From: Ben Goertzel (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Dec 25 2002 - 11:18:06 MST
> Ben Goertzel <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > Unless they are sessile, this implies that they also know some
> > > physics that we don't know.
> > It would be very surprising if a superintelligent being did not
> know some
> > physics that we don't know.
> Oh, I agree. But we have no idea what that physics might be, we
> cannot predict it, we cannot speculate about it. Just because
> having, say, reactionless drives would be nifty doesn't mean that
> there must be undiscovered physics to allow it. And once you
> actually introduce new physics, all bets are off and speculation
> becomes arbitrary.
Not entirely arbitrary, in my view. If we assume that the new physics will
bear *some resemblance* to our own, then based on this assumption we can
meaningfully speculate as to what it might be like, what new abilities it
might permit, etc.
If we don't make this "some resemblance" assumption then of course
speculation *does* become arbitrary..
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:41 MDT