| Revision as of 21:19, 4 December 2018 edit130.203.154.55 (talk) →Digital philosophers← 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 | ||
| (29 intermediate revisions by 22 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| '''Digital philosophy''' (also '''digital ontology''') 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|doi=10.1147/rd.481.0031}}</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 ]. | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| {{div col|colwidth=22em}} | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| {{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: