Many thanks for this fascinating interview. Very much looking forward to seeing how this work pans out

Having watched this only 1.1 times I am looking forward to leaning much more about "Constuctor" theory. Just the general approach to knowledge and learning, excites my curiosity. Thank you all...

This was a really good one. Old, but gold. Thank you

Fantastic Chiara! Thank you for the inspiration & for “doing something about it!!” 😉 Ron

awesome. great interview :)

I really appreciate the choice of a Philip Pullman book from a physicist.

Great stuff!

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:12 🌌 Constructor Theory Overview - Constructor theory is a new mode of explaining physics and physical reality. - Prevailing physics relies on predictions given laws of motion and initial conditions. - Constructor theory proposes a shift, expressing everything in terms of possible and impossible tasks. 02:52 🔄 Challenges in Prevailing Conception - Prevailing physics has been successful but struggles with certain problems. - Constructor theory addresses issues like information, life, and phenomena the current conception can't handle. - It introduces a different mode of explanation based on possible and impossible tasks. 06:20 🔍 Recovering Dynamical Laws - Recovering dynamical laws is part of future research in constructor theory. - The theory provides statements about possible and impossible tasks as its foundation. - Constructor theory aims to offer predictions, both existing ones and new ones not derived from current laws. 09:42 🏗️ Understanding Constructors - Constructor theory is not about constructors; it's about possible and impossible tasks. - A constructor represents the limit of a sequence of objects capable of performing a task. - The concept of constructors is crucial in understanding what is possible in physical transformations. 14:27 🔄 Implications for Reductionism - Reductionism within the prevailing conception needs reevaluation with constructor theory. - Entities considered emergent in the current view become fundamental in constructor theory. - Exact laws about traditionally emergent entities can be formulated in constructor theory. 19:40 🌐 Motivations for Constructor Theory - Constructor theory addresses the need for a foundational basis for physics. - It incorporates the concept of information and accommodates possibilities and causation. - It explains the capacity of constructors like biological cells and aims to promote optimism about knowledge and technology. 23:30 🧠 Foundations in Physics - Foundations in physics involve primitive elements, like initial conditions or principles in constructor theory. - Constructor theory's foundations are more general and may underlie future theories. - The need for new foundations arises from phenomena not well accommodated or ignored in the prevailing conception. 26:18 🧠 Constructor Theory and Principles - Principles in Constructor Theory are not fundamentally different; they follow a similar logic to other scientific principles. - Testing laws that conform to principles is the standard approach, maintaining consistency in the logic of testing. 27:23 🔄 Interoperability Principle - Introduces the interoperability principle for information in Constructor Theory. - Information media, like traffic lights and transistors, share the property of performing certain transformations and tasks. - The interoperability principle asserts that when two systems qualify as information media, their composite system remains an information medium, allowing tasks like copying information. 32:39 🔄 Rethinking Second Law of Thermodynamics - Challenges the second law of thermodynamics when applied to nano-scale engines. - Constructor Theory provides an exact formulation of the second law, potentially leading to new predictions for nano-scale systems. - Explores the potential implications for understanding and predicting behavior in small-scale engines. 36:19 🔄 Information as Fundamental - Discusses the fundamental nature of information and challenges the idea that it only emerges at a certain level. - Information, as described in Constructor Theory, is theory-independent and applies universally. - Emphasizes the additional regularity present in Constructor Theory, allowing for a broader understanding of information. 38:24 🖥️ Quantum Computing and Constructor Theory - Quantum computing is introduced as a branch of fundamental physics, exploring the use of quantum systems for computation. - Constructor Theory extends beyond quantum computing, defining a universal constructor capable of all physically possible transformations. - Highlights the foundational aspects of quantum computing and its implications for understanding the laws of physics. 44:11 🔗 Connecting Constructor Theory to Human Concepts - Addresses the human implications of Constructor Theory, as discussed by David Deutsch. - Constructor Theory provides room for concepts like possibility, free will, and causality in fundamental physics. - The idea of knowledge in Constructor Theory is introduced, connecting it to the creation of valuable information and its role in unpredictable knowledge creation. 53:09 🧠 Constructor Theory and Free Will - The deterministic nature of the universe and the challenge in accommodating free will. - Constructor theory's connection to free will through the unpredictability of knowledge creation. - Speculative idea: Brain configurations leading to decisions may only be predictable through simulating the universe. 56:09 🔄 Knowledge Creation Unpredictability - The clash between the predictability of brain configurations and the unpredictability of creative knowledge. - The role of simulation in potentially predicting knowledge outcomes. - Constructor theory's potential to accommodate the inherent unpredictability of knowledge creation. 57:41 🤔 Constructor Theory's Approach to Unpredictability - The challenge of accommodating unpredictability in the traditional computational view. - Constructor theory's potential to handle unpredictability in knowledge creation. - The speculative nature of these ideas within the framework of constructor theory. 58:11 🔄 Determinism vs. Free Will - Discussing the difference between predictability and the fixed nature of decisions. - Exploring the compatibility of Fred's choices and the dynamical evolution of his brain. - The potential role of new tools in physics to incorporate free will into the worldview. 01:02:05 🌐 Compatibilism and Approximate Concepts - Comparing the views on free will between a physicist's perspective and a compatibilist stance. - Exploring the approximate nature of free will relative to physics. - The proposition that free will is about our capacity as agents, not moment-by-moment fixation by physics. 01:03:02 🚀 Optimism in Constructor Theory - David Deutsch and Chiara Marletto's optimism derived from constructor theory. - The concept of "momentous bekata me" and its connection to the achievability of tasks. - The optimism in approaching challenges either by discovering new laws of physics or by finding ways to implement tasks. Made with HARPA AI

Don't get hung-up on the word "constructor"; That's the key to understanding Constructor theory.

This is most certainly innovative. Though in fairness I am not sure whether it is a logical repeatable methodology or a repetitive means of deriving more and more precise information. In truth I probably don't have a clue. Chaira gives a nice presentation.

49.22 For example, I say, instead of DNA, say Fractals of small non-biologicals like water that makes snow that is self replicating under certain initial conditions.

If we live in a multiverse, where all possible paths are taken through space~time (an intertwined fabric where each thread is a unique timeline/awareness), then indeed the prediction of physics would be "all possible outcomes happen". Which isn't that useful once you acknowledge it the first few times. So, instead, looking more closely at what IS and ISN'T possible, and what we WANT to do, is far more valuable a science.

As a lay person trying to follow these sessions, I can't get beyond a metaphorical understanding. I expect that actually (not metaphorically) understanding Constructor Theory would require familiarity with mathematics at a level considerably beyond the my high-school algebra and trigonometry. Can anyone enlighten me about what mathematics I would need to know to grapple directly with this theory? I'm wondering whether, absent such familiarity, I'm easy prey as a beautiful and eloquent verbal magician spins intellectual straw into gold before my credulous eyes.

Great interview. Thank you

Thank you David Deutsch for Constructor Theory

possible, not predictable!

All I can say...Thank you very much. We rarely get videos like this, beautiful in face and beautiful in mind!

So envious of her brain! Ghawdammit!

I find the idea of a whole new way of thinking about the world very engaging - constructor theory seems to address many issues that bug me, like the poverty of reductionism. Great interview technique, Joe.

Lyra's Oxford, nice 😃

She's a great combination of beauty and intelligence

sounds just like dependent origination

Eliminate the negative; accent the positive!

Funny that tue example she gave, about non-cloning, is a statement that was conceived without the help of constructor theory, but within 'conventional' physical thinking. To me this theory is just a meta-theory about physical methodology, rather than a theory in its own right.

Everything becomes beautifully clear at 1:02:20.

Constructor theory runs into the problem of irreducible computational complexity. You can't short-circuit Turing-complete computation.

In the "prevailing conception", it's easy to think about hypothetical universes, since a universe is just some dynamical laws plus initial conditions. Constructor theory instead seems to conceive of a universe as just a list of "tasks", some of which are labeled as "possible", and some of which are labeled as "impossible". Moreover, if I understand the theory correctly, there's a limited set of "fundamental tasks" which combine via the axioms of constructor theory to give us facts about the possibility or impossibility of more complex, specific tasks. But the "fundamental" tasks include, I think, things like evolution of life / creation of knowledge (one of the two - in Deutsch's view they're somewhat equivalent), as well as thermodynamic tasks. Point being, these are very hard to imagine being different, even in universes with very different dynamical laws. Surely there are no conceivable universes where epistemology works differently? It seems to me that constructor theory can easily describe universes which turn out to be physically impossible --- if physical possibility amounts to there being some dynamics and initial conditions that would agree with the constructor-theoretic possibilities.

Does constructor theory construct anything?

I see, constructor theory is a bit like brexit (which Deutsch seems to have supported with the same undoubting certainty in which he tolerates no deviance from multiverse theory, which like brexit we all have to accept -see another video he made): the benefits are lying in the future (and perhaps doomed to always remain there?), as she says that the physical laws remains to be ... constructed. Is that why it is callerd constructor theory: the eternal construction of the real theory?

To accuratly predict future we need as much bits as Universe has, so 1 bit per 1 quant of Universe, placed in place where comps quants will not interact with Universe (to not increase difficulsy of prediction) . This place is "nowhere" , it is there actually) There is no answer on free will theme, every second millions of possiblities resolved, on the other hand, as long as system describes events in terms of itself (arguments, applied to function comes from previous states of function itself, and prev. states also camed from prev. state of system etc.). Sorce of every unpredictability - events from outside system itself (input as you say), but Universe by defenition have no input, because there is nothing outside of Universe to give unpredictability, so there is millions of choices but all that choices were predicted. (PS. Your eyes can bend events, don't lose it)

Any overlap with Giulio Tononi's Integrated Information Theory?

Way beyond my knowledge and intellect, possibly above the interviewers as well.

The fact that for centuries we have been looking for TOE and not yet scratched its surface, then this re lensing of the ground work I believe will nudge us closer to this and beyond. I find that most respondents are like, this is my truck how dare you not call it a truck by suggesting a truck is not a state of a permanent predictable reality of a truck but an expression of its current information. Event horizons, conciseness including thinking or particle /wave slit experiments. Suggest this has merit to inquire. To just scoff at this is to be against th e pursuit of knowledge even if it sounds obscure. History has scoffed at many other such people who laid our current foundations before.

Well, you can run the Fred simulation up to the point of choice retrospectively, and watch what he chooses 1000 times. If there's true unpredictability the results will vary between biscuits and croissant. If the result is the same every time, it's an illusion of choice really, no matter how we think of the process behind the choice...

The *constructor theory,* Could it be a plagiarized idea? Nothing new here, it is very similar to *”The Hypothesis of Front-loaded Universe”.*

geez...she's beautiful.

Another "string theory" in the making. Just HYPE. 😁😁😂😂

The Reductionist Approach could be a Vector in a Constructivist Method.

Isn't constructor theory a complete gamble? What if we never suss out quantum computation? Also, philosophically, tapping into the deeper aspects of intelligence is never a guarantee of finding anything fundamental about information, but perhaps that's the point? Still, is there any way to make constructor theory palatable to the layman? Even relativity can be understood by a layman. Taglines! Soundbites! That's what we need!

He fancies her..

Thanks Bro because of your videos I completed my research , I HACKED GOD MODEL and I have ANTI LIFE EQUATION

These ideas sound very interesting and inspairing, but I'm afraid that constructor theory will fail, because seeting very high goals, wouldn't reach concreate results, that can be rigorously tested. And without such results, it will just die out.

Right now this theory seems much like a framework of wishful thinking. As it is, Calling it a theory is very misleading. The interviewer nailed down in the first question.

Interesting, though much of it goes way over my head. But it seems to be more of a philosophical theory than a scientific one.

The most interesting women I have met.

Solved.Sequence ⭐️+1 bit - to use natural atoms around us to create - anything the rules allow! 1bit of dense information - structural time. Using time mechanics & mathematics! ♾4D depth not horizontal Each information structure is a independent technology. Elemental Algorithm A sequence of mathematical interactions recreated via Fibonacci, prime mn ++ sets = preload last bit data! Braided create a unique sequence through infinity information to collect pre entanglement information. Universe / persons - choices = Updates 1bit - @ each infinite moment! Same 1 bit holds compressed time information - all previous to current information no need for previous loads! All can be extrapolated from 1bit. Each moment is 1bit updating No space - depth in time! The sequence expands & retracts! P N P for children of Ai ? Increasing information thus entropy! Decay! Raw atomic information turned into - Organic built - technologies? You just need the code! The or a specific- Sequence. Zero else.. Organic computer🤓🖖♾ Geometric information structures Geometric moments Geometric timeline Geometric Time-lines Geometric universes! INTERCHANGEABLE Paths in information! TO? 🌬⭐️ mergeability ..not a word is now for a moment. Priceless information- screenshot have it checked. Come curse me if wrong! 😊😌🖖 welcome to DMs are open.

Some set of incoherent words ... listened for 20 minutes and did not understand a single sentence...

the males in this comments section who can't not talk about this person's looks/womanhood whatever: TOTAL LAMES i wish we could send you back

Good brain, amazing eyes

Take a drink every time she says em... Deutsch is much easier to understand all around

"how do we get back to things at time T because prediction of things with initial conditions was useful?"..... ...."that's part of future research" lololol then don't make a video yet lol

Um, um, um, um and um!

Ok, she's beautiful, but the physicss she talks about - abstract babling about wrapping currently known physics under the title of "constructor". You want to explain how brain and consciousness work? Why choose so difficult topic, let's start with much more simplified environment. For example the double slit experiment. Let's explain that in a way of "constructor theory". Obviously, you can't, because the underlying physics is unkonwn (accepted, but in conflics with other accepted theories, so probably wrong in details).

Never seen braces on yellow teeth before

Don't do this.

Lots of sexual tension in this one…getting a bit awkward

I think this is baloney . Where's the math ?

When she started touching her neck @50:00, I lost complete track of what she was saying and had to go back about half a minute to pick up the line of thought. Props to this guy for hanging in there...I know (especially if I was holding eye contact w/ her) that I would constantly find myself suddenly realizing that I hadn't heard anything she said for the last 5-15 seconds. Working around this woman would be very distracting. Cool, but distracting. Particularly distracting would be when she smiles as she is describing elements of constructor theory (because she finds the theory fascinating!), but I would foolishly think "She's smiling at me!" (no doubt because she finds ME fascinating!). Then I would eventually snap out of it and say, "I'm sorry, could you repeat that again." Hopefully, she would find that cute.

I have no idea of what she is saying but she is a stunning brilliant woman. He appears like a poster child for the homeless. Man soap and toothpaste are cheap.

A nice lady but absolutely zero as a physicist... Probably her power is just in the unification of the named categories.