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
