RE: Is the universe computable?

From: Jesse Mazer <lasermazer.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 23:36:23 -0500

David Barrett-Lennard wrote:
>
>Jesse Mazer wrote,
>
> > Isn't there a fundamental problem deciding what it means for a given
> > simulated object to implement some other computation?
>
>Yes, but does this problem need to be solved? I have no problem with
>the idea that some "physical object" (in one computation) can be
>"interpreted" in all sorts of ways - depending on how you map it. Does
>it matter if there exists a (weird) mapping between a rock and a
>universe with conscious inhabitants? The universe doesn't depend on the
>rock for its existence so who cares!
>
>- David

I think it would matter if you want to find the measure of various types of
observers/observer-moments--you need to know which ones are instantiated
more often in the set of all possible computations (to address this you
might also need a measure on all possible computations). Without some type
of measure, there is no way to solve the "white rabbit problem".

--Jesse

_________________________________________________________________
Expand your wine savvy and get some great new recipes at MSN Wine.
http://wine.msn.com
Received on Wed Jan 07 2004 - 23:37:31 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:09 PST