[lit-ideas] Re: The Answering Machine

  • From: Andy <mimi.erva@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 05:53:29 -0800 (PST)

From what I understand, the number 1 is as close to infinity as is a number to 
the millionth power.  If infinity is unapproachable, at some point there has to 
be an end to the number of answers that humans and their machines 
can generate.  Pi is allegedly infinite, but it's a human discovery, like 
infinity itself.  It has nothing to do with humans.  The universe is 
unimaginably vast, but there's some suggestion that even it may be finite.  

From: John McCreery <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 8:20 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Answering Machine

A Turing machine and an answering machine differ in one fundamental way. An 
answering machine is limited to a finite set of answers (typically with only 
one member). A Turing machine shares with human beings the ability to generate 
an infinite number of different answers, thanks to combinatorics and recursion. 


John McC

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:13 AM, John Wager <jwager@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Donal McEvoy wrote:
>"And indeed the phone itself is simply a vehicle of communication that  
>>itself does not communicate, so it is doubly wrong an expression as we do 
>>answer the phone but respond to the person ringing."Would that mean the same 
>>thing for a  "Touring machine?"  Is it an "answering machine" as well
>that is only a means to respond to the person "ringing" the machine?
>Is ANY machine that is programmed by people basically a complicated "answering 
>that allows communication between two human parties, or is a Touring machine 
>somehow NOT
>an "answering machine" even if it's been programmed by someone in a more 
>complicated way than
>(but basically similar to) a phone answering machine?

John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
Tel. +81-45-314-9324

Other related posts: