5-1b1a2c0.2 Analogue information (e.g., tones of voice, EQ) cannot be perfectly-exhaustively represented by digital systems (e.g., universal writing systems)

Things never become digital. It’s like our relationship with truth. We can get closer to it. But we will never get to it. Things only become more digitized, but always with some room for more digitization.develop

5-1b1a2c0 No theory can exhaust reality
Again, the ‘slip’ is inevitable
As in how 4-1a4b3d The ‘ledger of record’ shifts the focus to adjacent layers. Specifically, from content to metadata to meta-metadata to ad infinitum.

But aren’t we supposed to be able to represent anything arbitrarily well?
3-1d4b1 What’s been considered ‘analog’ must be represented digitally, because the distinction is rather arbitrary
TheTuringPrinciple
develop

Remember: 9-2b5 Universality per se is never enough but that 10-2d1a The regularity in nature can be expressed arbitrarily well either by the language of mathematics, natural language, or by computers (zeros and ones) given enough knowledge because 1-2g2p The laws of physics, by conforming to the Turing principle, make it physically possible for those same laws to become known to physical objects. Thus, the laws of physics may be said to mandate their own comprehensibility.
Put differently: 1-2g2r The Turing principle, if true, dictates that we can form accurate theories about reality. Knowledge to the Turing principle is what steam engines are to the principles of thermodynamics. That is, the Turing principle implies knowledge.

Or rather, they must become composable. Then it can be represented by symbols.develop

Compare this argument to (a) Deutsch’s discussion on continuous and discontinuous variables, and (b) Marletto’s discussion on how constraints bring about universality (qubit is more constrained than bit, hence quantum computation is achieved)develop

• 1-2f1b4 The content of a theory is in what it rules out (and how!)
  • You don’t have to fully replicate anything (after all exhaustive 5-1b1a2c0.1 Perfect replication is impossible)
    • Or put differently: in digitizing the analog, we create meaning, because we displace the contingency inherent in anything analog - we create new things despite our initial intent was to make a mere copyAyache develop

It doesn’t have to be because what matters is knowledgedevelop
1-2g2k1 Replication of knowledge is what matters. Not replication per se.
It’s interesting that what matters is knowledge, because knowledge is traditionally not considered a matter
10-2g2e5 Abstractions exist and affect physical objects. Knowledge makes enormous difference in the world.
10-2g2e3 Abstractions seem ‘inaccessible’ to empiricism)