“The new version of the Church-Turing thesis (now called the ‘Church-Turing Principle’) does not refer to Turing machines. This is important because there are fundamental differences between the very nature of the Turing machine and the principles of quantum mechanics. One is described in terms of operations on classical bits, the other in terms of evolution of quantum states. Hence there is the possibility that the universal Turing machine, and hence all classical computers, might not be able to simulate some of the behavior to be found in Nature. Conversely, it may be physically possible (i.e. not ruled out by the laws of Nature) to realize a new type of computation essentially different from that of classical computer science. This is the central aim of quantum computing.”

How To Compute Without Numeric Variables In A Non-Von Neumann Architecture

http://www.tinyurl.com/indiscretelogic

I would like to patent and put this in the public domain.

What do you like to patent?

And how is it related to IA?

I think it could be used as a foundation for AI in quantum computing. It is pure connectionism. I would like to patent the concepts I outline in the document.

I would like to patent the concepts I outline in the document.

Then go find a patent atorney.

Purely out of morbid curiosity, why did you decide to try and implement quantum logic processing *inside* CounterStrike?

Obviously I am not welcome here.

Obviously I am not welcome here.

You're welcome to post. You've received confused responses because your post is confusing.

There is no question posed in your post. Are you looking for advice on how to apply for a patent? Do you want to stimulate discussion about the idea that you linked to? Do you just want to explain the idea and see what people think of it? What's the intention behind that post - what kind of responses are you looking for?

On a discussion forum, you have to either ask a question or give some kind of indication for what kind of discussion you're looking for. If you just dump a whole bunch of information in a post, you'll get replies asking you why you posted... which is what you've got.

A blog or a journal is fine for just dumping information on, but a forum assumes a question or discussion topic.

Isnt a primary problem that Quantum Computing only has limited application - only to certain classes of problems (as you are saying classical computing is also since there are some things IT cannot do as well) and thus what you really need is a hybrid of both ?

REAL Artificial Intelligence is having the computer build its own logic (learning) and that has been hard enough to do using binary discrete logic (and we ARE still very primitive compared to where it needs to go). SO it may be problematic that Quantum Mechnics being even more mysterious will be severly hampered when we try to employ it for that same purpose.

Recently IBM was touting some new neuron equivalent circuitry (a good step), but the one thing missing was how to get/create the weight patterns into that circuitry (there was no mechanism built into the hardware being shown off to 'learn')-- they actually had only the trivial part of the mechanism required for 'Artificial Intelligence'.

I think a hybrid would be possible. How a Turing Machine would interact with a quantum computer, I do not know. I think my paper opens the door to more than the limited applications such as breaking RSA encryption.

Yes, there is a need for some way for the computer to learn by itself. How that is done, again, I do not know.

I have read about the neurosynaptic systems IBM has created. It is still based in binary, and we are obviously not numerically based. Here is where you can read about it, scroll down to the bottom for descriptive papers of the hardware:

http://researchweb.watson.ibm.com/cognitive-computing/neurosynaptic-chips.shtml