wolfram is a knitting machine universe though – not wrong but


  • Susskind ( susskind@stanford.edu ) well, I don’t have questions for him; but if I did, I wouldn’t hesitate to try. Worst that happens? Nothing. It disappears into the aether. Or you get an automated response. Or a secretary. Or a grad student helper (whoever his #2 is). Or maybe you’ll get him. Your message might go *plonk*. It might get a curt response. Or might get just what you’re hoping for.

    Anyway I’m going off-track as always

    I like CA models as well. They’re especially useful in physical modeling I think – like fracture analysis, and allows us to build a kind of “knitting machine” with patterns to knit the Universe with.

    I got his big 1000 page book a few years back from the library. Realized by page 83 that it was getting repetitious. They’re akin to setting up knitting machines with knit, purl, loop, drop or whatever the terminology for knitting is. [since programming is historically *based* on paper patterns for sewing machines in the.. hm.. 18th or 17th century I think – it’s no surprise that they share a lot of commonalities]

    Anyway, that’s when I had a few questions.

    It’s not that a knitting machine Universe is wrong; I think his model has some AMAZING strengths that are a vast improvement upon mathematics by mathematicizing programming, language, historical facts, knowledge representation. His new language is _amazing_ and reminds me of working in Excel, which is my forte. I like it a lot.

    But.. it goes back to precision. We can have our knitting machines simultaneously knitting reality as we go (constructionalist, which is my tendancy as well – and why CA is so darned appealing) – yet the unknitted remains an issue. Still, I think his model is potentially powerful enough to carry us through another century or two, if mathematical formulas can be recast in his way and much of language incorporated into it.
    45 mins · Like · 1
  • Kenneth Udut Eventually though, I think the nature of the experiential self; that of choice; will need full addressing by some these models, even CA. We’re getting a tendency towards a deterministic view of things… and I think a lot of things that are currently considered reasonable/rational/free will/choice/uncertainty/ambiguity *will* get resolved.

    But – until the “us” is fully addressed, the “nowness” of experience… attempts at full objectivity will remain useful fictions… until they can tell me what my next thought will be
  • Kenneth Udut [of course they can tell me what my next thought will be as I think it and before I’m aware of it… but what I mean is a thought that will be, oh, 5 minutes from now at some precise time – that sort of thing]


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

1 × five =

Leave a Reply