3rd Task: Difference between revisions

Line 15:

(update)

Wolfram says “Universe is not mathematical but computational” Maybe he sincerely believes that everything is computable or maybe there is another meaning into it. Scientists and mathematicians always look for a simple answer like the ‘theory of everything’ or a simple elegant equation. Thinking in terms of simple programs Wolfram thinks that it is possible to construct a single truly fundamental theory of physics, from which space, time, quantum mechanics and all the other known features of our universe will emerge. And this immediately suggests that the phenomenon of universality is vastly more common and important in both abstract systems and nature.

“Organisms are algorithms” says Harrari. In biology, so many organisms exhibit such great complexity but they are all similar calculators constantly processing biochemical processes of calculation. Feelings are a process of biochemical calculation shaped by millions of years of natural selection. Organisms collect the data with their senses, calculate the probabilities very fast and the answer appears not as a number but as a feeling or emotion.

For me, computation would be a dealing strategy or another language to allow as to deal with problems. We can compute natural phenomena and create models in some extend but this doesn’t mean we can compute everything. This could only be a tool for understanding or looking things.

The idea of simple algorithms generating complex structures is very similar to compression algorithms. All the models and abstractions can be seen as compression algorithm. as something It compress a general structure into a simple fascinating rule. Every abstraction at the same time reject something about reality. Just like simulation allegory in Borges tale; they tried to draw the best map for the Empire and draw up a map so detailed that it ends up exactly covering the territory. If the map doesnt cover the territory that it has to ignore something.

At the end,

"All models are wrong, but some are useful". George Box.

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 (update)
+Wolfram says “Universe is not mathematical but computational” Maybe he sincerely believes that everything is computable or maybe there is another meaning into it. Scientists and mathematicians always look for a simple answer like the ‘theory of everything’ or a simple elegant equation. Thinking in terms of simple programs Wolfram thinks that it is possible to construct a single truly fundamental theory of physics, from which space, time, quantum mechanics and all the other known features of our universe will emerge. And this immediately suggests that the phenomenon of universality is vastly more common and important in both abstract systems and nature.
+“Organisms are algorithms” says Harrari. In biology, so many organisms exhibit such great complexity but they are all similar calculators constantly processing biochemical processes of calculation. Feelings are a process of biochemical calculation shaped by millions of years of natural selection. Organisms collect the data with their senses, calculate the probabilities very fast and the answer appears not as a number but as a feeling or emotion.
+For me, computation would be a dealing strategy or another language to allow as to deal with problems. We can compute natural phenomena and create models in some extend but this doesn’t mean we can compute everything. This could only be a tool for understanding or looking things.
+The idea of simple algorithms generating complex structures is very similar to compression algorithms. All the models and abstractions can be seen as compression algorithm.  as something It compress a general structure into a simple fascinating rule. Every abstraction at the same time reject something about reality. Just like simulation allegory in Borges tale; they tried to draw the best map for the Empire and draw up a map so detailed that it ends up exactly covering the territory. If the map doesnt cover the territory that it has to ignore something.
+At the end,
+"All models are wrong, but some are useful". George Box.