I think that evidence of the effectiveness of π–calculus in modeling biology (as curated by Microsoft’s Luca Cardelli), coupled with the suggestion that matter is “shared address space” or a “communication channel” by physicist Diederik Aerts et al. seems to suggest that interpretation (B) of the Strong Anthropic Principle I reproduce below may be quite credible, contrary to popular belief. Specifically, the interpretation should be modified to reflect Donald Hoffman’s “Conscious Agent Thesis” and the theories of cybernetics and biosemiotics by incorporating multiple, communicating observers (“processes”). Pi-calculus can be modeled with 2-categories (see “Higher category models of the pi-calculus” by Google’s Mike Stay) and theoretical biologist Robert Rosen illustrated in “Life Itself” that category theory allows for Aristotelian “final cause,” which appears to be a crucial element for understanding why evolution appears to obey neither random search nor intelligent design (see Gregory Chaitin’s argument at time marker 33:47 in the following video leveraging Kolmogorov complexity and Busy Beaver functions from his work on metabiology). Final cause cannot be modeled with recursion and differential equations, as Rosen illustrated by deriving the phase space concept of statistical mechanics by applying Newton’s second law to remove higher-order terms of a Taylor series. Since our modern natural system formalizations rely on classical Turing machines implemented using recursion and differential equations, they are not able to model final cause and therefore render emergent, self-organized, reactive phenomenon quite puzzling to us.
We know that graph rewriting – as would be performed by Robin Milner’s Bigraphical Reactive Systems – generates edge-of-chaos networks with moderate Kolmogorov complexity exhibiting self-similarity and power laws, as suggested by the Barabási–Albert model. My investigation in the immediate future will focus on Robin Milner’s Bigraphical Reactive Systems (a behavioral specification language that generalizes π-calculus) and their ability to 1) perform super-Turing computation and provide the oracle that Chaitin used in the video above to perform evolutionary fitness evaluation, 2) produce cosmological causal sets in an algorithmic fashion in accordance with the work of Tommaso Bolognesi – particularly those lattices that appear to exhibit scale invariance, and 3) explain how third-person determinacy (in Bruno Marchal’s terms, “3-determinacy”) can entail Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle (“1-indeterminacy”) in agreement with the Universal Dovetailer Argument. At some point, I will need to also understand why the communicating processes or agents themselves appear to be performing data compression (see Juergen Schmidhuber) and entropy maximization (see Alex Wissner-Gross) and how Bernard Roy Frieden’s Extreme Physical Information can be derived from these Bigraphical Reactive Systems (thereby explaining the abundance of hyperbolic second order partial differential equations in the physical sciences, as quoted by Max Tegmark in section 7.6 of Russell K. Standish’s “Theory of Nothing”).
The following supplementary analysis is reproduced from http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Cosmo/anthro_skintel.html :
Strong Anthropic Principle (SAP): The Universe must have those properties which allow life to develop within it at some stage in its history.
This suggests that the coincidences are not accidental but the result of a law of nature. But it is a strange law indeed, unlike any other in physics. It suggests that life exists as some Aristotelian “final cause.”
Barrow and Tipler (22) claim that this can have three interpretations:
(A) There exists one possible Universe ‘designed’ with the goal of generating and sustaining ‘observers.”
This is the interpretation adopted by most theistic believers.
(B) Observers are necessary to bring the Universe into being.
This is traditional solipsism, but also is a part of today’s New Age mysticism.
(C) An ensemble of other different universes is necessary for the existence of our Universe.
This speculation is part of contemporary cosmological thinking, as I will discuss below. It represents the idea that the coincidences are accidental. We just happen to live in the particular universe that was suited for us.
Lowly Ocean 