On Free Will and Noetic Architecture - General

April 13

avatar The Author

Comments migrated from WordPress:

ec429 <ec429@cantab.net> on 2018-05-21 13:26:09 wrote:

it’s nondeterministic in a mathematical sense

Now, I realise that this is, as you say, Minovsky science; but as someone who (after Jaynes) takes the laws of information entropy to be fundamental in a way beyond those of thermodynamics, I’m really struggling to imagine what this even means.

If a = f(x), and b = f(x), and a ≠ b, then either the Platonic form of f changed while we weren’t looking, or there’s some other parameter alongside x to supply the additional bits that would otherwise violate the Liouville-analog theorem in information dynamics.

If I’m reading you correctly, you’re saying that neither of these things happen; instead, the logos actually does violate the Liouville-like theorem — which means it’s an algorithm that, when physically implemented, causes its implementing hardware to violate the actual Liouville’s theorem.

And while free will breaks the equality in the wrong direction to be immediately useful, if logos can grow a phase space, maybe the ontotechs can find a way to use it to shrink a phase space, too.

Which gives an answer to the thermodynamic criticisms of the premise of The Matrix

Alistair Young <athanasius.skytower@arkane-systems.net> on 2018-05-22 00:36:17 wrote:

Now, I realise that this is, as you say, Minovsky science; but as someone who (after Jaynes) takes the laws of information entropy to be fundamental in a way beyond those of thermodynamics, I'm really struggling to imagine what this even means.

FWIW, insofar as this is the case, you have perfectly replicated the state of confusion and bewilderment of the in-universe sophotechnologists who are looking at this particular area.

Seriously.

Paracausality studies in general are only barely above the point at which there’s a nice big box drawn on the virtual chalkboard labeled “and here a miracle occurs”, except now the term “miracle” has been promoted to scientific jargon.

If a = f(x), and b = f(x), and a ≠ b, then either the Platonic form of f changed while we weren't looking, or there's some other parameter alongside x to supply the additional bits that would otherwise violate the Liouville-analog theorem in information dynamics.

The possibility of one of the above or other variations on the theme of “the universe throwing dice where they can’t be seen” is the Weak Paracausal Hypothesis. The thus-far-ahead-in-the-prediction-markets Strong Paracausal Hypothesis can perhaps best be summed up as, “Seriously, what the fuck? What the fucking fuck?”