Fabric of Reality Book Club

Showing only those parts of the discussion which lead to #2258 and its comments.

See full discussion·See most recent related ideas
  Log in or sign up to participate in this discussion.
With an account, you can revise, criticize, and comment on ideas.
Discussions can branch out indefinitely. Zoom out for the bird’s-eye view.
Edwin de Wit’s avatar
Edwin de Wit, 8 days ago·#2081

Perhaps it’s premature, but I’d love to discuss:

  1. why DD thinks the four strands already amount to a theory of everything

  2. why DD presents quantum mechanisms as having already subsumed general relativity

  3. what other (proto)strands we could envision and why they are indeed a meaningful addition to the 4 strands

Erik Orrje’s avatar
Erik Orrje, 7 days ago·#2090

Yeah (3) is interesting. Constructor theory is the contender I can think of for a future fifth strand. Any other suggestions?

Edwin de Wit’s avatar
Edwin de Wit, 2 days ago·#2258

I currently see Constructor Theory as a meta-theory. A different mode of explanation. But it raises an interesting question: does CT actually qualify as a deeper theory than the four strands? Even if we were to express all four strands in constructor-theoretic terms, that alone wouldn’t make it explain more or have greater reach. So when would it truly deserve to be considered a strand/theory of everything?

Criticized1
Erik Orrje’s avatar
Erik Orrje, about 21 hours ago·#2276

By the same logic, wouldn't neo-Darwinism also disqualify as a strand, since it's subsumed by Popperian epistemology?

Criticism of #2258