Details view: Simplicity matters, not ontology

Views
Add
Edit
- Edit page
- Delete page
Share
Login
- Member login
- Register now for a free account
🔎

Simplicity matters, not ontology OpposingArgument1 #115265 Occam's Razor is fundamentally about conceptual simplicity rather than ontological size.

CONTEXT(Help)

The Arrow of Time »The Arrow of Time The Arrow of Time ☜A map exploring some issues concerning the nature of time that lie at the boundary of physics and philosophy. The map follows up a talk to the Blackheath Philosophy Forum on 2 April 2011 by Huw Price, Professor of Philosophy and director of the Center for Time at Sydney University.☜F1CEB7

▲

The physics of time »The physics of timeThe physics of time☜Is our subjective sense that time has a direction from past to future reflected in impersonal physical processes and laws? Is it better - from the impersonal viewpoint - to look asymmetries in time rather than a direction (to the future) of time?☜FFB597

▲

The thermodynamic arrow »The thermodynamic arrowThe thermodynamic arrow☜The Second Law of Thermodynamics implies an arrow of time in the sense that the entropy (or disorder) of an isolated system such as the whole universe never decreases - it either increases or remains constant.☜59C6EF

▲

Why do we see an entropy gradient? »Why do we see an entropy gradient?Why do we see an entropy gradient?☜We find ourselves in an observable universe in which entropy increases consistently in one direction, thereby showing time asymmetry - an arrow of time. Yet the vast majority of underlying dynamical processes are time-symmetric. How to account for this? Two broad approaches are considered here.☜FFB597

▲

Asymmetric boundary condition »Asymmetric boundary conditionAsymmetric boundary condition☜We see entropy increasing because: 1. An isolated system in a less than maximal entropy state will spontaneously evolve toward higher entropy. 2. We inhabit a universe (or part thereof) at less than maximal entropy. Both must be true for the explanation to work.☜59C6EF

▲

Past hypothesis »Past hypothesisPast hypothesis☜We inhabit a universe - or part thereof - characterized by a low-entropy past that has enabled the evolution of intelligent observers to occur. This together with Boltzmanns probabilistic argument (see sibling node) implies entropy will increase over time toward thermal equilibrium.☜9FDEF6

▲

Why low entropy in the past? »Why low entropy in the past?Why low entropy in the past?☜How do we account for the low entropy of the early universe reflected in the extreme - but not perfect - homogeneity of the distribution of matter and energy shortly after the Big Bang? When gravity is prominent - as in the early universe - a smooth distribution is unstable and of low entropy.☜FFB597

▲

Anthropic selection »Anthropic selectionAnthropic selection☜Several explanations have been offered that rely on (weak) anthropic selection to explain the low entropy past. They all note that conscious observers can only exist in an environment far from thermodynamic equilibrium, but differ on how the we came to be in such a state.☜59C6EF

▲

Ontological cost »Ontological costOntological cost☜Huw Price notes that anthropic reasoning that appeals to some form of multiverse cosmology requires us to posit that much more exists than we are ordinarily aware of - that it has a huge ontological cost - and that we should therefore look for less costly explanations.☜EF597B

■

Simplicity matters, not ontologySimplicity matters, not ontology☜Occams Razor is fundamentally about conceptual simplicity rather than ontological size.☜EF597B

Heading

Summary

Click the button to enter task scheduling information

Details

Enter task details

Message text

Select assignee(s)

Due date (click calendar)

RadDatePicker

Open the calendar popup.

Calendar

Title and navigation
Title and navigation
<<	<	November 2024	>	<<

November 2024
	S	M	T	W	T	F	S
44	27	28	29	30	31	1	2
45	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
46	10	11	12	13	14	15	16
47	17	18	19	20	21	22	23
48	24	25	26	27	28	29	30
49	1	2	3	4	5	6	7

Reminder

Ready to post Copy to text

Task assignment(s) have been emailed and cannot now be altered

Lock

Comment graphing options

Choose comments:Comment onlyWhole threadAll comments

Choose location:To a new mapTo this map

New map options

Select map ontology Graph to private map

+Comments (0)

- CommentsAdd a commentNewest firstOldest firstShow threads

+Citations (1)

- CitationsAdd new citationList by: CiterankMap

Link[1] The Case for Parallel Universes

Author: Vilenkin, Alexander and Tegmark, Max - Scientific American, 19 July 2011
Cited by: Peter Baldwin 5:04 AM 12 August 2011 GMT
URL:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=multiverse-the-case-for-parallel-universe

Excerpt / Summary

George also mentions that multiverses may fall foul of Occam's razor by introducing unnecessary complications. As a theoretical physicist, I judge the elegance and simplicity of a theory not by its ontology, but by the elegance and simplicity of its mathematical equations—and it's quite striking to me that the mathematically simplest theories tend to give us multiverses. It's proven remarkably hard to write down a theory which produces exactly the universe we see and nothing more.

+About

- About

Entered by:- Peter Baldwin
NodeID: #115265
Node type: OpposingArgument
Entry date (GMT): 8/12/2011 5:02:00 AM
Last edit date (GMT): 8/12/2011 5:02:00 AM
Show other editors
Incoming cross-relations: 1
Outgoing cross-relations: 0
Average rating: 0 by 0 users

x Select file to upload