Re: Universal prior - Go FORTH and Run Backward

From: Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Tue Nov 16 06:48:41 1999

Russell Standish wrote:

>A bit like whoever it was who said that "whole numbers are the work of
>god - all else [of mathematics] is the construct of man". I have some
>sympathy for this view, but suspect that that debate would occupy many
>centuries of discussion.

The ``whoever" is Leopold KRONECKER. I like to paraphrase him in
my comp setting: "whole numbers are the work of god - all else are
number's dreams". See old posts by searching for "kronecker" for
more information.

>In any case, it would appear unimportant, as the complete theories
>must have measure zero, so we wouldn't be living inside a universe
>described by a complete mathematical theory.

This is not clear for me. Remember also that I don't think that with
``pure comp" the expression "living in a universe" has a definite
meaning.


In your paper I appreciate your attempt to derive QM from philosophical
hypothesis. I really things it deserve to be developped. I thing also
that assuming linearity is ... a little to easy. Where does linearity
comes from ?

I ask you a question:

Do you agree with the following statement:

``(Understanding why we must exclude the white rabbit)

       is equivalent with

   (Understanding why me must justify the laws of physics)" ?

Answering this could help me to have a clearer understanding of your
motivation in your paper.

Bruno
Received on Tue Nov 16 1999 - 06:48:41 PST