On 9/13/2012 4:55 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Hi benjayk,

This is exactly what I have been complaining to Bruno about. He does not see several things that are problematic.

1) Godel numberings are not unique. Thus there is no a single abslute structure of relations, there is an infinity that cannot be reduced.

They are not unique, but however they are chosen they represent the same structure. There is no unique representation of QM: wave functions, Hilbert space, Feynmann paths,... But they all predict the same physics and so represent the same structural relations.

2) the physical implementations of the representations cannot be abstracted away without making the entire result meaningless.

I have some sympathy with this, but Bruno is trying to explain the physical as computational, so he can't very well assume the physical. Although he frequently refers to eliminating the physical, when asked he quickly says he's only explaining the physical and eliminating it as *primitive*. I don't see that as any more problematic or unusual than explaining quarks by strings or spacetime by loop-quantum-gravity. You're not *eliminating* anything - you're just trying to explain it.


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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to