[ExI] Meaningless Symbols

Aware aware at awareresearch.com
Sat Jan 16 18:03:56 UTC 2010

On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/1/16 Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com>:
>> To claim that the complex thing does not differ in any important way from the simple thing is, I'll say it again, totally ridiculous.
> Yes and no. It appears that there is one single qualitative threshold
> (and a pretty low one...) as far as "complexity" is concerned. Beyond
> that, all conceivable degrees of complexity can be generated by
> systems having attained the required level, and all that changes is
> the performances in the completion of a given computation. See again a
> New Kind of Science.

Stefano, you are correct and Wolfram makes an important point about
"computational irreducibility" in regard to our ability to predict the
behavior of complex systems.  Beyond a certain point, the only way to
know is to run the system and observe the outcomes.  But this does not
imply that novel qualitative differences do not continue to emerge as
the (4th Law of Thermodynamics?) result of stochastic discovery of
synergies exploiting new degrees of freedom.  More is indeed

And all of this has virtually zero bearing on the exceedingly simple
but excruciatingly nonintuitive  *epistemological* puzzle of

- Jef

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list