On 5/11/2018 9:01 PM, Dustin Wehr wrote:
I'm a big fan of Tegmark's 2007 article/The Mathematical Universe,
/but I believe he got a couple details wrong, and those details are
interfering with my attempts to interest friends. So, I'm looking for
an exposition of the Mathematical Universe Hypothesis, of a similar or
shorter length, that omits those details, so that I have something I
can recommend to others without qualification. I can recommend
Tegmark's /Consciousness is a Mathematical Pattern/ TED talk without
qualification, but I need something that goes further, particularly
for people with a STEM background.
There should be nothing about the Computable Universe Hypothesis.
There should be nothing about Gödel's incompleteness theorems, unless
it's to explain why they do not pose a problem.
Ideally there is no claim about the MUH being testable. What would be
wonderful, in its place, is an admission that the MUH is probably
unfalsifiable, followed by a persuasive argument for why we should
reset our expectations when it comes to entertaining/evaluating a
theory of everything.
Richard Dawid has written a book advocating an approach to science that
abandons Popper's dictum.
https://www.amazon.com/String-Theory-Scientific-Method-Richard/dp/1107449618/ref=sr_1_7
I, however, found it less than persuasive. But I also found the MUH
incoherent. I understand Tegmark has more recently retreated to a
Computational Universe Hypothesis which may be coherent, but still wrong.
Brent
--
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.
