= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Dan_Moore comments on Kevin T. Kelly's Ockham Efficiency Theorem - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (81)
I'm pretty sure Nature doesn't have one.
In the game described by the OP, Nature must invent a law, which must be expressed in a language. So, in the game, there must be a description language.
As to whether (real life) Nature can be said to have a description language: I assess the validity of this concept in terms of its success or failure in explaining phenomena. I wouldn't be 'pretty sure' of any hypothesis unless it were tested.
So, in a true language the results of saying something could be equal to actions?
I'm not sure how to phrase this...
I think say and do: Heat + Air + Fuel and I get Fire?
Hmm...