2014/1/10, Alberto G. Corona <agocor...@gmail.com>:
> 2014/1/10, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>:
>> On 09 Jan 2014, at 23:00, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>>> Dear LizR,
>>> That is the key question that remains, IMHO, unanswered.
>> It is answered, completely.
> Stephen, LizR
> From what I can understand, once cleared from
> arithmetic-logic-metaphysic misticism, the determination of the laws
> from infinite "competitive" computations follow Solomonoff's theorem
> of inductive inference.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomonoff 's_theory_of_inductive_inference
> Or it should. But the problem is that Bruno did not gives a weight for
> each computation in order to stablish the outcome of what the pencil
> does in the air. Neither the algorithmic complexity of each
> computation (Solomonoff) nor any other. Therefore, it is a complete
> chaos cut by some magic 1p collapse of computations, following QM
> fashion. And there is where the aritmetic-logic-metaphysic mysticism
> does his job.
... Job that I do not know how it is possible if a computation that
does everithing OK until it convert the pencil in a fat female soprano
(with big algorithmic complexity) is equally compatible with all my 1p
observations until that moment, is equally probable than the
computation with much less algorithmic complexity that does its job
right and moves the pencil gracefully without emitting molesting
So anything goes
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.