On 4/10/2018 11:44 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 11 Apr 2018, at 01:29, John Clark <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>wrote:
>>
We know for a fact that physics is not yet a fundamental
theory because it can’t explain what Dark Energy or Dark
Matter is
>
/That has nothing to do with physics being a fundamental theory
or not./
If a theory can only explain how 6% of the matter/energy in the
universe works then it can't be fundamental.
?
I don’t see why. That simply does not follow. A theory can be simply
incomplete, not advance enough, etc.
When a theory systematically misses some important fact, like physics
miss consciousness (without adding more magic), we can suspect it to
be not fundamental, but that still does not prove it is not.
Your theory doesn't explain it without "adding more magic" either. You
start by assuming that certain computations must instantiate consciousness.
Brebt
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
