Hi,
I found Jason D.'s hypothesis to be very interesting, but I am not sure of its
validity as an answer to the cause of the Riddle.
I doubt anyone, no matter how embarassed, would be willing to be put in a coma
(and then die) just because they lost to a computer. More notably are the
undergrad students who succumbed to the coma during a lecture of an automata
theory course. There is no 'shame' for a student to not understand, so why
would they willfully be put in a coma? Also, in some of the Riddle coma
cases, no computers were involved at all, so there was no machine to put
anyone in a trance-like situation.
I think the answer lies in the fact that the Riddle must be understood for it
to take effect. So whatever IS happening, happens inside the mind.
=Katherine Loo=
Quoting Jason Dong <kinezo@yorku.ca>:
> Hi class,
>
> So we're supposed to come up with a hypothetical explanation of what happened
> with this "riddle" that's been killing everyone. I wasn't sure what other
> discussion for this part of the course was supposed to happen..
>
> Here's an idea (sorry for the length)
>
> So Dizzard is sitting in front of his computer embroiled in an exchange of
> mental mudslinging whereby he and the computer challenge each other to prove
> statements to be true in order to determine whether or not the computer's and
> Dizzard's thought patterns are the same. The only rule was that the
> statements had to be provable and true.
>
> You might say it would be a somewhat similar parallel to Kasparov and Deep
> Blue. Dizzard, being a falliable human being, comes up with a brilliant idea
> of introducing a self referential paradox -- a Godelian type statement that
> might outfox the computer.
>
> So he types it in but little does he know the computer has been programmed
> not only to recognize a Godelian statement (refering to Lucas' argument about
> standardizing the creation of a Godelian formula) being processed, but also
> provide a response saying the point of the game was not to see who's "mind"
> was more superior, but whether or not their thinking was the same. Since the
> Godel statement was not provable, Dizzard lost and could not take the
> embarassment of losing to a machine so he instructed the computer to induce
> him into a trance-like state so nobody could learn of his "shame".
>
> All those who came in contact with the computer were obviously so inticed
> with why Dizzard died each engaged in this game and each made the same
> mistake as Dizzard trying to assert their superiority over this machine. So,
> each followed the route of Dizzard by succumbing to the trance-like coma.
>
> It surely sounds like a voodoo-ish story to tell over the campfire (yeah
> right!)
___________________________________________________________________
This message was sent to the math3500 discussion list by Katherine Loo <in_limbo@yorku.ca> .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Dec 06 2004 - 19:12:08 EST