[ExI] Another reason why Platonism can't be true

[Ben Zaiboc]

On 22/02/2026 16:03, Jason Resch wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2026 at 8:45 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>     On 22/02/2026 11:41, John K Clark wrote:
>
>     > ... it's impossible to process data without physics
>
>
>
>
>
>     Very good point. And further, it's impossible for information to even exist without some kind of physical embodiment.
>
>
> Physical embodiment is only necessary for some information to be learned by you.

What??
I don't know how you reckon that.
Embodiment is necessary for any and all information, full stop. This has nothing to do with me.

>  But I don't see from this fact you reached the conclusion that information can only exist physically. It is like saying you know other universes (besides this one) can't exist, because information can only exist in this one.

No, it's not. I'm not saying that. You are straw-manning my argument.

> ...
>
>     That's all that needs to be said, really.
>
>     1) It rules out the existence of a 'Platonic realm' containing all of maths, because maths is full of things that need to be calculated in order for them to be known.
>
>
>     Unless you claim that all the results of all the calculations that are possible, already exist (an infinite number).
>
>
> That is the claim, yes.  See page 45 here, about how LISP computers, defining the final execution state of any LISP program, exist in pure number theory: https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0404335
>  

That's total gibberish to me. I'm no mathematician, I don't even understand negative numbers, but it doesn't matter. You say Yes, that's the claim (all possible results of all possible calculations exist somehow, in some fantasmal realm). So my question is, how is this infinite amount of information embodied? Because if it isn't embodied, it doesn't exist.

>
>     And then, 2) you'd need to explain how this infinite amount of information can exist without any physical embodiment.
>
>
> This is akin to someone who has lived within a virtual reality simulation their whole life saying "it is impossible for information to exist without some kind of virtual embodiment," and then concluding on this premise, that "for some hypothetical physical world (underlying this virtual reality) to exist, you'd need to explain how all that physical information can exist without any virtual embodiment."

No, it's not.
Virtual embodiment of information is still embodiment, and is based on a physical layer. Information can only exist if it is embodied, regardless of how.
My point is that a platonic realm cannot exist, because it would have to contain information, but has no way to do that.

Don't try to muddy the water by invoking alternate universes and virtual realities, these things are irrelevant to the central point.

...

> As I asked John, what powers all the computation, what stores all the information, the universe uses to compute its evolution? If you say the universe itself, then the universe is a structure that can compute and store information on its own. Why should the universe be the only structure with these properties?

Nobody is claiming it is.

The claim is that in order for there to be structure, there must be something to be structured. IOW, information must be embodied.


>     If that were somehow possible, what would then be the point of the physical world? Why would it even exist? That would be the biggest violation of Occam's Razor possible.
>
>
> Not at all. The universe is the structure that emerges with the least information complexity required to explain your present state of conscious experience. This is an outcome of algorithmic information theory. See this paper for details about how much of physical law can be extracted purely from starting with the assumption of observer states and seeing what algorithmic information theory implies for what typical observers will see: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01826 It is fascinating.

No, it's not fascinating, it's more muddy water. (And I'm pretty sure the structure of the universe is not dependent on my conscious experience).


>
>     There's no information processing, or even any information to be processed, without the physical world.
>
>
> Again, try to apply this reasoning for the observer stuck in a virtual reality.

Again, that has nothing to do with it. Virtual realities, no matter how deeply stacked, are still part of the physical world.

>  
>
>      Any possible 'platonic realm' would have to be another physical world, but with an infinite information capacity (and probably no time dimension).
>
>
> The experience of time is a subjective phenomenon, an illusion. Spacetime itself does not evolve. You can thus view the entire universe as a sort of static four-dimensional object.

I don't really know about the time thing, that was just an afterthought. The point is: Where is the infinite amount of information? It's certainly not in this universe.

Let's make it simpler. You claim that /disembodied/ information can exist (please say if this is not your claim).

So, I'm asking you to give evidence that such a thing is possible. In fact, why don't you send us some?
(sorry, that's facetious, I know. I just get frustrated when people persist in trying to justify utter nonsense and/or try to derail the conversation from its main point)

-- 
Ben