brian@caen.engin.umich.edu (Brian Holtz) (11/03/88)
In article <3802@cs.utexas.edu>, berleant@cs.utexas.edu (Dan Berleant) writes: > > we can then create a machine of infinite intelligence! Think > about it... What precisely would "infinite" intelligence be? It has been argued (from quantum mechanical grounds) that nothing can process more than 2*10^47 bits per gram of its mass per second; this limit would take the quantitative wind out of the sails of any argument for an "infinite" intelligence. Brian Holtz
berleant@cs.utexas.edu (Dan Berleant) (11/05/88)
In article <3f6ee9fd.142c4@retina.engin.umich.edu> brian@caen.engin.umich.edu (Brian Holtz) writes: <In article <3802@cs.utexas.edu<, berleant@cs.utexas.edu (Dan Berleant) writes: << << we can then create a machine of infinite intelligence! Think << about it... < < <What precisely would "infinite" intelligence be? It has been <argued (from quantum mechanical grounds) that nothing can process <more than 2*10^47 bits per gram of its mass per second; this limit <would take the quantitative wind out of the sails of any argument for an <"infinite" intelligence. < <Brian Holtz I'd like to see a reference for the quantum mechanics argument; it looks interesting. However, intelligence consists of more than processing speed. So your argument proves only that one possible aspect of intelligence, processing speed, must be finite. It says nothing about other aspects of intelligence. Dan (berleant@cs.utexas.edu)