Fw: The universe consists of patterns of arrangement of 0's and 1's?

From: Stephen Paul King <stephenk1.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 22:39:58 -0500

----- Original Message -----
From: "James N Rose" <integrity.domain.name.hidden>
To: "Stephen Paul King" <stephenk1.domain.name.hidden>
Cc: "Eric Hawthorne" <egh.domain.name.hidden>; <everything-list.domain.name.hidden.com>; "echo-CI"
<discussions.domain.name.hidden>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: The universe consists of patterns of arrangement of 0's and
1's?


> Stephen,
>
> Eric is taking the quest to its logical conclusion.
> Even Steve Wolfram hints that pure space is the source
> of all instantiation. So the only question that needs
> resolution is specifying the natural of the architecture
> of that space - and - identifying how it brings entities
> forces, particles into being. And that requires identifying
> the characteristics of that realm of 'could be' .. the one
> I've labeled in discussions as "Potentia".
>
> Jamie
>
>
>
> Stephen Paul King wrote:
> >
> > Dear Eric,
> >
> > I like your idea! But how do we reconsile your notion with the
notion
> > expressed by Russell:
> >
> > > From: "Russell Standish" <R.Standish.domain.name.hidden>
> > > To: <Fabric-of-Reality.domain.name.hidden>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 5:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: not-sets, not-gates, and the universe
> > >
> > > > There is no problem is saying that all computations exist in
> > > > "platonia" (or the plenitude). This is a zero information set, and
> > > > requires no further explanation.
> > > >
> >
> > One definition of "information" is a "difference that makes a
> > difference". If we take the "substrate" to be the "capacity for there to
be
> > difference" as you propose we obviously can not consider Platonia or the
> > "Plenitude" do be it. If we take these two ideas seriously, is there any
way
> > that we can have both?
> >
> > Kindest regards,
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Eric Hawthorne" <egh.domain.name.hidden>
> > To: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
> > Cc: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 4:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: The universe consists of patterns of arrangement of 0's and
> > 1's?
> >
> > > As I mentioned in an earlier post, titled "quantum computational
> > cosmology"
> > > why don't we assume/guess that the substrate (the fundamental concept
of
> > > the
> > > universe or multiverse) is simply a capacity for there to be
difference,
> > > but also,
> > > a capacity for all possible differences (and thus necessarily all
> > possible
> > > configurations of differences) to "potentially exist".
> > >
> > > If we assume that all possible configurations of differences can
> > > "potentially exist"
> > > and that that unexplained property (i.e. the capacity to manifest any
> > > configuration of
> > > differences) is THE nature of the substrate, then
> > > a computation can just be defined as a sequence of states selected
from
> > all
> > > of the potential difference-configurations inherent in the substrate.
> > >
> > > I don't even think that this notion of a computation requires energy
to
> > > do the
> > > information processing.
> > >
> > > My main notion in the earlier post was that some selections of a
sequence
> > > of the substrate's "potential states" will corresponds to
order-producing
> > > computations (computations which produce emergent structure, systems,
> > > behaviour etc).
> > >
> > > Such an order-producing sequence of substrate potential-states might
be
> > > considered to be "the observable universe" (because the order
generation
> > > in that sequence was adequate to produce complex systems good enough
> > > to be sentient observers of the other parts of that state-sequence).
> > >
> > > If we number the states in that selected order-producing sequence of
> > > substrate
> > > states from the first-selected state to the last-selected state, we
have
> > > a numbering
> > > which corresponds to the direction of the time arrow in that
observable
> > > universe.
> > >
> > > My intuition is that the "potential-states" (i.e. potentially existing
> > > configurations of
> > > differences) of the substrate may correspond to quantum states and
> > > configurations
> > > of quantum entanglement, and that "selection" of meaningful or
> > > observable sequences
> > > of potential states corresponds to decoherence of quantum states into
> > > classical
> > > states.
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
> > > Stephen Paul King wrote:
> > >
> > > >It is the assumption that the 0's and 1's can exist without some
> > substrate that bothers me. If we insist on making such an assuption, how
can
> > we even have a notion of distinguishability between a 0 and a 1?.
> > > > To me, its analogous to claiming that Mody Dick "exists" but
there
> > does not exists any copies of it. If we are going to claim that "all
> > possible computations" exists, then why is it problematic to imagine
> > > >
> > > >that "all
> > > >possible implementations of computations" exists as well. Hardware is
not
> > an
> > > >"epiphenomena" of software nor software an "epiphenomena" of
hardware,
> > they
> > > >are very different and yet interdependent entities.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
Received on Tue Nov 26 2002 - 22:41:45 PST