I think I'm for an objective rational approach to problems. If there is something that I can't explain or I don't understand, I want to use any tool at my disposal,. intellectual tool in my disposal to address the problem. And if it comes from reductionism or not reductionism, a different approach or something that I've never seen before, but I see the thing works, I'm just going to go for it. So constructive theory seemingly has provided an exact definite definition of knowledge and once instantiated tends to cause itself to remain so. That seems promising. Do you think that there will eventually be such corresponding definitions for things such as life or free will or consciousness? Or do
I interview Oxford physicist Chiara Marletto, who has been working on constructor theory for several years. She's published papers on its applications to various fields, including those of information, thermodynamics, life, and probability. We discuss the origins and motivations of constructor theory, problems the theory may solve, current research programs, the universal constructor, response to potential criticisms, why constructor theory can explain more of Reality than the prevailing conception, and more.
Constructor Theory Homepage - www.constructortheory.org
Constructor Theory of Thermodynamics - http://constructortheory.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Thd-ArXiv-2.pdf
Constructor Theory of Probability - http://constructortheory.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/20150883.full_.pdf
Constructor Theory of Life - http://constructortheory.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ct-life.pdf
Constructor Theory of Information - http://constructortheory.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ct-info.pdf
Twitter - https://twitter.com/ChipkinLogan
Articles - www.loganchipkin.com
---
Support this podcast:
https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/logan-chipkin/support