Smolin principle of evocation

    came into existence at the moment the rules were codified


What's compelling about the principle “came into existence at the moment the rules were codified” [1] is that it applies to both mathematics and universes — the first by homo sapiens, the second by cosmological natural selection [2].



Those who say that mathematics is created by homo sapiens are right, and those who say that mathematics is “continuous” with the physical world are right, since the devices (brains of homo sapiens) that created the mathematics are physical devices that produce only physical outputs. But this just shows that there can be physical things that can create new physical things that have never appeared in nature before. Synthetic biology is doing that, too. For mathematics, formulation in the vocabulary of HoTT — Homotopy Type Theory — is useful in showing mathematics to be a synthetic enterprise. Computers (other physical devices) are now creating new mathematics and they (future computers and robots) will do more of this creation of new mathematics in the future, and while what they create is novel, they are not entities that have a nonphysical existence outside of the physical realm.

On what constitutes mathematica truth: What is a close match to the Smolin principle of evocation is the mathematical pluralism of Joel David Hamkins [3].


[1] Smolin on mathematics
- scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/04/21/smolin-on-mathematics
[2] Lee Smolin: Cosmological Natural Selection
- youtube.com/watch?v=mbYLTqvo774
[3] Pluralism in mathematics: the multiverse view in set theory and the question of whether every mathematical statement has a definite truth value
- jdh.hamkins.org/pluralism-in-mathematics-the-multiverse-view-in-set-theory-and-the-question-of-whether-every-mathematical-statement-has-a-definite-truth-value-rutgers-march-2013

CODE

Codosophy:
Ontology
Deconstruction
Epistemology


Codosophy — As a word, it is the merging of coding and philosophy. As a subject, it is the interplaying of the programmatical and the physical. The '-ism' - - of codosophy is codicalism.

programmaticalism↔physicalism
languages↔substrate
PLUM↔CHUM

PLUM (Programming Languages Universe Model)
CHUM (Computing Hardware Universe Model)

Codosophy and the Matrix of Nature

• We along with our code are embedded in the matrix — matter or substance — of nature.
• There is the code of nature, and our own code, an attempt in reverse engineering. A science is the reverse (code) engineering of some aspect of reality into some domain-specific language.
• Codosophy is not digital physics (naive computationalism). Nature's code consists also of biocomputers and (possibly) hypercomputers — beyond-Turing. It is more related to programming language theory in computer science, neopragmatism and semiotics in philosophy.
• Conscious code could be biocode. This averts Searle's Chinese Room trap.

Why the universe appears mathematical should be no surprise.

Suppose the universe is a computer U (which could include quantum-, bio-, and/or hyper-computational capabilities). A scientist attempts to reverse engineer some part P of the universe. What is produced by the scientist is a separate computer C that models the observations—inputs/outputs—of P. But C is not P. P could consist of a different (unknown) architecture/programming than what C is made of. (Also, another scientist may produce a computer D that works as well as C in modeling the i/o of P.) But since C and U—of which P is a part—are both computers, that the universe appears mathematical comes as no surprise.

Programmaticalism

“What difference does it make if pragmatism is centered on language or experience?"

European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy
Symposia. Language or Experience:
Charting Pragmatism’s Course for the 21st Century
Editor: David L. Hildebrand (University of Colorado)
PDF: EJPAP, 2014, Volume 6, Number 2

Computationalism is typically meant to be limited to Turing machine formulations and digital physics. Programmaticalism subsumes computationalism by encompassing all programming languages for all domains (including potentially super-recursive/hyper-computational ones) that can be experienced. With programmaticalism, the linguistic (computational) and the non-linguistic (physical) side are in balance.