Quote:
Originally Posted by modest
Yes, if you consider the change in information to move pastward then the change in information (the loss of info) can be reconstructed with the explanation. Likewise, if we consider the change to be futureward then the change (the addition of info) can be constructed with the explanation. Either way it amounts to predicting the future, which as you rightfully point out, can be done if "all the information" is known. I'd add that the info would need to be deterministic as well.
|
Once again, you are speaking in terms of a mental view of “an explanation” of some sort and not the issue of modeling “the defined entity” (an explanation).
What I am getting at is the fact that we have apparently agreed as to the definition of “an explanation”. We now have that definition to work with and, to go on from there, we need to model the thing which was defined; not something you may have in your mind. If you are complaining about the definition, then we should discuss that issue; if not, examples of explanations don't really play a roll in what follows for two very serious reasons. First, we don't know what information exists to be explained (our model is to be absolutely general) and second, we do not know how to achieve that explanation. In other words, actually discussing any specific explanation of anything is pretty much a waste of time: we need to work with the definition itself.
Hope that makes sense to you -- Dick
