🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <RPATIL.93Jan1031622@pylos.nmsu.edu> rpatil@nmsu.edu (Raj Patil) writes:
>
>Is Chaos more powerful in the Computability sence then Turing Machine. In 
>other words: A *real* Chaos (not the discrete version) behavior can be 
>represented using a finite description which can generate  a Language that 
>is not generated by the other finite representations we currently have. (reg.
>exp, CFG, TM etc). I should be actually talking about decidibility of a 
>Language rather then its generation. But as i know a little bit about Chaos
>is it not possible to find the starting point and the curve given the 
>Language. I am refering a Language to a Fractal.
>
>Based on this idea of Machines and Languages, is Chaos more powerful then
>and Turing Machine? and is *real* Chaos Comuputable by Turing Machine?
>
>Any ideas..
>
>Regards
>
>Raj Patil
>New Mexico State Univ.
>Las Cruces, NM 88003


If one could answer "Can Chaos be satis. simulted on a TM?", you'd have your
answer, assuming that Choas does process information. Some "mild" Chaos does,
but what about "wild" Chaos with no (or too few) underlying rules? I'm not
sure that we can expect the two computabilty to be even of the same kind.


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
 STEVEN PIGEON, a.k.a pigeons@jsp.umontral.ca, planet Earth.
==Departement d'informatique et de Recherche Operationnelle=
              == Universite de Montreal==