On 16 Mar 2011, at 22:40, Russell Standish wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:03:12PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Mar 2011, at 09:53, Digital Physics wrote:
You are right, the theory of nothing is an old hat, published in
the 1990s. Hutter's new contribution is the observer
and therefore
more predictive in the Bayesian framework. This allows to distinguish
meaningful from
predictively meaningless theories.
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 21:26:59 +
From: andrewsol...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Hutter's article on a complete theory of everything
21:26:59 +
From: andrewsol...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Hutter's article on a complete theory of everything
On 11/03/11 09:39, Digital Physics wrote: Send
Rummaging through the archives, I realized that a highly relevant
article by Marcus Hutter
apparently
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:03:12PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Mar 2011, at 09:53, Digital Physics wrote:
You are right, the theory of nothing is an old hat, published in
the 1990s. Hutter's new contribution is the observer localization:
how many bits are necessary to identify the
On 11/03/11 09:39, Digital Physics wrote:
Rummaging through the archives, I realized that a highly relevant
article by Marcus Hutter
apparently has not yet been discussed on this list, although many have
downloaded it:
Highly relevant indeed. He states in his summary I have demonstrated
that a
5 matches
Mail list logo
