Fra's latest activity

But the absolute KEY difference is what you omitted "but without the guiding nomology". I'd say the key difference is not in "hidden...

If the issue is that Barandes seem to wants the metaphysical benefit of "real trajectories" without supplying the formal machinery that...

They are Barandes's words. They are in the correspondence paper abstract. He explicitly says "can be". I mean regular and expressible...

Think then of normative probability as the stochastic constraint of a predictive encoder. It not necessarily describing the correct...

All descriptive probabilities yes. Descriptive probabilities become normative only when combined with the stationarity assumption, that...

But this view is a plain descrpitive probability of all time history, which in itself has zero predictive value in the situation where...

difference between history and the future? 1st level is that the future is probabilistically known, but probability is contextual to the...

For me the only conceptual resolution to this is the insight that the laws of nature is emergent. I see it like this: Its exactly...

Yes I see it as two distinct levels. Confusing them does not help. About 2, i personally would not phrase it as unifying quantum and...

My ambition is much larger than that though. I hop it can help unify the intrinsic and extrinsic perspectives. But of course there is...

In conventional paradigm, the physical dynamical law is essentially encoded in "just" differential equations. I think this can maybe be...