Alexei Sharov wrote:
> Reply to Ricardo:
>
> >Most of the theories in physics try to see the world as a great
> >empty space, populated by entities that we call particles. Those particles
> >interact to each other, creating the world we live on. Most research in
> >modern physics is directed to the understanding of such particles. One of
> >the most controverse theories trying to explain particles is Quantum
Mechanics.
> >But, if you notice, this conception of the world is intrinsecally
> reductionistic.
> >We reduce matter to atoms, atoms to quarks, and (maybe) quarks to
superstrings.
> >WHAT IF the world is not an empty space populated by particles, but a
> >giant "cellular automata", where each point of the space is able to be in
> >a state (among e.g. an infinite number of possible states, only to be
generic),
> >and the value of a state depends on its own value in previous instants of
> >time and the value of its neighbour states in previous instants of time.Not
> >exactly like a cellular automata, but something as a continuous cellular
> >automata. And the laws governing this big continous cellular automata
> >would be such that it allows for the creation of stable things as
> >particles that move within this space and eventually chock to each other and
> >perform something that would be chemical reactions, and so and so and so.
Then,
> >particles would not be really particles, but only illusions of our
> >perception, just as we can see happening in standard cellular automata.
> >IF this scenario could be posed, then a Holistic view of the world would
> >be in terms of such cellular automata laws, instead the illusion of
> >particles interacting that our perception gives us.
>
> I agree that "cellular automata" is a more deep representation of the
> world than the traditional model of "particles in empty space". At least
> it does not hide the problem of defining spatio-temporal boundaries of
> objects (particles). But I would not call this a "Holistic view of the
> world" because your cellular automata does not include the most important
> component: the observer.
>
> I would argue that neither "particles in empty space" nor "cellular automata"
> is the True (with capital "T") representation of the world. Both are
> theories which are more-or-less good approximations.
> I see the problem not in substitution of existing scientific theories
> with more accurate theories (physicists will do it sooner or later) but
> in understanting that ALL scientific theories are approximations.
> There are no True or False descriptions of the world, but there
> are more or less accurate and more or less convenient descriptions.
> You draw a picture of how our notions of particles and their interactions
> become vague if we start from cellular automata. Perhaps, I understand why
> you talk about continuous CA rather than discrete: discreteness would
> require additional abstractions which you try to avoid. However, CA
> is a very compicated theory in itself. You would need a definition of
> space which may have various metrics and various topologies. Then you
> would need a model of time, and so on. Finally you may discover a
> more general theory, in which cellular automata would appear to be a
> vague and rough approximation.
>
> Rosen's definition of a mechanism is aplied to a description of a
> system, not to a system itself. Thus, the previous discussion about
> possibility to manufacture a "complex", i.e. non-mechanistic system
> becomes a contradiction in terms. We do not manufacture a description
> of a system, but we manufacture a system itself which cannot be
> a mechanism. Of course, the question can be turned around and we may
> ask, can we manufacture a system that does not behave according to
> our description? But this question is a trivial one because our artifacts
> too often behave unpredictably.
>
> -Alexei
> -------------------------------------------------
> Alexei Sharov Research Scientist
> Dept. of Entomology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061
> Tel. (540) 231-7316; FAX (540) 231-9131; e-mail sharov@vt.edu
> Home page: http://www.gypsymoth.ento.vt.edu/~sharov/alexei.html