A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
cephalopods.blog
A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
1–10 of 133 posts
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#2Interesting article!
As linked in the article, Egan posted some FAQ/counterarguments for issues raised here: https://www.gregegan.net/PERMUTATION/FAQ/FAQ.html
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#3A while ago I wrote up my own take, inspired largely by Permutation City but also by Tegmark's mathematical universe hypothesis: https://blog.domenic.me/mathematical-consciousness/
To me this line of thinking is very attractive. As someone who has been a mathematical Platonist forever, this gives a very satisfying answer to big questions like "why is there something instead of nothing" and "why is our universe so perfectly described by mathematics".
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#4I’ll take this one. Can someone provide some background as to exactly what is being discussed here?
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#5I don't know the original theory, but this explanation is brief to the point where it's nonsensical.
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#6This article doesn't actually explain Dust Theory to someone who hasn't read the book. I haven't found a good standalone explanation of the theory that explains it in a compact manner so my recommendation to people is to read the book.
Permutation City is among my top 5 favorite books because I found Dust Theory so mind blowingly amazing from a philosophical standpoint. I haven't seen it discussed elsewhere outside the lesswrong.com forums (which are famous for creating Roko's Basilisk). It's only $3 on Amazon so it's worth picking up if you're a fan of hard sci-fi that gets into the philosophy of uploading: https://www.amazon.com/Permutation-City-Greg-Egan-ebook/dp/B...
Dust Theory also provides an interesting option for people who want to achieve True Immortality. That is, immortality that can survive the heat death of the universe without violating the First or Second Laws of Thermodynamics. It also provides a hard sci-fi version of the concept of Subliming from Iain Banks' Culture novels where a civilization leaves this universe once they become sufficiently advanced. (Sublimation in the Culture books is similar to Ascension in the Stargate universe or Transcendence in Babylon 5.)
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#7He lost me right in the second paragraph:
> Because computation is sort of subjective, just a set of relations that can be usefully interpreted as representing a function, this seems to imply that the function you identify with can be interpreted as being simulated by any sufficiently complex set of relations.
Can anyone explain? I'm already struggling with the premise: Why should computation be subjective in the first place?
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#8A while ago I wrote up my own take, inspired largely by Permutation City but also by Tegmark's mathematical universe hypothesis: https://blog.domenic.me/mathematical-consciousness/ To me this line of thinking is very attractive. As someone who has been a mathematical Platonist forever, this gives a very satisfying answer to big questions like "why is there something instead of nothing" and "why is our universe so per…
> Permutation City
I haven't read that book since the early 90's but it dealt with ideas that have really stuck in my mind.
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#9I’ll take this one. Can someone provide some background as to exactly what is being discussed here?
A major plot point and thematic element from a novel by Greg Egan called Permutation City.
Re: A Brief Explanation of Greg Egan’s Dust Theory
#10He lost me right in the second paragraph: > Because computation is sort of subjective, just a set of relations that can be usefully interpreted as representing a function, this seems to imply that the function you identify with can be interpreted as being simulated by any sufficiently complex set of relations. Can anyone explain? I'm already struggling with the premise: Why should computation be subjective in the fir…
And why would "sort of" subjectivity be sufficient for simulation? The only interpretation is that the author uses the word subjective to mean "a set of relations". It doesn't sound like math, more like pseudo-philosophical sci-fi.
It also seems to assume that simulation of physical processes can be highly accurate and efficient, and that the function that represents "I" doesn't interact with the environment.