Re: Physics is a human construct

[restes <restes@mars.harvard.edu>]

> In essence, Penrose argues that a computer
> could not simulate human consciousness
> because the mind is not a digital device.

I'd have to say you missed the point. His argument (convincing to me) is 
that a machine can never be said to understand anything, though it may 
give answers to many problems. I can recommend Shadows of the Mind, in 
which Penrose uses a cleverly chosen Goedel example that we can 
understand, but which no algorithmic-driven computer could. He also 
speculates on how the mind/brain differs from any possible computer.

Bob Estes