Bit of a slog (an editor please!) but once you finess the jargon and get
your mind on the path it's rewarding (that said I'm only up to page
5). Recommended so far, though multiverse and block-universe folks may
become unhappy.
Just off-the-cuff, maybe a way to think about the arguments in the paper
is that the universe has an "n-cat number", s.t. you can explore more
fully spaces with lower n-cats and cannot approach fully exploring
spaces with higher n-cats, so high n-cat stuff exists in a very (very)
sparse space where transformations from one stuff to another is not smooth.
I'm not convinced yet at this hour that said lumpiness is necessarily
next to can't-prestate-it-at-all, but I will read further, since I'm
presidposed to like the exploration-trumps-optimization perspective
results of the argument.
On 1/11/12 11:57 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2069v1 why biology isn't just physics,
-- rec --
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
