![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
http://www.ufoskeptic.org/
Anyone perplexed with the mathematical mysticalism of this fruitbat of late, behold:
Shermer's Last Law: Any sufficiently advanced Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence is indistinguishable from God
http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/
http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/sciamer.html
http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/ns.html
http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/eesti.html#13
THE LIMITS OF MATHEMATICS : A Course on Information Theory and the Limits of Formal Reasoning, by G J Chaitin, IBM Research
[entire book seems to be available and free here]
http://www.geocities.com/francorbusetti/algor.htm
http://www.ams.org/new-in-math/cover/prime-chaos.html
http://www.geocities.com/~harveyh/narciss.htm
http://www.geocities.com/~harveyh/index.htm
http://www.geocities.com/vedicmathematics/scriptures_formats.htm
http://www.vorpublishing.com/number_theory_by_kevin_trinder.html
head hurts; wrongy o'clock; i know the universe is strange when i regain an interest in that ugliest of languages, LISP. Maybe i modify his modified language to be more pleasing to fruitbatkind. Call it Lithp. Argh. Been taken. Ok, take off the plosive, make it Lith.
http://www.techfest.com/software/lang.htm
http://www.catseye.mb.ca/projects/?keyword=eso
http://p-nand-q.com/e/java2k.html
Java2K is not a deterministic programming language, but a probabilistic one. Even for built-in functions, there is only a certain probability the function will do whatever you intend it to do. All Functions have two different implementations. At runtime, based on a pseudo-RNG, the actual implementation is choosen. This is in line with common physicalist assumptions about the nature of the universe - there is never absolute security, there is always only probability.
mk
GoToBed Statement Considered unHarmful, Edna W. Dijkstra
Anyone perplexed with the mathematical mysticalism of this fruitbat of late, behold:
Shermer's Last Law: Any sufficiently advanced Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence is indistinguishable from God
"Dr. Michael Shermer is the Founding Publisher of Skeptic magazine, the Director of the Skeptics Society, a monthly columnist for Scientific American, the host of the Skeptics Lecture Series at Caltech, and the co-host and producer of the 13-hour Fox Family television series, Exploring the Unknown. He is the author of In Darwin's Shadow, about the life and science of the co-discoverer of natural selection, Alfred Russel Wallace. He also wrote The Borderlands of Science, about the fuzzy land between science and pseudoscience, and Denying History, on Holocaust denial and other forms of historical distortion. His book How We Believe: The Search for God in an Age of Science, presents his theory on the origins of religion and why people believe in God. He is also the author of Why People Believe Weird Things that was widely and positively reviewed and was on the Los Angeles Times bestseller list as well as the New Sciences science books bestseller list in England. Dr. Shermer is also the author of Teach Your Child Science and co-authored Teach Your Child Math and Mathemagics."A fruitbat can sometimes be quite amused.
http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/
http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/sciamer.html
( Read more... )From Complexity to Life: On the Emergence of Life and Meaning
...Gödel's technique can be applied to virtually any formal system, and it therefore demands the surprising and, for many, discomforting conclusion that there can be no definitive answer to the question ``What is a valid proof?'' ( Read more... )
http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/ns.html
I have found an extreme form of randomness, of irreducibility, in pure mathematics---in a part of elementary number theory associated with the name of Diophantus and which goes back 2000 years to classical Greek mathematics. Hilbert believed that mathematical truth was black or white, that something was either true or false. I think that my work makes things look grey, and that mathematicians are joining the company of their theoretical physics colleagues. I do not think that this is necessarily bad. We have seen that in classical and quantum physics, randomness and unpredictability are fundamental. I believe that these concepts are also found at the very heart of pure mathematics.
http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/eesti.html#13
1.3 Summary of Leibniz, 1686
What is a law of nature? According to Leibniz, a theory must be simpler than the data it explains! Because if a physical law can be as complicated as the experimental data that it explains, then there is always a law, and the notion of ``law'' becomes meaningless! Understanding is compression! A theory as complicated as the data it explains is NO theory! ( Read more... )
Leibniz's key insight is not that this is ``the best of all possible worlds''. This was anti-Leibniz propaganda by Voltaire, who ridiculed Leibniz and did not understand how subtle and profound Leibniz was. (According to Borges, the word ``optimism'' was invented by Voltaire to mock Leibniz!)
Leibniz's key insight is that God has used few ideas to create all the diversity, richness and apparent complexity of the natural world. Leibniz is actually affirming his belief that the universe is rationally comprehensible. (This belief in a rational universe goes back at least to the ancient Greeks, particularly Pythagoras and Plato, but Leibniz's formulation is much sharper and profound because he analyzes in mathematical terms exactly what this belief means.) In modern language, Leibniz was stating his belief in the possibility of science.
Pythagoras and Plato believed that the universe can be comprehended using mathematics. Leibniz went beyond them by clarifying mathematically what exactly does it mean to assert that the universe can be comprehended using mathematics.
AIT continues this train of thought and goes beyond Leibniz by positing that explanations are computer programs and also by defining precisely what complexity is and what exactly does it mean to satisfy Leibniz's requirement that an explanation has to be simpler than the phenomena that it explains.
...TRY is like a large suitcase: I am using it to do several different things at the same time. In fact, TRY is all I really need to be able to program AIT in LISP. All of the other changes in my version of LISP were made just for the fun of it! (Actually, to simplify LISP as much as possible without ruining its power, so that I could prove theorems about it and at the same time enjoy programming in it!)http://www.cs.umaine.edu/~chaitin/unknowable/lisp.html
THE LIMITS OF MATHEMATICS : A Course on Information Theory and the Limits of Formal Reasoning, by G J Chaitin, IBM Research
[entire book seems to be available and free here]
http://www.geocities.com/francorbusetti/algor.htm
http://www.ams.org/new-in-math/cover/prime-chaos.html
http://www.geocities.com/~harveyh/narciss.htm
http://www.geocities.com/~harveyh/index.htm
http://www.geocities.com/vedicmathematics/scriptures_formats.htm
http://www.vorpublishing.com/number_theory_by_kevin_trinder.html
head hurts; wrongy o'clock; i know the universe is strange when i regain an interest in that ugliest of languages, LISP. Maybe i modify his modified language to be more pleasing to fruitbatkind. Call it Lithp. Argh. Been taken. Ok, take off the plosive, make it Lith.
http://www.techfest.com/software/lang.htm
http://www.catseye.mb.ca/projects/?keyword=eso
http://p-nand-q.com/e/java2k.html
Java2K is not a deterministic programming language, but a probabilistic one. Even for built-in functions, there is only a certain probability the function will do whatever you intend it to do. All Functions have two different implementations. At runtime, based on a pseudo-RNG, the actual implementation is choosen. This is in line with common physicalist assumptions about the nature of the universe - there is never absolute security, there is always only probability.
mk
GoToBed Statement Considered unHarmful, Edna W. Dijkstra