The Eternal Doorman

He calls it the entschuldigungsproblem though.  My comment : 7:15 Jenann Ismael gave a talk at Johns Hopkins last year entitled "Cracks in the edifice of determinism" where she argues that this sort of self-reference produces questions which have no meaningful answer. There then arises the question as to how much one can reasonably deduce about physical processes (such as computation) based on their demonstrated inability to answer such questions. See  Jenann Ismael - Laplace meets Godel: How Self reference Foils Prediction  for more details and a suggestion as to a better way to define "effectively calculable" that does not depend on our incomplete knowledge of physics.  Subscribe to  Computable Secrets . Subscribe to  Hopkins Natural Philosophy Forum .  See  Dana Scott on Lattice Fixpoint Semantics and Gopal Gupta on Logic, Co-induction and Infinite Computation . On Monday, Aug. 29, 2016 in Berkely, Dana Scott gave  a lecture on a model ...

See her paper  Common Knowledge and its Limits . Maybe she can justify someone just watching talks on YouTube and posting them on blogs, see e.g.  Curt Jaimungal Interview with Aaron Schurger  and  Aumann's Agreement Theorem is Fifty Years Old . Subscribe to  Hopkins Natural Philosophy Forum .

This is better than I thought it would be from the title alone, ... See his paper  Conscious artificial intelligence and biological naturalism .  The sense I get from both these talks is that people are attributing consciousness to individual beings whereas it seems to me to be something proper to dynamic interactions within systems that have an auto-poetic character. Panel discussion. Wow, they did a lot on one day! 42:36 Question about the Mentaculus. See  Curt Jaimungal, David Albert and Naftali Weinberger Talking About The Character of Physical Law . See also the fiducial counterfactual measurement probabilities in QBism:  Rudiger Schack - Can Two QBists Experience One Thing? QBism's Take on Wigner's Friend .  See  these posts of mine . Subscribe to Hopkins Natural Philosophy Forum .

With a response on mathematical modelling by Harrison Hartle .  This was given just a few days after this recording of her talk at Santa Fe appeared:  Jenann Ismael - Laplace meets Godel: How Self reference Foils Prediction . See her paper  A Participatory Universe in the Realist Mode: On the Separation of Observational and Agentive Perspectives in Classical and Quantum Mechanics . I'm sure there's something interesting going on here with entropy when systems contain representing records of their history. See  Rüdiger Schack and Gabriele Carcassi on The Character of Physical Law  and  Assumptions of Physics - Reading the Book . Also hear John Norton’s discussion of entropy of physical representation . Subscribe to Hopkins Natural Philosophy Forum .

This is really interesting. See  Empowerment Gain as Causal Learning, Causal Learning as Empowerment Gain: A bridge between Bayesian causal hypothesis testing and reinforcement learning. Subscribe to Hopkins Natural Philosophy Forum . It explains what’s going on here: Subscribe to Julia Programming Language . And Chris Fields has some ideas about where these sorts of behaviours came from, physiologically: 13:10 On the psychological arrow of time, see  Carlo Rovelli Trying to Explain the Thermal Time Hypothesis to A General Audience . 41:23  on Geometric Phase, which is the idea that "We experience the actions of a high-dimensional environment on a low-dimensional boundary, so there has to be a many-one mapping from paths in the environment to paths on the boundary." 1:19:22 Great question about the dinosaurs and paleoscopy! David Mermin's 2018 paper is  Making better sense of quantum mechanics : We still lack any consensus about what one is actually talking about ...

My comment: You said rather a lot but I don't think you mentioned experiment once. Ernst Mach had an idea which was that physics should concentrate on  describing the experimentally observed phenomena as accurately and succinctly as possible. Then it turns out that the succinctness criterion serves as a kind of explanation in the sense of that Wigner quote about particles and groups (thanks, I'd never heard that before). So you just need an empirical basis for the least action principle and a relativistic invariance principle to get the symmetries, and then Noethe's theorem gives you a necessary reason (i.e. an explanation) why space is three-dimensional: it's because each degree of freedom requires two independent pairs of conjugate variables if you are going to have a well-defined notion of entropy in the configuration space. That's just for example (see Gabriele Carcassi's video on this .) But there are a lot of ways that the experimental method ...

For more on "man muss" see  John Campbell on mRNA Vaccines . Subscribe to Hopkins Natural Philosophy Forum .

These talks were given in the same afternoon: His paper "Hard Proofs and Good Reasons" is here:  https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.18994   30:02 But that “coevolutuon” is what Lakatos wrote about in Proofs and Refutations, isn’t it? And another thing: 27:39 “There’s no causality in mathematics” What about axioms? I mean the fact that some structure is a group causes a whole lot of theorems by Cayley, Sylow and others to hold for that object. Isn’t that the same sort of causality that applies in physics? That this particle of certain size, mass and charge moves in this path in a certain field when propelled in a certain direction at a certain speed from a certain point. There is another theorem of Lagrange that holds for this situation in a very similar way. The only difference is that in physics we don’t always know the precise masses, velocities, positions, fields etc, but under some assumptions we are reasoning the same way, aren’t we? I must have totally missed the point here! ...