Hi Fred:

> I agree that any useful TOE should be able to be implemented on a
> (large enough) computer.

Yes, I agree.

> This computation can then SIMULATE the relevant or important aspects
> of the universe we observe, or all aspects of other possible
> universes, with their APPARENT real-number continua and infinite
> sets. Godel's theorem prevents us from simulating all aspects of our
> universe.

Hmm.. Sounds like we might be talking about different things.  Or maybe it's
just our terminology...

To be clear, I envision just one universe that contains everything.  Within
it may be many worlds or sub-worlds, but these are not independent.  They
interact.

Furthermore, I imagine there is a single program that runs the whole
universe, and that we can know that program exactly.

I'm not sure what Godel is doing here.

> Adopting that perspective, we should be able to justify that a
> simulation of our universe does not appear overly fine-tuned. At
> least that would suit my aesthetic tastes.

As in fine-tuned to support life, etc.?  No, I don't see any necessity in
that either.  Where there is life, there is life.  That's enough for me!

Joel


Reply via email to