All, In the computational theory of reality I present in my book, information is not physical, but it is real and is the fundamental component of reality, Information is what computes physicality, or more accurately what is interpreted as physicality in the minds of organismic beings in their personal simulations of reality.
Yet this information does need a substrate in which to manifest. This substrate is simply the existence space of reality itself, what I call ontological energy, which is not a physical energy, but simply the locus (non-dimensional) of the presence of reality, the living happening of being. A good way to visualize this is that ontological energy is like a perfectly still sea of water, and the various waves, currents, eddies etc. that can arise within the water are all the forms of information that make up and compute the universe. They have no substance of their own other than the underlying water (existence) in which they arise. And of course the nature of water determines what forms can arise within it just as the underlying nature of existence determines the types of information forms that can arise within our universe. In this theory EVERYTHING without exception is information only. It is only abstract computationally interacting forms that continually compute the current information state of the universe. In fact, if one observes reality with trained eyes, one can actually directly observe that the only thing out there is just various kinds of information. After all ANYTHING that is observable is by definition information..... Only information is observable, ONLY information exists... It is the fact that this information exists in the actual realm of existence that makes it real and actual and enables it to compute a real information universe. Edgar On Thursday, February 27, 2014 8:34:32 AM UTC-5, 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
