5 ms·
I think they're begging the question a bit when it comes to thermodynamics. In their video on http://constructortheory.org/what-is-constructor-theory/ http://co
by contravariant 6y ago
I think they're begging the question a bit when it comes to thermodynamics. In their video on http://constructortheory.org/what-is-constructor-theory/ http://constructortheory.org/what-is-constructor-theory/ they simply claim that no constructor exists that can turn a cooked egg into a raw egg and that allows their theory to reason about thermodynamics. Now presumably this is meant to be about entropy and not merely the amount of energy. However given the exact right amount of energy it is possible for a constructor to 'uncook' an egg, it's just that this constructor will work only for exactly that egg at exactly that time.
The resolution is that you're extremely unlikely to pick the right constructor but then we're back to probability again. In fact anything the recovers the laws of thermodynamics simply ends up recovering probability theory as the laws of thermodynamics are inherently probabilistic.
- quirky_mind 6y agoLooks like someone reinvented operators. Or am I missing something here?
- contravariant 6y agoWell I guess they're assuming the operators are more physical than theoretical and they should conserve things (so I think they're limited to hermitian operators). But yeah that sounds about right. Not that I mind that they're looking for a different foundation but you can't just gloss over the problem of explaining statistical physics without statistics...
- Chinjut 6y agoTheir definition of "constructor" is as something that will perform a task reliably (whose meaning they define as including repeatably) for any choice of input with the specified attribute. If you can't come up with some reliable repeatable way of turning any cooked egg into a raw egg, then you don't have the thing they call a "constructor" for turning cooked eggs into raw eggs.