Two possibilities:
- The universe is deterministic, symmetric and we can describe it globally (has global semantics). Then we find that it is simpler than it seems. There are Theories of Everything, which are far more simple than the universe itself. The variety that we see around is in fact shallow, actually the variety is only apparent from our particular and limited point of view. The universe is far simpler than it looks.
- The universe is nondeterministic, non symmetric and there is no global semantics. There is variation everywhere, at any scale. The universe does never and nowhere admit a complete description. The behaviour of any of it’s parts can only be predicted in average, or statistically, and for a limited time frame. Symmetries that we see are not global, therefore they are very precious, we can exploit them for limited parts of the universe, under limited conditions. There are no Theories of Everything which are simpler than the universe. The non symmetric universe translates into infinite variations where the lack of symmetry is used. We have randomness, friction, dissipation, but the universe is forever interesting.
Which way do you think is true?
If the universe were a game, then the two possibilities would be:
- The game has to be simple, because is made by programmers. The variety is limited, after a while the gamers start to see under the skin of the game. They understand that the simple mechanisms result in a poor game universe, which the devs mask with lots of ad hoc tricks. Updates are needed all the time, to make the experience look interesting, otherwise everything starts to look boring.
- The game is like a casino. Lots of games available, all are conceptually simple and always the casino wins eventually, but the social drama is endless and varied. Heroes and losers exist. All sorts of recipes to win the games exists. None works forever. Very addictive. Rare fortunes are made, most fortunes are lost.
Which way do you think is true?
If you would want to hack the game, then the two possibilities would be:
- There has to be a formal mistake in this formal game. Despite all claims that the game is well written and everything is top done, there is a secret hope that hack are possible because the devs were sloppy somewhere. And why not? After all, by symmetry we learn all the time that any particular piece of the universe which looked varied, it is not. Our uniqueness it is not. Why? Because somebody says so? In the simple symmetric and explainable universe everybody knows that the rules are imposed, not natural.
- In the casino, of course you attack it scientifically. There are probability rules. Some bad habits of casino employees, which are not random enough, could be exploited. In the casino universe the scientific attitude pays well.
Which way do you think is true?
chorasimilarity 