This seems like the easy way out ...
-
-
-
You got a better one?
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
An embarrassment in what sense? To ask the question at all? Or in how far we seem to be from being able to address it?
-
In the sense that it is intellectually disturbing
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Weirdly, if we enumerate all possible universe states, some might be interpreted as having a history (which could be remembered by its inhabitants to a small degree), and following those lines we get all the possible evolving universes.
-
Indeed, I'm still trying to internalize the fact I can be a Boltzmann brain :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That truly is THE question. Does his mathematical universe theory charm your curiosity?
-
I think it is better expressed as computational. Noncomputable mathematics cannot be implemented, and thus I think they cannot exist. Neither the idea of a mathematical nor of a computational universe are new, of course.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Personally, I think Tegmark is on point. Everything that can be implemented, has been implemented, whether by nature or nurture or both. I think of the universe as the set of all computable functions.
-
This is one of the instances where you need to get your temporal forms correct. And in this context, nurture is entirely a form of nature.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.