Interesting analogy but I don't think there is a global minima of physics. Rather physics is localised with different rules depending on context. I mean (I SAY AGAIN) our 'physics' are rules for an edge-case ~5% of matter. That's what makes it exciting: we are noise in the signalhttps://twitter.com/Plinz/status/941522164586557440 …
That implies that there is no ground truth, and we live in a David Lynch movie. I find that implausible, it would fall apart. Even if the universe is noisy, there is going to be a global optimum in characterizing it as a probabilistic system.
-
-
So I have a soft spot for Smolin (& Hoyle). I mean consider phrase 'physics breaks down at X'. Why do we have to apply the _same_ physics there? It is a very human thing to go for a ground truth. I can't convince myself there is justification for that (But I take your point :)
-
It is not physics that is breaking down, but a frame of description. The idea that molecular dynamics, quantum dynamics, relativistic dynamics etc. play out in ontologically different universes does not make sense, even if temperature, gravity or space are specific to frame
- 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.