Matt Mahoney wrote:
--- Jef Allbright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/1/07, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What I argue is this: the fact that Occam's Razor holds suggests that the
universe is a computation.
Matt -
Would you please clarify how/why you think B follows from A in your
preceding statement?
Hutter's proof requires that the environment have a computable distribution.
http://www.hutter1.net/ai/aixigentle.htm
So in any universe of this type, Occam's Razor should hold. If Occam's Razor
did not hold, then we could conclude that the universe is not computable. The
fact that Occam's Razor does hold means we cannot rule out the possibility
that the universe is simulated.
Matt, I really don't see why you think Hutter's work shows that "Occam's
Razor holds" in any
context except AI's with unrealistically massive amounts of computing
power (like AIXI and AIXItl)
In fact I think that it **does** hold in other contexts (as a strategy
for reasoning by modest-resources
minds like humans or Novamente), but I don't see how Hutter's work shows
this...
-- Ben G
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=11983
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=11983
