Is there anything in particle physics that emulates the processing capabilities of computers, analog or digital? My question goes below Chaitin's metabiology. Something that is a characteristic of physics.
-----Original Message----- From: Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> To: everything-list <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, Mar 24, 2014 2:08 pm Subject: Re: Chaitin's Metabiology On 23 Mar 2014, at 21:40, [email protected] wrote: One might note that at the end of Chapter Three (Proving Darwin) Greg has the "caveat" "Metabiology in its present form cannot address thinking and consciousness, fascinating those these be." (page 21). I do not see any reason why plants should not be included. I think so to. If one has the inspiration to imagine that the act of reproduction *is like* a computation (math and philosophy different) and abstract simply that we humans reproduce and if one thought that all of algorithmic complexity in metabiology (as a subect) was derived from a difference in that biotic potential in different lineages then... metabiology applied might not be a part of the/an algorithmic theory of everything yet different computations that "emerge" in different lineages would be differentiable. A machine cannot know what computations "support it" but propagtion of species differences is a different kind of monkey at the qwerty...I would think and be conscious of...There are really no physical laws that support pure metabiology (only generalized matheatical function through arbitrary points) and the step to physical lawys engineer-able in applied metabiology is actually a bit more than would be for non preserved force propagations. These kinds of contained algorithmic sets are only thus a part of what a theory of everything etc would contain but it might be more somatically correct even if not currently inclusive of any kind of plant or animal. What is contained and what can exist for longer times are different things. OK. That is the problem, but it helps to put it in mind/body or first-person/third person terms, and assuming, like Chaitin, digitality put a lot of interesting constraints, especially if you take into account tractability and resources. My questioning is more fundamental, and eventually consists in a translation of the mind body problem into a "stable belief in body" problem arising in arithmetic and meta-arithmetic (but meta-arithmetic is in some part in arithmetic: this is exploited maximally). Bruno On Friday, March 21, 2014 5:26:20 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 21 Mar 2014, at 19:18, [email protected] wrote: Are you still interested in talking about metabiology? http://www.axiompanbiog.com/Pages/Metabiology.aspx On Wednesday, November 24, 2010 2:10:42 PM UTC-5, thermo wrote: Chaitin is currently drafting some attemps on metabiology and biological evolution of creativity. I read the latest: http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~chaitin/darwin.pdf I found it very interesting in it's simplicity. Strong features: - Abstract and theorems can be proved. - Includes algorithmic mutations. - Fitness is general enough to enable infinite evolution. Weak features: - Some oracles are used. - Biological features such as replication, environment were removed favoring more abstract concepts. - Evolution is only associated with mathematical creativity, IA? Can someone can explain how this theory is related to Algorithmic Theories of Everything? It *is* an algorithmic theory of everything, but like digital physics, it still assumes a brain-mind identity thesis, which does not work when you assume computationalism in the cognitive science. It avoids the comp mind body problem, which forces us to derive the core of the physical laws from a statistics on all computations. It cannot work because it implies comp, and comp implies that "reality" is a view from inside the space of all computations, and this is not entirely reductible to an algorithm. Like Wolfram, they still don't take into account that a machine cannot know which computation support it, and can know she is distributed in many computation. They miss the "Everett" aspect of arithmetic or computer science. I would say in a nutshell. Bruno Cheers, José. -- A los hombres fuertes les pasa lo que a los barriletes; se elevan cuando es mayor el viento que se opone a su ascenso. José Ingenieros (1877.1925) *thermo* http://www.mechpoet.net -- 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/d/optout. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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/d/optout. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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/d/optout. -- 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/d/optout.
