You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Jack comments on Folk theories can be useful even when they're entirely wrong - Less Wrong Discussion

16 Post author: taw 23 March 2011 04:04PM

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

Comments (20)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Jack 23 March 2011 06:52:57PM *  4 points [-]

Something rather curious about the universe is that there are well-defined, exploitable regularities that supervene upon the most basic elements of the physical universe. We might expect the most fundamental level of reality to be defined by relatively simple, predictable laws because of the probability penalties associated with complexity. But why should we expect that physics to result in such helpful regularities on the macro level?

Are there only certain possible physical universes that produce useful macro regularities? The anthropic principle might explain some of the regularities we see- there have to be some for macro-sized organisms to exist- perhaps this is why the social sciences are so hard, our universe hasn't been anthropically selected for regularities in the behavior of societies like it has for physics and chemistry.

Conversely, perhaps the relationship is just mathematic and macro-regularities exist for most fundamentally simple systems. Maybe The Game of Life is relevant here? Are all macro-regularities just statistical?

Comment author: [deleted] 24 March 2011 01:57:56AM 2 points [-]

"Macro regularities" often have mathematical explanations

Tao, Draft article on universality

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 24 March 2011 03:27:05AM 1 point [-]

I think this is a better justification for Occam's razor then the one based on Solomonoff induction.