Nick, Spoiler alert, there is no *how best to think*. You say random, Gary says determined. Until you investigate the consequences of each you can't even know whether or not you are actually developing the same model ( like with the Church-Turing thesis). At the end of the day, deciding whether or not the universe is determined, indeterminate, random, etc.. is decidedly uninteresting. I try to hold 50 conflicting ontological commitments before breakfast. Alas, it appears that we have no interest in working with the commitments others make. In an effort to contribute to the banality I propose 2401 or perhaps whatever number you would construct the fifth time you follow Cantor's diagonal argument!
-- Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
