Torgny Tholerus wrote:
> Brent Meeker skrev:
>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>> Le 09-juil.-07, à 17:41, Torgny Tholerus a écrit :
>> ...
>>>     Our universe is the result of some set of rules. The interesting
>>>     thing is to discover the specific rules that span our universe.
>>> Assuming comp, I don't find plausible that "our universe" can be the 
>>> result of some set of rules. Even without comp the "arithmetical 
>>> universe" or arithmetical truth (the "ONE" attached to the little Peano 
>>> Arithmetic Lobian machine) cannot be described by finite set of rules.
>> But it can be "the result of" a finite set of rules. Arithmetic results from 
>> Peano's axioms, but a complete description of arithmetic is impossible.
> That is exactly what I wanted to say.  You don't need to have a complete 
> description of arithmetic.  Our universe can be described by doing a 
> number of computations from a finite set of rules.  (To get to the 
> current view of our universe you have to do about 10**60 computations 
> for every point of space...)

How did you arrive at that number?

Brent Meeker

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to