Deutsch cites the discovery of the neutrino as an application of energy conservation, but
he doesn't seem to notice that energy conservation is simply a consequence of requiring
that our theories by time-translation invariant. It's exactly the kind of impossibility
restriction he hopes to get from constructor theory and the example shows it is a
restriction we impose, because we don't want theories tied to specific times.
Brent
On 2/27/2014 5:34 AM, David Nyman wrote:
http://edge.org/conversation/constructor-theory
I don't recall if the list has discussed these ideas of David Deutsch recently. The link
is to an Edge interview in which he discusses his view that mathematicians are mistaken
if they believe that information or computation are purely abstract objects. He says
that both are in fact physical, but to justify that assertion we may need deeper
principles of physics than the existing ones. He proposes constructor theory as a
candidate.
Implications for comp (or anything else for that matter)?
David
--
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
[email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
