Marcus Hutter

Okay, with a big question first.

I think it's a very interesting hypothesis or idea.

And I have a background in physics, so I know a little bit about physical theories, the standard model of particle physics and general relativity theory.

And they are amazing and describe virtually everything in the universe.

And they're all, in a sense, computable theories.

I mean, they're very hard to compute.

and you know it's very elegant simple theories which describe virtually everything in the universe so there's a strong indication that somehow the universe is computable but it's a plausible hypothesis

No, I strongly believe and I'm pretty convinced that the universe is inherently beautiful, elegant and simple and described by these equations.

And we're not just picking that.

I mean, if there were some phenomena which cannot be neatly described,

Scientists would try that, right?

And, you know, there's biology, which is more messy, but we understand that it's an emergent phenomena and, you know, it's complex systems, but they still follow the same rules, right, of quantum and electrodynamics.

All of chemistry follows that, and we know that.

I mean, we cannot compute everything because we have limited computational resources.

No, I think it's not a bias of the humans, but it's objectively simple.

I mean, of course, you never know, you know, maybe there's some corners very far out in the universe or super, super tiny below the nucleus of atoms or, well, parallel universes where, which are not nice and simple, but there's no evidence for that.

And we should apply Occam's razor and, you know, choose the simplest tree consistent with it.

But although it's a little bit self-referential.

So maybe a quick pause.

What is Occam's Razor?