On 4/10/2018 11:44 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

On 11 Apr 2018, at 01:29, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com <mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>>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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to