On 9/13/2012 4:55 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at