On 11/03/11 09:39, Digital Physics wrote:
Rummaging through the archives, I realized that a highly relevant article by Marcus Hutter apparently has not yet been discussed on this list, although many have downloaded it:
Highly relevant indeed. He states in his summary "I have demonstrated that a theory that perfectly describes our universe or multiverse, rather than being a Theory of Everything (ToE), might also be a theory of nothing." just as Russell maintains. " The collection of all possible descriptions has zero complexity, or information content. ... There is a mathematical equivalence between the Everything, as represented by this collection of all possible descriptions and Nothing, a state of no information." (2006, p. 5)

A Complete Theory of Everything (Will Be Subjective)
Algorithms 2010, 3(4), 329-350; doi:10.3390/a3040329
Part of the Special Issue
"Algorithmic Complexity in Physics & Embedded Artificial Intelligences"
In Memoriam Ray Solomonoff (1926-2009)

http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4893/3/4/329/

Abstract: Increasingly encompassing models have been suggested for our world. Theories range from generally accepted to increasingly speculative to apparently bogus. The progression of theories from ego- to geo- to helio-centric models to universe and multiverse theories and beyond was accompanied by a dramatic increase in the sizes of the postulated worlds, with humans being expelled from their center to ever more remote and random locations. Rather than leading to a true theory of everything, this trend faces a turning point after which the predictive power of such theories decreases (actually to zero). Incorporating the location and other capacities of the observer into such theories avoids this problem and allows to distinguish meaningful from predictively meaningless theories. This also leads to a truly complete theory of everything consisting of a (conventional objective) theory of everything plus a (novel subjective) observer process. The observer localization is neither based on the controversial anthropic principle, nor has it anything to do with the quantum-mechanical observation process. The suggested principle is extended to more practical (partial, approximate, probabilistic, parametric) world models (rather than theories of everything). Finally, I provide a justification of Ockham’s razor, and criticize the anthropic principle, the doomsday argument, the no free lunch theorem, and the falsifiability dogma.

Keywords: world models; observer localization; predictive power; Ockham’s razor; universal theories; inductive reasoning; simplicity and complexity; universal self-sampling;
no-free-lunch; computability

Remarkably, Prof. Hutter holds doctoral degrees in both physics and computer science,
where he made fundamental contributions.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to