Re: Is the universe computable?

From: John M <jamikes.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 18:27:51 -0500

You asked what I meant:

(----- Original Message -----
From: "Georges Quenot" To: "John M"
Cc: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 3:50 AM)


(> John M wrote:
[earlier excerpts from GQ's post]:
> > A."the universe in which I live according to the current intuition
> > I have of it"
>> and
> >B:> the possibility to simulate the universe at any level of accuracy. <
>
Snip, and later:
> > Now if A is true, I wonder upon WHAT can you simulate?)
>
> [GQ remark]:

> I don't understand the question.

[JM]:
>
> > Your reply points to first person processes.
If you consider (the) (your) universe, something according to YOUR
current intuition what YOU have of it, then there is nothing else upon which
you can "simulate" it. You definitely need something ELSE on which
a simluation can be based. More than just your intuition-based universe.
(I didn't say: 'outside reality'!).

My (rethorical) question pointed to this dichotomy.
It may be wrong, but probably understandable now.

Further on :
[GQ]: "I don't believe I can isolate something like 'me'."
Full agreement here. However:

> >If you expand further - well, I did not find a limit.<<
[GQ]:
>I am not sure of that. If many universes do exist, they might
>well be considered independent of each other (because of lack
>of spatio-temporal continuity or particle interaction or the like).<
[JM]:
I don't restrict my views to "spatio-temporal" continuity, or to
the 'particle-interaction' views of reductionistic human science.
We MAY not know everything by today (ha ha). I leave open my
'scientific agnosticism' - the potential answer: I dunno.
So you mat find a limit what I didn't. No argument here.

To your remark on my narrative (watch the name I use):
"This sounds very speculative (not to say mystical) to me."
Not more than the white or pink elephants/rabbits. Or some
computation that takes infinite time and infinite virtual memory .

Finally I like to use instead of "triggers" (in causality #2) 'facilitates'
and "must occur" - "may occur", leaving open changing
circumstances to alter what we may postulate upon our closed model.

With best regards

John Mikes

SNIP the rest
Received on Thu Jan 08 2004 - 18:32:24 PST