Of course, evolution is statistical. But as I wrote in AlphaGo critique: blurring distinction between evolution & learning blurs causal mechanisms. May as well call it all change and lump rock formation with classical conditioning; key question is whether you need strong priors.https://twitter.com/plinz/status/968490295968063488 …
We don't have to make such an assumption a priori. The unchangeability of physics is a hypothesis that has to be supported by observations.
-
-
We need far fewer observations in order to attempt the assumption than we would need to render it certain. E.g. there's an infinity of hypotheses that look like 'physics is constant... until 3 seconds from now' that we can't directly disprove by observation but we discard anyhow.
-
We already observe that physics is changing. The universe expands etc. When we observe change we can of course always construct an underlying regularity. We don’t need to discard any possibility.
- 4 more replies
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.