Occam's Razor is true because for all possible probability distributions over the infinite set of possible theories described by strings, each theory can only be more likely than a finite set of longer theories. This is true in any language used to describe the theories.
By "theory" I mean a description or program that is consistent with past observations and makes predictions. I suppose you would need to determine experimentally which languages work best. I think it would be human understandable languages because humans are doing the experiments. On Mon, Jun 29, 2020, 2:29 PM <immortal.discover...@gmail.com> wrote: > But Matt, if we use a language that is easiest to compute in our observed > universe, and penalize larger systems, then we are really just leveraging > physics and a penalization. We already know this in the original Occam's > Razor: Leverage physics and make the algorithm as small as possible (but > not too small). > *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* > / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + > participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery > options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T37756381803ac879-Mea6329ab643b5853235ed9bb> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T37756381803ac879-Me9e8c7798ae9ee652dcb124a Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
