saturn comments on A note on the description complexity of physical theories - Less Wrong

19 Post author: cousin_it 09 November 2010 04:25PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (177)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: saturn 09 November 2010 06:26:03PM 6 points [-]

Your "fix" seems problematic too, if it doesn't allow belief in the implied invisible

Comment author: cousin_it 11 November 2010 03:00:21PM *  2 points [-]

Took me more than a day to parse your objection, and it seems to be valid and interesting. Thanks.

Comment author: byrnema 09 November 2010 11:13:50PM *  1 point [-]

I'm not sure yet.

What does cousin_it mean by

find the shortest algorithm that outputs the same predictions.

Does this algorithm necessarily model the predictions (in any fashion), or just list them? If the predictions are being modeled -- then they'll either predict or not predict the implied invisible.

If the predictions are not being modeled -- I just don't see how you can get an algorithm to output the right list without an internal model.

This comment on this page is relevant... For example, I think I agree with this:

In this case, the look-up table is essentially the program-that-lists-the-results, and the algorithm is the shortest description of how to get them. The equivalence is because, in some kind of sense, process and results imply each other. In my mind, this a bit like some kind of space-like-information and time-like-information equivalence, or as that between a hologram and the surface it's projected from.