= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
nyan_sandwich comments on The ongoing transformation of quantum field theory - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (19)
Physics is cool and all, but what has this got to do with rationality?
Mitchell's post is about new developments in the foundations of physics (i.e. what the foundation ontology of the physical world should be). This is very much relevant to Eliezer Yudkowsky's latest sequence on epistemology: for instance, if Mitchell Porter is right, we should be able to reconcile Eliezer's viewpoint that everything should in principle be reducible to physics with the traditional neo-positivist POV that everything should be reducible to experience. All things considered, this is a fairly big deal.
That sounds sensible, but even on rereading, it is entirely unclear to me where the OP said anything about that. Maybe I just lack the physics grooves in my brain that would help me grok this, but I can't be the only one.
If that is in fact the point of this post, I think it could vastly improved by saying at the outset "here's this new hypothetical physics that physicists are playing with that is interesting to us because X" and then discussing the implications rather than just the physics and math.
and if X really is something about reconciling physical reductionism with positivism, then I'm totally confused, because those things don't seem to need reconciling.
I think bogus is talking about this passage:
which seems to be suggesting that the approach may eventually solve the puzzle of Born probabilities. I agree with you that it would have been nice to have this at the top of the post, if it's supposed to be the main point.