Are there any systems in nature that are non-computational?
>>16898518Drawing circles and lines?
>>16898518No,Everything is a computation.The great mystery is why nature can compute certain things that we, for now, appear unable.
>>16898548So you're saying everything is a computation but you can't prove it computationally?Um.
>>16898518muh feelings
>>16898548>The great mystery is why nature can compute certain things that we, for now, appear unable.Not a very big mystery. If everything is a computation and the universe is infinitely more vast and/or more complex than the contents of our brains, then the computing power of those brains can never reach the computing power of the rest of the entirety of the universe. Even if our brains were the most complex computing machines in existence, the sheer amount of stuff that's out there will always be too much computing power for our brains to match.Given the miniscule amount of the observable universe that is available to our brains, the likelihood that there ARE things more complex than our brains is quite high, meaning we would never be able to fathom them.If there are things more complex than our brains and the universe is utterly filled with them, we could never hope to be able to compute the nature of those computations.
>>16898518>>16898518Everything is the analog computer of its own dynamics, but that notion of computation is as meaningless as it is trivial. To meaningfully claim that something computes, you must be able to abstract the computational logic from the physical means of computation. But once you do that, a computation ceases to be an objective physical process. It's no longer subject to the constraints that allow you to objectively identify physical phenomena. You can distribute the steps of a computation arbitrarily across space and time, up to sequential dependencies. Correlating those steps back into a (logical) process is mere convention. Real phenomena don't work like that. So you can claim some physical system is a "computer" (i.e. you can read computations into it if you want) but you can't claim whatever you think it computes is what drives or characterizes it as a physical system.
>>16898548spbp
>>16898840>shittiest post best post
>>16898788>as meaningless as it is trivial
>>16898854>mentally ill retard strikes again
>>16898854> academic has not outgrown his idealism phase and posts useless mumbo jumboHopefully you get it soon.
>>16898777That would imply that everything that can be observed by a human can be computed by a human's brain, but that doesn't seem to be the case since even the human brain generally estimates rather than computes.
>>16898518Love. Hope.
