David Wolpert: Free Will & No Free Lunch Theorems

LINKS MENTIONED:

TIMESTAMPS:
00:00:00 Introduction
00:05:41 Explaining the No Free Lunch theorem
00:08:42 Mathematical proof isn't iron clad (an extremely controversial statement!)
00:18:38 Bayesian reasoning isn't iron clad either
00:24:23 What do the No Free Lunch theorems mean?
00:32:15 "The Problem" (TP) and regret about one's past / Nihilism in NFL
00:40:01 There's no "meaning" in the temporary nature of life
00:44:07 No Free Lunch helps appreciation of Zen Buddhism
00:45:50 Artist or Mathematician? (art helps math, and vice versa)
00:48:54 NFL and Zen (continuation)
00:51:38 For intellectuals, atheism is easier than not being an atheist
00:57:30 On Sabine Hossenfelder's excellent video about Superdeterminism
00:59:23 What free will is, and what it is NOT
01:02:23 Excoriations on Dan Dennett's and Stephen Wolfram's idea of "free will"
01:12:46 Does science make metaphysical claims or is it instrumental?
01:21:12 Map vs Territory doesn't apply to the Mathematical Universe
01:35:05 What if physics supervenes on free will?
01:39:36 Explaining The Mathematical Universe
01:43:09 Preview of Part 2 with David Wolpert
01:46:06 The philosophy of mathematics and the foundations of reality are important
01:47:45 Why science shouldn't work / cross validation (thumbnail reference)

* * *

[bernardofitzpatrick]

Love it when Curt says “let’s have some fun”. For me every episode is a total delight. I was completely absorbed in this convo. 👏👏👍👍can’t get enough !! Hope part II is soon!

[RickDelmonico]

No matter how much information we use to describe the tree, it will always be incomplete, the only complete description of the tree is the tree itself.

[grahamhenry]

This guy is literally hitting all my favorite topics one after another. Induction, Deduction, Bayesianism, skepticism, Motivated Reasoning, Logical Fallacies, determinism, Kolmogorov Complexity.. just waiting for Solomonov Induction..
He needs to write a book

[stephendevine]

Curt, David confirmed what many of your academic guests have already noted....their surprise at how much they enjoy the freedom of conversation with you, the audience questions and the format.

David seemed to realise like so many other guests, during the course of the conversation, that he was indeed having fun.

Another brilliant episode, just brilliant. Can't wait for round 2.

[lilmoesk]

I’m a big fan of this guy. Seems like he’s willing to ask really deep questions when most academics are simply gunning for the next publication. Also impressed with the diverse interests and perspectives he brings.

[samwell]

Can you please consider interviewing Jeffrey Mishlove, he’s the recent winner of the BICS ‘survival of consciousness post death’ essay contest and the only person in America with a degree in parapsychology.

[pnf]

Wolpert's poetry, of which I am not familiar, displayed the beauty of his ideas. Kurt, you're simply amazing, thank you for a mind blowing episode -- can't wait for part II. I had to stop and rewind many times to let the ideas settle.
As an aside: I am not a mathematician, or a scientist -- I'm a layperson like many of your adoring fans. This conversation, like many you have, toss numerous theories and laws - would be great to just have a pop up we can go to and look them up. I got 50% of it -- and that was a lot of new knowledge I didn't know before.

[Self-Duality]

There are bursts of love, wisdom, and power in this conversation and more generally throughout this channel 💖😊💭

[thea.igamer]

Gather your family and friends, near and dears as well as the ‘far awayers’ to witness this exceptionally outstanding episode of TOE.

[polymathpark]

Meta-science and the pursuit of correlation and oversight between the various sciences is absolutely crucial to gaining a grasp on reality and our place in it. This is a noble endeavor that I plan to pursue on my own channel, and conducting detailed interviews in this manner is absolutely invaluable to me, and all polymaths. Thanks again for all your efforts, Curt.

[lile]

This is one of those conversations where I'm going to have to do some homework and then listen again. Probably more than once. But for the bit I think I understood, I love this guy. He would be a fantastic 4th voice next time Lee Cronin and Brian Keating converse witn you.

[zenmeister]

Absolutely LOVE Curt Jaimungal! What a stimulating conversation...even though, at times, it was rather difficult for me to follow. Okay, maybe most of the time. But still... David Wolpert has my kind of mind...extraordinary!

[dougg]

It’s wild how we went from caves to desperately trying to figure out what the hell is going on. Question is, how far out of the cave are we really.
Very interesting video

[mattwillis]

I want to say thank you, Curt. I was always terrible at mathematics in school, mainly because of my own psychological sabotage. This video has planted the seed that, just because I'm not good with arithmetic, it doesn't mean I can't get to know mathematics. If I can follow the conversation here, even on a superficial level, then maybe I should try to foster a better relationship with mathematics.

[girlplanetboy]

@46:25 shows why Curt is a real smarty-pants in the best sense of the word. What a great question to ask a math guru: "Do you see yourself more as an artist than a mathematician?" Bravo!

[rooruffneck]

Such a relief hearing him speak about free-will like that. Cuts through the bullshit. There is so much pressure to define it as 'real' just because we have such important experiences of volition. But nobody- and I mean nobody- has ever pointed to a shred of what it would mean to really 'choose' one behavior over the other.

[anthonylawrence]

As it's Burns night and the professor talks about our awareness of time, it reminded me of a quote from the great Scottish poet Robert Burns in his Ode to the Mouse. -
"Still, thou art blest, compar’d wi’ me!
The present only toucheth thee:
But Och! I backward cast my e’e,    On prospects drear!
An’ forward tho’ I canna see,
I guess an’ fear!

[TimothyOBrien]

Thanks for this, Curt and David. David does not make flippant statements, so please take seriously his extraordinary statement that the mathematical universe hypothesis can "explain away all the conundrums of philosophy together with science". It's my personal belief that the development of this (currently fringe) idea is the way forward to synthesize science and religion; metaphysical concepts such as the soul, reality as an illusion/dream, and spiritual planes of existence can be wedded to mathematical concepts like zero, infinity, Euler's formula, and the Fourier transform. If Tegmark or David stated these implications explicitly they would be ridiculed, but this is the promise that David hinted at. Consider that math is not a tool to create an ontology for a scientific concept of the world, but rather science is a tool to understand the ontology of mathematics. Note that this hypothesis is broadly compatible with idealism as discussed by Kastrup on your channel. I'm sure you're busy, but if I can help clarify your thinking here at all, please feel free to reach out. You've contacted me over email when I signed up for your Patreon, so you have my email.

[dyrwtkhiehomie]

Is it just me or does it seem like it's generally true that it's the people who have the humblest demeanor who make the biggest contributions to their fields? And if so, what does this imply on a practical level? As always great episode Curt, much appreciated!

[KineHjeldnes]

Took me a while to watch this episode, but thank god someone is finally talkning about the problems with bayenism! No free lunch theorems is such a gift to the arguments of my master thesis!
o