Registered: Jan 2004
Let me briefly reiterate my point. My question is whether the similarities between a small portion of yogic philosophy and the four classes of cellular automata might be a result of certain yogis witnessing the computational basis of the mind.
Maybe, using different words to describe the same concept. The difference is that with CA’s we are able to implement the four states into machinery and doesn’t stay reclusive in the human mind.
I am doubtful myself because I don’t believe that CA are the computational building blocks of the universe
Me too. CA gives us much deeper insight of the concept information (Data)  itself while Calculus gives us an understanding of action (in the form of matter) and energy. But I believe that it would go to far to label it as the computational building blocks of the universe (reality) itself . CA’s gives us a better understanding of how Data is intertwined with energy and matter which is still sourly lacked in current day human intellectual structures (like economics).
, but I also don’t believe in throwing data away because it doesn’t fit a cherished theory. As to Archimedes, while I think it is possible that he was the greatest intellect to every walk the Earth, I don’t see the connection between Archimedes and the possible history of CAs, beyond the obvious fact that Archimedes was a historical figure. I’m sure Archimedes would have been enchanted with CAs, but does any part of his work involve anything similar?
As far as I know the answer is negative. But the question was if there already was an intellectual New Kind of Science structure before Calculus and what we know of the past the answer is negative.
 The conventional view is that matter is primary, and that information, if it exists, emerges from matter. But what if information is primary, and matter is the secondary phenomenon! After all, the same information can have many different material representations in biology, in physics, and in psychology: DNA, RNA; DVD's, videotapes; long-term memory, short-term memory, nerve impulses, hormones. The material representation is irrelevant, what counts is the information itself. The same software can run on many machines.
Information is a really revolutionary new kind of concept, and recognition of this fact is one of the milestones of this age.
-- Gregory Chaitin, VII. Mathematics in the Third Millennium? --- The Unknowable, 1999
 Two complexity perspectives:
“Perhaps the best way to explain the difference is to say that he (Stephen Wolfram) is looking at "hardware" complexity, and I'm looking at "software" complexity. The objects he studies have complexity less than or equal to that of a universal computer. Those I study have complexity much larger than a universal computer. For Wolfram, a universal computer is the maximum possible complexity, and for me it is the minimum possible complexity.”
-- Gregory Chaitin, On the intelligibility of the universe and the notions of simplicity, complexity and irreducibility, 2002
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged