| Revision as of 18:19, 3 October 2017 editDVdm (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers138,475 edits Undid revision 803628571 by Badtoothfairy (talk) claim about Rucker's work from 1978 cannot be based on Wolfram's later work. Remove spammy advert← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 03:25, 14 March 2022 edit undoSrleffler (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers44,787 edits Merge to Computational philosophyTag: New redirect | ||
| (38 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{Confusing|date=February 2009}} | |||
| '''Digital philosophy''' is a direction in ] and ] advocated by certain ]s and ]s, including: ], ], ], ], ], and ]. | |||
| ==Overview== | |||
| Digital philosophy is a modern re-interpretation of ]'s ] ], one that replaces Leibniz's ]s with aspects of the theory of ]. Since, following Leibniz, the mind can be given a ]al treatment, digital philosophy attempts to consider some main issues in the ]. The digital approach attempts to deal with the non-deterministic quantum theory, where it assumes that all information must have finite and discrete means of its representation, and that the evolution of a physical state is governed by local and deterministic rules.<ref name="Fredkin1">{{cite journal|author=Fredkin, Edward|title=An Introduction to Digital Philosophy|journal=International Journal of Theoretical Physics|number=2|volume=42|year=2003|doi=10.1023/A:1024443232206|pages=189–247}}</ref> | |||
| In ], existence and thought would consist of only computation. (However, not all computation would be thought.) Thus computation is the single substance of a ] ], while ] arises from computational ]. There are many variants of digital philosophy; however, most of them are ] theories that view all of ] and ] and so on, in framework of ].<ref name="Fredkin1"/> | |||
| ==Digital philosophers== | |||
| *]. In his paper "Finite Nature" (1992),<ref>{{cite conference|url=http://64.78.31.152/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/finite_nature.pdf |author=Fredkin, E. |title=Finite Nature |conference=Proceedings of the XXVIIth Rencotre de Moriond |year=1992 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130829040406/http://64.78.31.152/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/finite_nature.pdf |archivedate=2013-08-29 |df= }}</ref> computer pioneer Edward Fredkin stated two fundamental laws of ]. As ] these two fundamental laws have two fundamental ]. | |||
| # All information must have a digital means of its ]. | |||
| # An informational process transforms the digital representation of the state of the system into its future state. | |||
| # If Fredkin's first fundamental law of information is correct then Einstein's theory of ] is not entirely correct, because the theory does not rely upon ]. | |||
| # If Fredkin's second fundamental law is correct then the ] of ] is not entirely correct, because quantum randomness lacks a digitally ] explanation. | |||
| *]. In Chapter 9 of '']'',<ref>* Wolfram, Stephen, ''''. Wolfram Media, Inc., May 14, 2002. {{ISBN|1-57955-008-8}}</ref> ] presents an outline of a ] ]. | |||
| # Below the ], there is an informational substrate that allows the build-up of ] by means of an updating parameter. | |||
| # The updating parameter for the multiverse is analogous to time via a mathematical ], but the updating parameter involves a decomposition across ]. | |||
| # The informational substrate consists of ]s that can simulate ] models and ]. | |||
| # In physical reality, both ] and ] are secondary features. The most fundamental feature of reality is ] ] caused by an updating parameter acting upon ]s. | |||
| # The multiverse automaton has a model consisting of informational substrate, an updating parameter, a few simple rules, and a method for deriving all of ] and general relativity theory, | |||
| # The totally finite nature of the model implies the existence of weird, ] forces that might, or might not, be too small for empirical detection. | |||
| *]. In his book "Mind Tools" (1987),<ref>Rucker, Rudy, Mind Tools - the five levels of mathematical reality - Houghton Mifflin (1987)</ref> mathematician/philosopher ] articulated this concept with the following conclusions about the relationship between Math and the universe. Rucker's second conclusion uses the ] term 'fact-space' ; this is Rucker's ] of ] based on the notion that all that exists is the perceptions of various observers. An entity of any kind is a ] in fact-space. The world – the collection of all thoughts and objects – is a pattern spread out through fact-space. The following conclusions describe the digital philosophy that relates the world to fact-space. | |||
| # The world can be resolved into digital bits, with each bit made of smaller bits. | |||
| # These ]s form a ] pattern in fact-space. | |||
| # The pattern behaves like a ]. | |||
| # The pattern is inconceivably large in size and dimensions. | |||
| # Although the world started simply, its computation is irreducibly complex. | |||
| ==Fredkin's ideas on physics== | |||
| Fredkin takes a radical approach to explaining the ] and the ] in quantum mechanics. While admitting that quantum mechanics yields accurate predictions, ] sides with ] in the ]. In "The Meaning of Relativity", Einstein writes, "One can give good reasons why reality cannot at all be represented by a continuous ]. From the quantum phenomena it appears to follow with certainty that a finite system of finite energy can be completely described by a finite set of numbers (]). This does not seem to be in accordance with a ], and must lead to attempts to find a purely algebraic theory for the description of reality. However, nobody knows how to find the basis for such a description." | |||
| Einstein's hope is a purely algebraic theory; however, Fredkin attempts to find a purely informational theory for the description of reality. At the same time, physicists find some vagueness, problems with ] compatibility, and lack of empirical falsifiability in Fredkin's expression of his ideas. | |||
| In "Digital Philosophy (DP)", Chapter 11,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.digitalphilosophy.org/?page_id=12 |author=Fredkin, Edward |title=Digital Philosophy |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140928110706/http://www.digitalphilosophy.org/?page_id=12 |archivedate=2014-09-28 |df= }}</ref> Fredkin raises the question, "Could physics have a strong law of ]?" Fredkin answers his own question, "If so, we have to rethink ]s, ]s and ] to better understand what is happening to the information. The appearance of a single truly ] is absolutely incompatible with a strong law of ]. A great deal of information is obviously associated with the ] of every particle and that information must be conserved. This is a very large issue in DP, yet such issues are seldom considered in conventional ]." | |||
| ==Fredkin's "Five big questions with pretty simple answers"== | |||
| According to Fredkin,<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3751/is_200401/ai_n9348128/|author=Fredkin, E.|title=Five big questions with pretty simple answers|journal=IBM Journal of Research and Development|volume=48|issue=1|date=January 2004}}</ref> "Digital mechanics predicts that for every continuous ] there will be some microscopic process that violates that symmetry." Therefore, according to Fredkin, at the ], ordinary matter could have ] that violates the ].There might be weird Fredkin ]s that cause a ]. | |||
| The ] extends general relativity theory to deal with ] when matter with spin is present. According to conventional wisdom in physics, torsion is nonpropagating, which means that torsion will appear within a massive body and nowhere else. According to Fredkin, torsion could appear outside and around massive bodies, because ] have anomalous ]. | |||
| ==Compatibility between Fredkin's ideas and M-theory== | |||
| * Fredkin uses many metaphors and analogies in attempting to convey his ideas. Straightforward interpretations of Fredkin's ideas seem to violate ]. However, careful consideration might reveal considerable merit underlying Fredkin's metaphors. | |||
| * Let us imagine that our universe consists of the following 5 components:{{Clarify|date=January 2010}} | |||
| # a one-dimensional antimatter clock that measures the flow of information running backward in time; | |||
| # a one-dimensional matter clock that measures the flow of information running forward in time; | |||
| # a six-dimensional directional-measuring device that measures the flow of information with respect to curvature and torsion of spacetime; | |||
| # a three-dimensional volume-measuring device that measures the amount of information with respect to volume; | |||
| # an alternate-universe engine that runs the 4 Fredkin measuring-devices with respect to information. | |||
| * Let us assume that the 'alternate-universe engine' is basically similar to the model described in Wolfram's "]", Chapter 9. How might the remainder of the "Digital Mechanics" philosophy described in (1)-(4) possess a meaning in terms of M-theory? | |||
| * ] formulates ] as a ] model. M-theory might have a good approximation by a theory that has a ] consisting of U(N) for some large N. If such an approximation is valid, then the group U(N) might describe the 4 Fredkin measuring devices. The 6-phase clock described in Fredkin's "Digital Mechanics" might be a counting mechanism for the 6-dimensional directional-measuring device that measures the curvature and torsion of information flow. Note that all 4 of these hypothetical Fredkin measuring devices assume a notion of absolute space, time, and information that would depend upon the 'alternate-universe engine' for any empirical validity. | |||
| * Fredkin's concept of the multiverse as a finite automaton with absolute space, time, and information might be isomorphic to a sheaf uniformization axiom. Such an axiom might establish a ] that supports uniform mapping of ]s and Feynman actions across alternate universes. | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| {{div col|cols=3}} | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| {{div col end}} | |||
| ==References== | |||
| {{Reflist}} | |||
| ==External links== | |||
| * | |||
| *]'s site "." | |||
| *Kelly, Kevin. 2002. Wired 10.12 | |||
| * ] Section 3.4 of this article discusses the foundations of digital physics/philosophy. | |||
| * | |||
| *Longo, Giuseppe O. Vaccaro, Andrea, Bit Bang. La nascita della filosofia digitale, Apogeo, 2014. | |||
| {{Philosophy topics}} | |||
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Digital Philosophy}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 03:25, 14 March 2022
Redirect to: