Lee Cronin

I think that this falls into the Brouwer-Hilbert trap. So how do you get a cellular automata to produce a complexity? You have a computer, you generate a display, and you map the change of that in time. Mm-hmm. There are some CAs repeat, like functions.

It's fascinating to me that for pi, there is a formula where you can go to the millionth decimal place of pi and read out the number without having to go there. But there are some numbers where you can't do that. You have to just crank through. Whether it's Wolframian computational irreducibility or some other thing, it doesn't matter. But these CAs...

It's fascinating to me that for pi, there is a formula where you can go to the millionth decimal place of pi and read out the number without having to go there. But there are some numbers where you can't do that. You have to just crank through. Whether it's Wolframian computational irreducibility or some other thing, it doesn't matter. But these CAs...

It's fascinating to me that for pi, there is a formula where you can go to the millionth decimal place of pi and read out the number without having to go there. But there are some numbers where you can't do that. You have to just crank through. Whether it's Wolframian computational irreducibility or some other thing, it doesn't matter. But these CAs...

That complexity, is that just complexity or a number that is basically you're mining that number in time? Is that just a display screen for that number, that function?

That complexity, is that just complexity or a number that is basically you're mining that number in time? Is that just a display screen for that number, that function?

That complexity, is that just complexity or a number that is basically you're mining that number in time? Is that just a display screen for that number, that function?

No, because the complexity on Earth has a copy number and an assembly index associated with it. That CA is just a number running.

No, because the complexity on Earth has a copy number and an assembly index associated with it. That CA is just a number running.

No, because the complexity on Earth has a copy number and an assembly index associated with it. That CA is just a number running.

Well, it does in the human, where we're looking at humans producing different rules, but then it's nested on selection. So those CAs are produced by selection. Yeah. I mean, the CA is such a fascinating pseudo complexity generator. What I would love to do is understand, quantify the degree of surprise in a CA and write it long enough.

Well, it does in the human, where we're looking at humans producing different rules, but then it's nested on selection. So those CAs are produced by selection. Yeah. I mean, the CA is such a fascinating pseudo complexity generator. What I would love to do is understand, quantify the degree of surprise in a CA and write it long enough.

Well, it does in the human, where we're looking at humans producing different rules, but then it's nested on selection. So those CAs are produced by selection. Yeah. I mean, the CA is such a fascinating pseudo complexity generator. What I would love to do is understand, quantify the degree of surprise in a CA and write it long enough.

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

But what I guess that means is we have to instantiate, we have to have a number of experiments where we're generating different rules and running them time steps. But, ah, got it. CAs are mining novelty in the future by iteration, right? And you're like, oh, that's great, that's great. You didn't predict it. Some rules you can predict what's going to happen. Other rules you can't.

But what I guess that means is we have to instantiate, we have to have a number of experiments where we're generating different rules and running them time steps. But, ah, got it. CAs are mining novelty in the future by iteration, right? And you're like, oh, that's great, that's great. You didn't predict it. Some rules you can predict what's going to happen. Other rules you can't.

But what I guess that means is we have to instantiate, we have to have a number of experiments where we're generating different rules and running them time steps. But, ah, got it. CAs are mining novelty in the future by iteration, right? And you're like, oh, that's great, that's great. You didn't predict it. Some rules you can predict what's going to happen. Other rules you can't.

So for me, if anything, CAs are evidence that the universe is too big to contain itself. Because otherwise you'd know what the rules are going to do forever more.