To drop a quick logic bomb here, any process, pattern, or thing that can be measured or discerned (like emotions) is expressible ex machina by definition, and Solomonoff induction provides the mechanism by which any such model can be created. To put it another way, there is no measurable property of the human system that is not reducible to finite state machinery. Emotions in particular aren't all that inexplicable or mysterious anyway (at least to me).
On a somewhat related note, there are some good arguments (which I don't have time to make) that emotions are a biological necessity for higher animals from a very low-level function standpoint. In other words, emotions are very likely a functional adaptation in biology that precede higher level intelligence.
On a somewhat related note, there are some good arguments (which I don't have time to make) that emotions are a biological necessity for higher animals from a very low-level function standpoint. In other words, emotions are very likely a functional adaptation in biology that precede higher level intelligence.
My inclination is to say "well and good" as far as it goes. I believe that there is a meaningful intangible realm, the evidence for which is found in physics, and that to the extent this is true, mathematics will, I think, experience some difficulty describing it. Free Will is an apparent and abundant reality and that may as well prove problematic. But the proof is in the pudding, so to speak, and you/we should explore whatever avenues seem open to us. For myself, I don't believe that real scientific progress will be made until the reality of the realm of the mind is acknowledged as wholly intangible and we act accordingly.