3 ms·
I think the point is that all the patterns we deal with are a result of physic laws, so that somehow limits the solution space
by alehander42 10y ago
I think the point is that all the patterns we deal with are a result of physic laws, so that somehow limits the solution space
- akvadrako 10y agoThat seems to be concise summary of the articles point, but my first reaction is that it's a superficial distinction. One of the researches is Max Tegmark, author of Our Mathematical Universe. In short, he suggests every theory becomes it's own universe; physical laws are representations of patterns in some kind of calculation or proof. As he explains, although every possible theory is a universe, "most" complex theories can be reduced to simple ones. So it seems plausible that those simple patterns are more common and more likely to be found in a random (mathematical or physical) universe. This means that neural networks are likely to work with those common patterns. One might say it because that's closer to the nature of physical laws. But more directly, that's because of the nature of mathematical laws.
- rbanffy 10y agoI wonder why the article got so long.