp. 193–220). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Feynman, R. P. (1982). Simulating physics with computers. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 21, 467–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2008). A defence of informational structural realism. Synthese, 161, 219–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2011). The philosophy of information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gödel, K. (1944). Russell’s mathematical logic. In P. A. Schilpp (Ed.), The philosophy of Bertrand Russell (3rd ed., pp. 123–153). New York: Tudor. (Reprinted in Benacerraf and Putnam (Eds.), Philosophy of mathematics (2nd ed.) (pp. 447–469). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press and in Pears (Ed.) (1972) Bertrand Russell: A collection of critical essays (pp. 192–226). Garden City, NY: Anchor Books).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadamard, J. (1945). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haigh, T. (2014). Actually, Turing did not invent the computer. Communications of the ACM, 57(1), 36–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, A. (1992). Alan Turing: The enigma. London: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D., & Sander, E. (2013). Surfaces and essences: Analogy as the fuel and fire of thinking. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. (2008). Quantum theory and relativity. In R. S. Doran, C. C. Moore, & R. J. Zimmer (Eds.), Contemporary mathematics group representations, ergodic theory, and mathematical physics: A tribute to George W. Mackey (pp. 209–246)., Contemporary mathematics Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. (2005). Physicalism, or something near enough. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreisel, G. (1970). Church’s thesis: A kind of reducibility axiom for constructive mathematics. In A. Kino, J. Myhill, & R. E. Vesley (Eds.), Intuitionism and proof theory: Proceedings of the summer conference at Buffalo N.Y. 1968 (pp. 121–150). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, D. H. (1926). The plumed serpent. London: Martin Secker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, S. (2012). A Turing test for free will. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 370(1971), 3597–3610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longley, J., & Normann, D. Higher order computability. Springer, to appear.

  • Longley, J. (2005). Notions of computability at higher types I. In R. Cori, A. Razborov, S. Todoréevié, & C. Wood (Eds.), Logic colloquium 2000., Proceedings of the Annual European Summer Meeting of the Association for symbolic logic, held in Paris, France, July 23–31, 2000 Wesley, MA: A K Peters.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch, W., & Pitts, W. (1943). A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 5, 115–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGilchrist, I. (2009). The master and his emissary: The divided brain and the making of the western world. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Németi, I., & Dávid, G. (2006). Relativistic computers and the Turing barrier. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 178(1), 118–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, R. (1987). Quantum physics and conscious thought. In B. J. Hiley & F. D. Peat (Eds.), Quantum implications: Essays in honour of David Bohm (pp. 105–120). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, E. (1948). Degrees of recursive unsolvability: preliminary report (abstract). Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 54, 641–642. [Reprinted in Davis, M. (Ed.). (1994). Solvability, provability, definability: The collected works of Emil L Post, Contemporary mathematicians. Boston, MA: Birkhäuser Boston Inc.].

  • Rieper, E., Anders, J., & Vedral, V. (2010). Entanglement at the quantum phase transition in a harmonic lattice. New Journal of Physics, 12, 025017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronald, E. M. A., Sipper, M., & Capcarrère, M. S. (1999). Design, observation, surprise! A test of emergence. Artificial Life, 5, 225–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rorty, R. (1987). Science as solidarity. In J. S. Nelson & A. Megill (Eds.), The rhetoric of the human sciences: Language and argument in scholarship and public affairs (Vol. 44, p. 17). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. (Revised and reprinted in Objectivity, relativism, and truth. Cambridge University Press, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruelle, D. (2007). The mathematician’s brain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saari, D. G., & Xia, Z. J. (1995). Off to infinity in finite time. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 42(5), 538–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, G. E. (1990). Higher recursion theory. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. R. (2010). Making the social world: The structure of human civilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Slaman, T. A. (1981). Aspects of e-recursion (Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA).

  • Slaman, T. A. (1990/1991). Degree structures. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians. Kyoto (pp. 303–316).

  • Smolensky, P. (1988). On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 1–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smolin, L. (1997). The life of the cosmos. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolin, L. (2006). The trouble with physics: The rise of string theory, the fall of a science and what comes next. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolin, L., & Unger, R. M. (2014). The singular universe and the reality of time: A proposal in natural philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tegmark, M. (1993). Is “the theory of everything” merely the ultimate ensemble theory? Annals of Physics, 270, 1–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teuscher, C. (2002). Turing’s connectionism. An investigation of neural network architectures. London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turing, A. M. (1936). On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 42(2), 16–41. (Reprinted in Cooper and van Leeuwen).

    Google Scholar 

  • Turing, A. M. (1939). Systems of logic based on ordinals. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 45(2), 161–228. (Reprinted in Cooper and van Leeuwen, 2013, pp. 151–197).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turing, A. M. (1947). Lecture to the London mathematical society on 20 february 1947. In B. E. Carpenter & R. W. Doran (Eds.), A. M. Turing’s ACE report of 1946 and other papers (1986). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

  • Turing, A. M. (1954). Solvable and unsolvable problems. Science News, 31, 7–23. (Reprinted in Cooper and van Leeuwen, pp. 322–331).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article is based on an invited talk by the author at the First International Conference on Logic and Relativity: Honoring István Németi’s 70th Birthday, held at the Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, September 8–12, 2012. Research and preparation of this article was supported by a John Templeton Foundation research grant: Mind, Mechanism and Mathematics, July 2012 – August 2015. The author is grateful to the two anonymous referees for their detailed questions and suggestions which led to a number of improvements in the final version of the article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Barry Cooper.

Ethics declarations

Ethical standard

No research involving human participants and/or animals is involved.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cooper, S.B. The machine as data: a computational view of emergence and definability. Synthese 192, 1955–1988 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0803-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0803-4

Keywords

Navigation