David Lloyd-Jones wrote: >Hal Finney writes: > >> It has been found that "Life is Universal", meaning that you can >> construct a Universal Turing Machine out of the Life rules. It would >> then be possible to program it to simulate any mathematical or logical >> system, hence SAS's should be possible. > >But only if the outside world supplies the necessaries. I don't insist on >John Horton Conway, or even Hal Finney, but I do insist that the machine be >plugged into the wall. > >It's really a pissoff to see people writing about these patterns being >"self-organizing." They're organized by the throughput from the power >company.
Bullshit (to speak like Jacques Mallah). Look: Life is universal, so there is a life pattern equivalent to a Universal Dovetailer (UD) algorithm (or Schmidhuber's great programmer...). Among the mathematically executed programs there will be plenty of rooms for "relative programs" in which the outside/inside difference will be accounted. There is no reason to postulate there is a absolute outside-world. This is the base of Tegmark, Schmidhuber and even Everett's approaches, I think, (and mine of course, and I think most people here agrees with that). Bruno