What if Reality is Complexity at its Core?

It has been the most consistent, the most unchallenged premise of the scientific method: reality is determined by one or few simple rules. The observed complexity emerges from repeat application of a very simple algorithm. Every one is busy searching for that algorithm (The Theory of Everything).

In light of the Darwin barrier [see publication] one wonders. As we evolved our ability to extract data from the environment was much more efficient than our ability to infer useful conclusions from same data. And so we developed shortcuts in the form of 'theories' and 'rules' to be applied to live data for efficient inference thereto. It was a survival must. Now as scientists we are grabbed by the same trend, to find a simple formula to replace the need to evaluate large quantitiess of data each time. This moves us to assume that the universe is run by one or few very simple rules for us to discover.

This might not be the case. We have no objective argument in favor of this concept of reality determined by a single or few formulas. Yes, we have so called natural laws that agree with experimental results. Alas, a conspiracy of consensus may be played out. Subconciously we measure only that which we expect to validate our theory, and we theorize only what we expect to fit our observations.

If so than we live in an illusion of understanding reality, while in fact we carved for ourselves a piece of reality which can be understood by the simple natural law concept.

To see the reality without we need to broaden our experiments into areas that don't seem productive or interesting, and then use AI to relate to all that data in parallel in order to extract prediction for new observation.

That is what we do in the BitMint lab. Curious? Info@BitMint.com