New answers tagged

0

Wolfgang Smith answers very intelligently on this “It is difficult, almost impossible, in fact, for the scientific community to recognize the fact that Cartesian bifurcation is a philosophic postulate, for which there is absolutely no scientific basis [...] It is not that they can conceive or imagine a scientific proof of that hypothesis; it is rather that ...


0

The algorithm is just the recipe --- the physical system is the bowl, flour, eggs, sugar, mixing spoon, etc. An algorithm is just a description of a process to be performed --- it does not implement itself. Even when we are talking about computing algorithms, these are all implemented using some physical machine. So no, an algorithm is not identical to a ...


0

One interesting point in relation to this: The set of computable numbers is a subset of the set of real numbers of measure zero. The extremely non-rigorous and technically incorrect but intuitively clear significance of this is - numbers that can ever be produced by an algorithmic process are an infinitesimally small proportion of the set of states that a ...


2

Penrose is using the three world model of Frege and Popper. Here is a link to Popper's Tanner lecture which explains three worlds. https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_resources/documents/a-to-z/p/popper80.pdf In summary, there are three kinds of things in our universe -- things which have location and time properties, and those things are basically matter, ...


0

This is an important question, and one that to answer, one must dig into some of the subtleties of physics. The most common answer one will find is that we thought our universe was deterministic under Newtonian "classical" physics, such that LaPlace's Demon who could know the location and momentum of all particles, could predict the behavior of the ...


0

"philosophy of science is as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds" - Feynman While physicists can get on with practical work, laboratory work of experimentalists like building gravity-wave observatories, or theoretical predictions that can be matched to cosmological predictions, they don't really need philosophy. But when the programme ...


0

I thought a while about whether or not I want to answer to this question but rereading the answers again and again I come to the conclusion that the discussion so far was not only highly subjective but also emotionally charged. Both these properties of the previous discussion devalue this very discussion. Therefore I try to give a physicists perspective on ...


Top 50 recent answers are included