hpm: > Races that live in space realize that it's perfectly OK to build > structures that have no foundation at all. They can be circular > and unsupported, yet if you spin them they'll have gravity just > like the ponderous planetary piles!
This is a clever argument, but I think it's just a trick. Races that live in space will have built their science(s) from the ground up just like us - on first principles, and extensions of those principles. It wasn't wishful thinking that allowed them to escape their planet's gravity! > Many of the people on this list (in common with a lot of western > philosophy at least since Descartes) are hoping to construct their > existence measures on the bedrock of the objectively decidable > self-awareness. They've built very interesting structures, but > you may notice there's been no progress at all on stabilizing the > foundation. Instead we have on this list the same debates that > endlessly, repetitively and inconclusively flood comp.ai. > philosophy, never mind philosophy journals and books. This may be true, but has anyone here (or anywhere else) ever checked to see that we can't program the universe exactly with simple algorithms? I think this is something new. (Check out what Stephen Wolfram has been doing lately: http://www.wolframscience.com) Everyone's talking about "quantum consciousness" and other nebulous words, but it seems no one has tried to build the universe from the ground up - on absolute principles and no uncertainties. Now, I know I'm not asking everyone to give up their most cherished beliefs and all their hard work forever. I'm just asking for SOMEONE to stop and take a look with me to see if we haven't missed something really simple - something so obviousthat everyone just dismissed it without asking, "Why not?" Maybe it's not as hard as we think. Maybe we CAN obtain some real, final answers. It's just crazy enough to work! Joel
