2023-09-18 08:25 UTC
@kendmiller@qoto.org
... you can ask, and the explanations you consider scientific. Our physical theories become complete descriptions of the world. You become trapped in your small world.
That's why computationalists can't even see the point of the argument I'm trying to have with them. The world is large and open-ended, but you can only get a shallow understanding of why that is if you live within your limited model.
Replies (1)
-
@yoginho@spore.social 2023-09-18 08:28
@kendmiller@qoto.org Concrete examples: Stephen Wolfram has a model called the "Ruliad," which he considers to be a model of not just this world, but all possible world. But it's 100% computational. So: nope. It remains trapped in a small world and does not even begin to describe what is possible in the real (large) world. https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2021/11/the-concept-of-the-ruliad Similarly, Sara Walker and Lee Cronin have come up with an interesting computational model of chemical complexification during the history of the ...