BerryPick6 comments on Where Recursive Justification Hits Bottom - Less Wrong

41 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 08 July 2008 10:16AM

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

Comments (73)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 31 December 2012 11:24:15PM *  1 point [-]

Here's one. The universe is a particularly perverse simulation, largely controlled by a sequence of pseudorandom number generators. This sequence of PRNGs gets steadily more and more Kolmogorov-complicated (the superbeings that run us love complicated forms of torture), so even if we figured out how a given one worked the next one would already be in play, and it is totally unrelated, so we'd have to start all over. Occam's razor fails badly in such a universe because the explanation for any particular thing happening gets more complicated over time.

In other words, Quirrell-whistling writ large.

Comment author: BerryPick6 01 January 2013 05:13:48AM 0 points [-]

I guess we could test this one by looking at successful explanations over time and seeing whether their complexity increases at a steady rate? Then again, I can already find two or three holes in that test...

Hmm. This is a tricky one.