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

Reply via email to