i have noticed, ah in my own a, writing papers, giving talks and getting responses to them, that there's always a difficulty when you have to both convince the audience that there exists a problem. Like, every one has a list of actual existing problems in their head. And if you say you're solving tho s like, why is there more matter than anti matter, people go, oh, yes, that's a good problem to be working on. Butr is this the situation you find yourself in, where you have to convince people that there is an issue to be addressed, or are people more or less sympathetic to that? Well, i think i do a recall and having
Traditional physics works within the “Laplacian paradigm”: you give me the state of the universe (or some closed system), some equations of motion, then I use those equations to evolve the system through time. Constructor theory proposes an alternative paradigm: to think of physical systems in terms of counterfactuals — the set of rules governing what can and cannot happen. Originally proposed by David Deutsch, constructor theory has been developed by today’s guest, Chiara Marletto, and others. It might shed new light on quantum gravity and fundamental physics, as well as having applications to higher-level processes of thermodynamics and biology.
Support Mindscape on Patreon.
Chiara Marletto received her DPhil in physics from the University of Oxford. She is currently a research fellow at Wolfson College, University of Oxford. Her new book is The Science of Can and Can’t: A Physicist’s Journey Through the Land of Counterfactuals.
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.