* Susskind ( susskind@stanford.edu ) well, I don't have
       questions for him; but if I did, I wouldn't hesitate to try.
       Worst that happens? Nothing. It disappears into the aether.
       Or you get an automated response. Or a secretary. Or a grad
       student helper (whoever his #2 is). Or maybe you'll get him.
       Your message might go *plonk*. It might get a curt response.
       Or might get just what you're hoping for.

       Anyway I'm going off-track as always

       I like CA models as well. They're especially useful in
       physical modeling I think - like fracture analysis, and
       allows us to build a kind of "knitting machine" with
       patterns to knit the Universe with.

       I got his big 1000 page book a few years back from the
       library. Realized by page 83 that it was getting
       repetitious. They're akin to setting up knitting machines
       with knit, purl, loop, drop or whatever the terminology for
       knitting is. [since programming is historically *based* on
       paper patterns for sewing machines in the.. hm.. 18th or
       17th century I think - it's no surprise that they share a
       lot of commonalities]

       Anyway, that's when I had a few questions.

       It's not that a knitting machine Universe is wrong; I think
       his model has some AMAZING strengths that are a vast
       improvement upon mathematics by mathematicizing programming,
       language, historical facts, knowledge representation. His
       new language is _amazing_ and reminds me of working in
       Excel, which is my forte. I like it a lot.

       But.. it goes back to precision. We can have our knitting
       machines simultaneously knitting reality as we go
       (constructionalist, which is my tendancy as well - and why
       CA is so darned appealing) - yet the unknitted remains an
       issue. Still, I think his model is potentially powerful
       enough to carry us through another century or two, if
       mathematical formulas can be recast in his way and much of
       language incorporated into it.
       [1]45 mins * [2]Like * [3]1
     * [4][IMG]
       [5]Kenneth Udut Eventually though, I think the nature of the
       experiential self; that of choice; will need full addressing
       by some these models, even CA. We're getting a tendency
       towards a deterministic view of things... and I think a lot
       of things that are currently considered
       reasonable/rational/free will/choice/uncertainty/ambiguity
       *will* get resolved.

       But - until the "us" is fully addressed, the "nowness" of
       experience... attempts at full objectivity will remain
       useful fictions... until they can tell me what my next
       thought will be
       [6]38 mins * [7]Edited * [8]Like
     * [9][IMG]
       [10]Kenneth Udut [of course they can tell me what my next
       thought will be as I think it and before I'm aware of it...
       but what I mean is a thought that will be, oh, 5 minutes
       from now at some precise time - that sort of thing]
       [11]33 mins * [12]Like



References

   Visible links
   1. https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut/posts/735266193718?comment_id=735402266028&offset=0&total_comments=64
   2. Like this comment
	https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut/posts/735266193718#
   3. https://www.facebook.com/browse/likes?id=735402266028
   4. https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut?fref=ufi
   5. https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut?fref=ufi
   6. https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut/posts/735266193718?comment_id=735402525508&offset=0&total_comments=64
   7. Show edit history
	https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut/posts/735266193718#
   8. Like this comment
	https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut/posts/735266193718#
   9. https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut?fref=ufi
  10. https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut?fref=ufi
  11. https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut/posts/735266193718?comment_id=735402929698&offset=0&total_comments=64
  12. Like this comment
	https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.udut/posts/735266193718#