This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
It’s yet another surprising construct that’s arisen from our Physics Project. And it’s one that I think has extremely deep implications—both in science and beyond. In some ways it’s a bit like our efforts to construct the ruliad. The whole continuum of all real numbers is “from the outside” in many ways a simple construct.
It began partly as an empirical law, and partly as something abstractly constructed on the basis of the idea of molecules, that nobody at the time knew for sure existed. But what’s important for our purposes here is that in the setup Carnot constructed he basically ended up introducing the Second Law.
When most working mathematicians do mathematics it seems to be typical for them to reason as if the constructs they’re dealing with (whether they be numbers or sets or whatever) are “real things”. And we can think of that ultimate machine code as operating on things that are in effect just abstract constructs—very much like in mathematics.
One of the key things that had originally let me start “scientifically investigating” cellular automata is that out of all the infinite number of possible constructible rules, I’d picked a modest number on which I could do exhaustive experiments. Of course, as is typical in the history of ideas, there’s more to the story.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 28,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content