Re: Introduction (Digital Physics)

From: Joel Dobrzelewski <dobrzele.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2001 07:19:24 -0400

Bruno:

> I should have been more clear. I put at the (3-) bottom
> arithmetical truth. It just means I believe sentence like
> "2+2=4", Fermat theorem, ...

Yes, I think we agree on this point. I gave the example of the
minimal cellular automaton as another third-person verifiable
structure. We can all start with the simple one-dimensional
automata (Rules 0..255) and notice that some of them do certain
things, and some of them do EVERYTHING (e.g. Rule 30).

> Also, how would a friendly entity manages bottom-up links between
> a universal automata and the "observers" it generates?

Ahh... sorry. I did not express this clearly.

I believe that NO entity is responsible for the automaton that is
the Universe (the WHOLE thing). As I said, I feel that the
Universe is a simple mathematical structure that generates all
things - and is something that all sentient entities can discover.

The friendly entity I speak of lives WITHIN the automaton - and
creates new worlds (virtual realities) within it.

This complicated entity, living naturally within the automaton
(like everything else), creates new "artificial" realities where
different games are played.

In some of these worlds, gravity is attractive (like the
"Earth 2001" simulation). But in other worlds, gravity is
repulsive. And in still other worlds, there is no gravity at
all - and white rabbits are abundant.

So again, such a wise and old and friendly natural entity could
create an "artificial" simulation in which the laws of physics in
that world were closely related to the structure and behavior of
the universal automaton outside.

Maybe such an entity would choose to do this in order to reeducate
itself about the greater truth outside. Or, just for te fun of it!

Note: I have neglected to mention explicitly that I believe this
complicated, god-like friendly entity is *us*.

We have chosen to enter this simulation - and divide our awareness
into separate people - in order to once again appreciate the
natural wonder and complexity that WE are - collectively.

Collectively, we are one organism.

Playing games... dreaming.

If I understand your work correctly, Bruno, you are not far from
this idea as well. As you say, our physics (the world we see now)
is just a branch of machine psychology.

We are all mecha - pretending to be orga.

Joel
Received on Sun Jul 01 2001 - 04:20:00 PDT