Talk:Actor model, mathematical logic, and physics

message: Note: For a related, past dispute about the content of this article, see this talk page section. Karol 19:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Update to above note.  We are still working on the above issues in Incompleteness of quantum physics.--Carl Hewitt 21:06, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

message: The article has been reorganized as a result of the helpful questions, comments and suggestions that everyone has provided.
Note that current controversy seems to be confined to the section Actor model, mathematical_logic, and quantum physics#Actor model and quantum physics which is now completely independent of the rest of the article.
So one possible way out of our difficulties would be to delete the section Actor model, mathematical_logic, and quantum physics#Actor model and quantum physics  and rename the article Actor model and mathematical logic.
If we did this, it would make sense to remove the connections between the Actor model and quantum physics from the other articles as well.  Note that we would still have a connection between the Actor model and indeterminacy because the consensus view of experts is that Arbiters are indeterminate in their operation.  Also it still leaves the Actor model dependent on physics but not yet reported that it is dependent on quantum physics.
Please provide questions, comments, suggestions, etc.  Thanks--Carl Hewitt 10:18, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial reorganization

message: The article has now been reorganized as per suggestions of the Wikipedia editors.  Note that it no longer mentions "quantum."
Therefore I suggest that the article be renamed Actor model, mathematical logic, and physics--Carl Hewitt 04:39, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reorganization as per suggestions of Wikipedia editors

message: Once the VfD is settled, if the article is not deleted, you will have to make substantial changes to this article. You may want to ask someone else such User:Chalst for assistance. Some suggested changes
* The opening sentence has to be replaced. It is too vague.
* "Hewitt's thesis was that logical deduction was incapable of carrying out concurrent computation in open systems even though there are mathematical theories of concurrency"  This requires explanation.  Surely you are not trying to claim that in principle the classes are different. You need to be more precise here. What is an "open system"; do you mean "open" in sense of its being entangled with the environment?
--CSTAR 17:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your comments.  I have clarified the article.  Please see what you think.  Thanks,--Carl Hewitt 05:23, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganization of this article 

message: Everyone:  Please see this comparison of versions for this article.  I see my wording as being more correct.  However, I am also certain that Carl will revert it.  So I need help for an edit war.  Without support, I let Carl win (since this is more his baliwick than mine). --EMS | Talk 04:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war, anyone? 

message: This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Splashtalk 22:30, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Deletion debate

message: The article contains the paragraph which begins:
: The Actor model makes use of arbitration for determining which message is next in the arrival ordering of an Actor that is sent multiple messages concurrently.
Is this a quote? If so from which of the two articles? If it is not a quote, then why does it have this special formatting? --CSTAR 04:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  I have removed the block formatting.--Carl Hewitt 04:52, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of block paragraph 

message: The article has the following sentence: 
: However, the Prolog-like concurrent programming languages (like the Actor model)
The actor model is not a programming language, and even if it were a programming language in what sense could it possibly be Prolog-like? --CSTAR 05:01, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  I have clarified the wording.  Regards,--Carl Hewitt 05:09, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actor model Prolog-like?

message: The title proposed by Hewitt Indeterminacy in computation seems like a good one to me. Unfortunately, only Arthur Rubin has responded. If no one objects within the next few days, I will go ahead and change it.
The claim that indeterminacy may have physical causes appears to me to be an incontestable (or even trivial fact), so  I don't understand Arthur Rubin's objections. I do object to the emphasis on the actor model, since as I mentioned the relation between physics and computation has been considered by several researchers (including von Neumann, Feynman, David Deutsch, Kitaev, Leslie Lamport etc.. besides Hewitt and some of his students). It may not be trivial to extract a useful article, however from their published work.--CSTAR 06:18, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The claim that indeterminacy may have physical causes seems incontestable to me -- but this article is not effected by the cause of the indeterminacy.  If the article were to be greatly expanded, then the question of whether the indeterminacy is physical, quantum, or just uncertainty as to the design might be relevant. Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:39, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed, what goes into the article may not be easy to decide.--CSTAR 01:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I just realized that Indeterminacy in computation already exists and it's another one of the articles that was at the source of a prior dispute with Hewitt. Given that fact,  I propose to merge them. Before doing so I will place a    banner on this article. --CSTAR 05:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it is worth, I think this would improve things and give the reader who might not be that familiar with the topic a broader and more complete picture of the subject. DV8 2XL 11:19, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Sorry for taking time in responding: I agree with the proposed merge.  Even if the content of the article remains slanted towards CH's work, the article will still be better balanced if it gestures towards the context in the preamble and bibliography.  It's worth noting that much of the relevant sources are widely available and fairly well known, so I'm hopeful about some of this editing work getting done. --- 16:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I performed the merge into Indeterminacy in computation.--Carl Hewitt 23:18, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New proposed title