On 7/11/2012 4:29 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
2012/7/10 meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>>
Why would you not expect a theory-of-everything to include the
behavior of people? Note that 'govern' does not imply 'predictable'.
A phisicinst theory of everithing , despite the popular belief, does
not "govern" the behaviour of the people. No longer than the binary
logic govern the behaviour of computer programs. I can program in
binary logic whatever I want without limitations. the wetware whose
activity produces the human mind could execute potentially any kind of
behaviour. Our behaviour is not governed by anything related wth a
phisical TOE, but by the laws of natural selection applied to social
beings. I can observe the evolution of such behaviours (in a
shchematic way) in a binary world within a computer program as well.
it for the first time.
On the contrary, the antrophic principle tell you that is the mind the
determinant element for the existence of a TOE. A phisical TOE It is
just the playing field and the stuff upon things are made.
Interesting that you bring up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_cooperation ! Could you
elaborate a bit on your thoughts? Do you have any ideas how to model
cooperation between computer programs? The main problem that I have
found is in defining the interface between computations. How does one
define "identity" for a given computation such that it is distinguished
from all others?
"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
~ Francis Bacon
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