The two concerns, how to give a precise notion of the Everything, and
how to deduce predictions from a chosen notion, lie at the very heart
of our common efforts. Though, I did not go into them for the simple
reason that I wanted to avoid discussions that are not directly linked
to the topic.
When I first wanted to capture mathematically the Everything, I tried
several mathematicalist approaches. But later, I prefered the
Everything ensemble that is also known here as the Schmidhuber
ensemble. I assume that the no-justification naturally leads to this
ensemble. This comes from the development of the (degenerate) property
of existence which is then assigned to all imaginable things. I don't
think that a metaphysical discussion of the term "imaginable thing" is
necessary now, I'm satisfied with the idea that an imaginable thing
can be completely described by means of language. For further
research, it is then natural to identify imaginable things with their
descriptions and to choose a simple alphabet for expressing the
descriptions (e.g. strings of 0 and 1). In the past I assumed these
strings to be of finite length. I read that Russell Standish also
permits infinite strings.
But first of all, I'm interested in your opinions concerning the no-
justification. Thank you, Stathis Papaioannou, for letting me know of
Kant's ideas in this context.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Wed Sep 12 2007 - 10:32:39 PDT