On 16 Mar 2011, at 22:40, Russell Standish wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:03:12PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Mar 2011, at 09:53, Digital Physics wrote:
You are right, the "theory of nothing" is an old hat, published in
the 1990s. Hutter's new contribution is the observer localizat
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:03:12PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 16 Mar 2011, at 09:53, Digital Physics wrote:
>
> >You are right, the "theory of nothing" is an old hat, published in
> >the 1990s. Hutter's new contribution is the observer localization:
> >how many bits are necessary to ident
person views.
Bruno
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 21:26:59 +
From: andrewsol...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Hutter's article on a complete theory of everything
On 11/03/11 09:39, Digital Physics wrote: Send
Rummaging through the archives, I realized
much more likely and therefore
more predictive in the Bayesian framework. This "allows to distinguish
meaningful from
predictively meaningless theories".
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 21:26:59 +
From: andrewsol...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Hutter
On 11/03/11 09:39, Digital Physics wrote:
Rummaging through the archives, I realized that a highly relevant
article by Marcus Hutter
apparently has not yet been discussed on this list, although many have
downloaded it:
Highly relevant indeed. He states in his summary "I have demonstrated
that a
Rummaging through the archives, I realized that a highly relevant article by
Marcus Hutter
apparently has not yet been discussed on this list, although many have
downloaded it:
A Complete Theory of Everything (Will Be Subjective)
Algorithms 2010, 3(4), 329-350; doi:10.3390/a3040329
Part of th
6 matches
Mail list logo
