Life as Evolving Software... (Chaitin) (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, December 20, 2011, 11:48 (4721 days ago) @ David Turell

David,

So... at least as far as Chaitin's research goes, don't let uncommondescent try and spin things into directions they simply cannot go...

1. What does God is random mean?

2. I understand.

3. Is that resultant possibility equal to the others? And why? I am so lost!

1. Sort of flippant... but not really. It means that God influences design in an imperfect, not really planned way. (Think of the mad painter option I threw out some years back...) God hides itself in randomness.

3. If we find that evolution were to somehow always follow the best-case path, then one interpretation is that clearly, we're designed. It's just as valid as the others.

The three interpretations are there just to show that in the end, there won't be any real impact on our discussions...

Which is, I think, one of Chaitin's external motives. (Why he cited Berlinski and is including the ID community here...) In the paper he expressed disappointment that he wasn't yet able to cause point-mutations alone to map with the "Intelligent Design" graph line.

If you prove mathematically that you can't tell the difference between design and chance, for any left-brainers out there, it stops being a debate. (We righties however are always a little more open.) Its impact would be as deep as Godel. As a reminder, Godel was the inspiration to convince Einstein that a "Theory of Everything" was impossible.

What parts of my post were confusing?

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"