3 ms·
Anyone + thoughts on what predictions it makes that can potentially tell this theory apart from the prevalent ones? Would we need to transcend falsifiability as
by sriku 5y ago
Anyone + thoughts on what predictions it makes that can potentially tell this theory apart from the prevalent ones? Would we need to transcend falsifiability as a requirement to get there? (Ref philosopher Dawid's model)
- andybak 5y agoI haven't read TFA but David Deutsch is usually pretty keen on falsifiability. I learned most of what I know about Popper from reading "The Fabric of Reality".
- jlokier 5y agoPotentially: "This argument provides the indispensable theoretical basis for recently proposed tests of non-classicality in gravity, based on witnessing gravitationally-induced entanglement in quantum probes."
- sriku 5y agoThanks for this ref! (arxiv paper link - https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.07974 https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.07974)
- Kaomet 5y agoDoes it make predictions ? It looks like a logical fundation for physics. In computer science, it's the equivalent of inventing a new programming language instead of solving actual problems.
- andreareina 5y agoMy understanding is that this is more of an approach than a single rigorous theory. Modern theories typically define operators that are applied to a current state to derive a future state; constructor theory skips all of that and says that some start -> finish pairs are allowed and some forbidden. Conservation of energy is very much of this model: it doesn't say why or how it's conserved, but from it you can figure out things like the velocity an object gains as it moves through a gravitational potential.