I didn't understand anything except for the bit about the Eskimos. But apparently most Eskimo languages have no more words for snow than English its just that they join two words together to make a single word like coldsnow or wetsnow. So put like that they
could make infinite words for snow.
Interesting a lot of what you said is actually not so crazy!
For example some string theorists think that E11 might be the Lie group which is the symmetry of M-Theory. Now E11 is an
infinite dimensional Lie group which it has to be in order to express all the infinite number of modes that can occur on a string or membrane.
A Lie group is expressed by its generators which form a Lie algebra, an element of which can be written L(n). Now an
infinite Lie group is expressed in terms of a Kac-Moody algebra in which the index n can be any integer from minus infinity to infinity.
Each state of a Turing machine can be encoded as an integer by a particular coding system. For example taking the commutor of L(0) with L(n) should give the next state of the Turing machine L(n'). So we can ask, is there a Kac-Moody algebra that encodes the
Universal turing machine? If so this would mean that Kac-Moody algebras are unclassifiable which would be an important question in physics.
Thus combining the ideas of computability, physics and group theory is not so outlandish after all! You would probably even get it published in a respectable journal.
(But I would leave out the part about the computers made of gloop!)
I would also like to know about that. Could future implementations of TPL be used for example to make a distributive project for example like the one people downloaded to model climate change? Because this is an example of parrallism in which the CPUs are
distributed on computers worldwide. Then either the program could be run on a single computer with multiple cores or distributed on multiple computers in a local grid or distributed to different computers on the internet. What are your thoughts on this?
This is the way I see computers going where it doesn't matter where the CPUs are as long as they are joined together in some way you can run parrallel programs on them.
PLINQ, and Parallel.For and so on are good for computers with lots of CPUs but what would also be good is if we could use the same language to access the many processors on a graphics card.
At the moment there are special shader languages such as NVidias cg langauge to write shaders.
Can PLINQ take advantage or encapsulate the parallism on graphics cards or even multiple channels on sound cards? I think this would make writing shaders very easy and they could be implemented either on multiple cores or on a graphics card.
So could you ask about that and also whether you are concentrating only on multiple CPUs because this may do away with the need for a dedicated graphics card in the long term?
When you are designing PLINQ and so on do you mainly have database and data programming and business software in mind or graphics and games too?