- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Eric Hawthorne <egh.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:36:25 -0800

Frank wrote:

*>Indeed, I've always thought there was a dubious assumption there.
*

*>There isn't a universal time to pace the clock tics of a simulation.
*

*>Relativity forbids it.
*

*>Anyway, time is a subjective illusion.
*

*>
*

*>Back to the question:
*

*>So what happens when the simulation "diverges" from regularity?
*

*>Some possibilities:
*

*>a) The universe ends
*

*>b) Pink elephants pop up everywhere
*

*>c) It's already happening
*

*>
*

*> I like (c)
*

Ok. How about:

The multiverse is a very long qubit-string. (This is an informal

statement to drive intuition.)

Being a qubit string it simultaneously exhibits all of its potential

information-states.

If there is something like this qubitstring simultaneously exhibiting

all possible information

states, then note that to do computation, within that qubit-string, no

actual computational

process need take place. Any tour through any subset of the information

states (i.e.

"visiting" one information-state after another after another...) can be

considered equivalent to a computation. Any tour through a subset of the

information

states which is such that the "direction" of the tour is restricted to

only those successor

information-states Si+1 (of the state Si we're currently at) which are

different from Si

by only a single bit-flip in a single position in the bitstring, and

where that bit-flip

would only happen based on some function of only the state of the bits

in a local vicinity

of the flipping bit, can be considered equivalent to a computation which

is comprised

solely of localized operations, similar to the kinds of computation we

understand.

So the universe (or any observable universe) could be a tour through a

subset of the

information-states of the qubit-string multiverse, which is such that

the tour

computes only self-consistent spaces and objects, perhaps using only

local computational

steps (part this computational locality is part of the secret of

ensuring consistency, locality,

metric etc properties of the space and the objects, prehaps).

Observers which were self-aware substructures WITHIN the set of objects

computed

in a "consistent" tour, maybe can only observe other information states

which are also

within that tour.

TIME AND LIGHTSPEED

As Wolfram postulates, the concept of time and speed of light c within

such an

informational universe may be related to how fast the informational

changes (from one

state to another) can propagate (across the qubitstring) using only

local computations

as the medium of state-change propagation. It is wrong to suppose that

this implies

"computational time" outside of the qubitstring. "How fast state-change

propagates"

is purely a question of how the metric spacetime that the consistent

tour defines

can evolve in form within a consistent tour.

The tour itself could be imagined to be real if you like (with the

qubitstring really in some god-quantum-computer-thingy which has a

god's-now-program-

pointer which moves from state to state in the consistent tour).

But it is better to think of the consistent tour as a virtual tour, an

abstraction,

defined by nothing more nor less than its BEING a subset of information

states, and an order

of traversal of those (very large) information states which is such that

the ordered set

of information-states IS and CONJURES reality.

OBSERVERS, AND TOUR-TRAVERSAL AS THE TIME ARROW FOR OBSERVERS

An OBSERVER is a set of local subsets of the some of the set of

information-states in the

consistent tour which is the universe. The notion of locality there is

information-distance.

OBSERVERS can observe any aspect (part) of the information states in the

tour which has

the following properties:

1. The observable substates must be within a light-cone of the observer.

Photons or waves of light are

information travelling through the set of information-states. They are

closely related to the putative

"local computations" which are imagined as defining sensible localized

change between sets of

information states. So the observable substates are those that are

reachable from the observer

states by local computations. These observation computations are

computations that can

affect the observer-part of the "now" information-state based on the

prior-to-now configuration

of other adjacent-to-the-observer parts of the prior-to-now information

states, with the information

moving at a speed of one local computation (or is that one bitshift) per

information-state-distance

in the consistent tour. Confusing? Yes I'm confused too. This bit's

hard. (Pun intended)

2. Argument 1 implies that only parts (in some informational locality to

the observer within the

information-states) of PRIOR-IN-THE-TOUR information-states can be

observed by the observer.

That's what being in the light-cone from the observer implies: 1.

Informationally-local to the observer's

own states, and also 2. PRIOR in the consistent tour to the

"now-in-tour" state of the observer.

In fact we will stand these arguments on their heads now, and say that

the consistent-tour direction

must be one in which an observer cannot observe (via light i.e.

information packets moving by local

computation) forwards in the tour direction, but can observe (local

parts of) information-states that are

backwards in the tour direction.

--------

The time-arrow (state-tour direction) is that direction of

information-state-change in which the

changes are like local computations which can communicate information

across from one part of the

qubit string to an observer who is (is in?) another part of the qubit

string.

--------

Consistent tour direction (through a very large, or infinite?) set of

very large (or infinite) discrete information

states has a lot to do, I think, with the information-theoretic

concept of entropy, and if this whole

quantum-comp hypothesis is correct, I think we'll find that

information-theoretic entropy is in fact identical

to thermodynamic entropy.

Particle interactions are analogous to local computations.

The entropic time arrow must have to do with the fact that the

computations only appear to be

a self-consistent-classical-reality-producing set of computations when

the info-state-changes are considered

to be going in certain of the info-change directions that they could.

The direction that the consistent tour chooses (and that the particle

interactions choose when observation

from within the tour forces them to decohere into classical state) is a

direction imposed by consistency

constraints. In fact, the direction is DEFINED BY the

consistency-of-classical-reality constraints AND

BY NOTHING ELSE.

A way of thinking about where "NOW" is in the tour of information states

is that the PAST in the tour

is CLASSICAL (experiments have been conducted, quantum events have

actually chosen a path

from their probability distributions) and the FUTURE in the tour is

quantum-mechanical. The possible

successor-states have probabilities WHICH ARE BASED ON THEIR

INFORMATION-DISTANCE

from the now-state in the tour.

But the notion of the now-state in the tour is ILL-DEFINED as a global

concept (just as it is in physics).

We really just have a NOW-state of a local part of an information state

in the tour.

We can say that, as a definition,

the consistent tour visits those information states all of whose parts

can choose a successor part-state

by local computation IN A WAY THAT IS GLOBALLY CONSISTENT AT THE SPEED OF

LOCAL-COMPUTATION INFORMATION-CHANGE (i.e. at the speed of light.)

So ALL of the choices of successor-state for each informationally local

part of the "now" information-state

in the tour must be consistent with each other, at least in the

retrospect that will happen when those

future states can be inspected (at info-lightspeed) by any observer

within the tour-states.

THAT is the transformation of quantum potentialities into classical

realities.

----------

So all in all I think I agree with Frank. The simulation DOES diverge

from regularity, but

the diverging simulation is just one of many "virtual tours" through the

"all-information-states"

qubitstring. Some other simulation, defined precisely as that one (or

few) which does not

diverge from regularity, is also simultaneously happening (or existent,

as an ordered subset)

in the qubitstring. And that non-diverging-into-noise simulation

(info-state-tour, I prefer

because it implies passivity (no computer needed)) is the universe.

So can there be other universes?

One way of rephrasing this question is to put it as the question of

whether there is

more than one "lightspeed--globally-consistent" tour through a set of

all possible

information states, where light is defined as communication, from one

part of the

qubitstring to another via local computations, of information.

Received on Wed Jan 07 2004 - 01:38:45 PST

Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:36:25 -0800

Frank wrote:

Ok. How about:

The multiverse is a very long qubit-string. (This is an informal

statement to drive intuition.)

Being a qubit string it simultaneously exhibits all of its potential

information-states.

If there is something like this qubitstring simultaneously exhibiting

all possible information

states, then note that to do computation, within that qubit-string, no

actual computational

process need take place. Any tour through any subset of the information

states (i.e.

"visiting" one information-state after another after another...) can be

considered equivalent to a computation. Any tour through a subset of the

information

states which is such that the "direction" of the tour is restricted to

only those successor

information-states Si+1 (of the state Si we're currently at) which are

different from Si

by only a single bit-flip in a single position in the bitstring, and

where that bit-flip

would only happen based on some function of only the state of the bits

in a local vicinity

of the flipping bit, can be considered equivalent to a computation which

is comprised

solely of localized operations, similar to the kinds of computation we

understand.

So the universe (or any observable universe) could be a tour through a

subset of the

information-states of the qubit-string multiverse, which is such that

the tour

computes only self-consistent spaces and objects, perhaps using only

local computational

steps (part this computational locality is part of the secret of

ensuring consistency, locality,

metric etc properties of the space and the objects, prehaps).

Observers which were self-aware substructures WITHIN the set of objects

computed

in a "consistent" tour, maybe can only observe other information states

which are also

within that tour.

TIME AND LIGHTSPEED

As Wolfram postulates, the concept of time and speed of light c within

such an

informational universe may be related to how fast the informational

changes (from one

state to another) can propagate (across the qubitstring) using only

local computations

as the medium of state-change propagation. It is wrong to suppose that

this implies

"computational time" outside of the qubitstring. "How fast state-change

propagates"

is purely a question of how the metric spacetime that the consistent

tour defines

can evolve in form within a consistent tour.

The tour itself could be imagined to be real if you like (with the

qubitstring really in some god-quantum-computer-thingy which has a

god's-now-program-

pointer which moves from state to state in the consistent tour).

But it is better to think of the consistent tour as a virtual tour, an

abstraction,

defined by nothing more nor less than its BEING a subset of information

states, and an order

of traversal of those (very large) information states which is such that

the ordered set

of information-states IS and CONJURES reality.

OBSERVERS, AND TOUR-TRAVERSAL AS THE TIME ARROW FOR OBSERVERS

An OBSERVER is a set of local subsets of the some of the set of

information-states in the

consistent tour which is the universe. The notion of locality there is

information-distance.

OBSERVERS can observe any aspect (part) of the information states in the

tour which has

the following properties:

1. The observable substates must be within a light-cone of the observer.

Photons or waves of light are

information travelling through the set of information-states. They are

closely related to the putative

"local computations" which are imagined as defining sensible localized

change between sets of

information states. So the observable substates are those that are

reachable from the observer

states by local computations. These observation computations are

computations that can

affect the observer-part of the "now" information-state based on the

prior-to-now configuration

of other adjacent-to-the-observer parts of the prior-to-now information

states, with the information

moving at a speed of one local computation (or is that one bitshift) per

information-state-distance

in the consistent tour. Confusing? Yes I'm confused too. This bit's

hard. (Pun intended)

2. Argument 1 implies that only parts (in some informational locality to

the observer within the

information-states) of PRIOR-IN-THE-TOUR information-states can be

observed by the observer.

That's what being in the light-cone from the observer implies: 1.

Informationally-local to the observer's

own states, and also 2. PRIOR in the consistent tour to the

"now-in-tour" state of the observer.

In fact we will stand these arguments on their heads now, and say that

the consistent-tour direction

must be one in which an observer cannot observe (via light i.e.

information packets moving by local

computation) forwards in the tour direction, but can observe (local

parts of) information-states that are

backwards in the tour direction.

--------

The time-arrow (state-tour direction) is that direction of

information-state-change in which the

changes are like local computations which can communicate information

across from one part of the

qubit string to an observer who is (is in?) another part of the qubit

string.

--------

Consistent tour direction (through a very large, or infinite?) set of

very large (or infinite) discrete information

states has a lot to do, I think, with the information-theoretic

concept of entropy, and if this whole

quantum-comp hypothesis is correct, I think we'll find that

information-theoretic entropy is in fact identical

to thermodynamic entropy.

Particle interactions are analogous to local computations.

The entropic time arrow must have to do with the fact that the

computations only appear to be

a self-consistent-classical-reality-producing set of computations when

the info-state-changes are considered

to be going in certain of the info-change directions that they could.

The direction that the consistent tour chooses (and that the particle

interactions choose when observation

from within the tour forces them to decohere into classical state) is a

direction imposed by consistency

constraints. In fact, the direction is DEFINED BY the

consistency-of-classical-reality constraints AND

BY NOTHING ELSE.

A way of thinking about where "NOW" is in the tour of information states

is that the PAST in the tour

is CLASSICAL (experiments have been conducted, quantum events have

actually chosen a path

from their probability distributions) and the FUTURE in the tour is

quantum-mechanical. The possible

successor-states have probabilities WHICH ARE BASED ON THEIR

INFORMATION-DISTANCE

from the now-state in the tour.

But the notion of the now-state in the tour is ILL-DEFINED as a global

concept (just as it is in physics).

We really just have a NOW-state of a local part of an information state

in the tour.

We can say that, as a definition,

the consistent tour visits those information states all of whose parts

can choose a successor part-state

by local computation IN A WAY THAT IS GLOBALLY CONSISTENT AT THE SPEED OF

LOCAL-COMPUTATION INFORMATION-CHANGE (i.e. at the speed of light.)

So ALL of the choices of successor-state for each informationally local

part of the "now" information-state

in the tour must be consistent with each other, at least in the

retrospect that will happen when those

future states can be inspected (at info-lightspeed) by any observer

within the tour-states.

THAT is the transformation of quantum potentialities into classical

realities.

----------

So all in all I think I agree with Frank. The simulation DOES diverge

from regularity, but

the diverging simulation is just one of many "virtual tours" through the

"all-information-states"

qubitstring. Some other simulation, defined precisely as that one (or

few) which does not

diverge from regularity, is also simultaneously happening (or existent,

as an ordered subset)

in the qubitstring. And that non-diverging-into-noise simulation

(info-state-tour, I prefer

because it implies passivity (no computer needed)) is the universe.

So can there be other universes?

One way of rephrasing this question is to put it as the question of

whether there is

more than one "lightspeed--globally-consistent" tour through a set of

all possible

information states, where light is defined as communication, from one

part of the

qubitstring to another via local computations, of information.

Received on Wed Jan 07 2004 - 01:38:45 PST

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:09 PST
*