isn't "the brain is a classical computer" the mother of all of these "pop science" over-simplifications? ;)
-
-
Replying to @samim
To be a computer means little more than the ability to move from state to state in a nonrandom fashion. Sometimes I get the impression that you oppose reductive thought because your religion is an essentialist version of the god of the gaps.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
I'm neither religious, nor do i subscribe to any theological ideas, but guilty of occasionally pondering the meaning of our existence. Not against reductive thought at all, but refuse to live in a reality where all fundamental questions appear to be "answered".
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samim
I appear to have moved from an inscrutable universe of essences that animated reality, mind and consciousness into a clean one that I built from the ground up and has all the same observables as the former. Why not turn off the lights in the universe of essences?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
What's the difference? Is the new one still temporal? How does this new view change your approach going forward?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samim
Time is deconstructed too. Most of the fundamental questions are answered. There is no room for gnosticism and mystery. It is all fine as far as I can see in the machine universe.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Sounds like your close to a breakthrough, congrats! Good to hear you've deconstructed time, very curios to find out how! Is your model testable or even implementable (or is it more a feature of your personal enlightenment) ?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samim
I think that it is testable by implementing it. Can it reproduce the standard model and GR? At the moment it is merely a proof candidate, i.e. a family of theories that seem to be able to deal with the usual issues, and I don't know how much trouble there will be in the details.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Trying to sketch in a single tweet: Time is rate of change on a flat regular topology as observed by an embedded computer (and thus relative to the rate of change of that observer). It emerges over the elementary state changes that give rise to the topological dynamics. Helpful?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
mmhh... let me meditate on that one. What is the major difference in your opinion here to classical views of time?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The very classical view is that time is a continuous absolute dimension of change. The relativistic view makes it observer dependent and introduces a rotational operator to create spacetime, but causal order is preserved. I think that it should be discretized.
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.