On 9/13/2011 11:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Sep 2011, at 22:16, Craig Weinberg wrote:
To say that complex things can result from very simple rules is true
enough, but it's circular reasoning that distracts from the relevant
questions: What are 'rules' and where do they come from?
You are the one assuming some physical reality. But mechanism can
explains where such physical rules come from. They are consequences of
addition and multiplication. More exactly, their /appearances/ for the
average universal machine are consequences of 0, +, and *.
Could you give us a sketch of exactly how 'physical rules' or the
appearance thereof are the "consequences of 0, + and *"? I think that
there is more to the explanation than the fact that 0, + and * exist....
This is the part of your work that I still do not understand.
How are they
enforced? Why would there be a difference between simple and complex
to begin with and what makes one lead to the other but not the other
They are all statically, but logically related.
Also, why do you make that argument, given that you seem to take for
granted electromagnetism, that is Maxwell laws?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at