Reality is a Quantumetric Computer

[Philip Thrift]

coming soon

@philipthrift

[John Clark]

REALITY.SYS Corrupted: Re-boot universe? (Y/N/Q)

 John K Clark

[Philip Thrift]

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 6:47:41 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote:

REALITY.SYS Corrupted: Re-boot universe? (Y/N/Q)

 John K Clark

quantumetric computer

The idea basically is to combine

• quantum computer

• relativistic computer

e.g. https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5555 

@philipthrift

[Lawrence Crowell]

No hypercomputation. The event horizon of a black hole and what might be called the quantum horizon are a parts or dual aspects of a general epistemic horizon. 

LC 

[Philip Thrift]

What is a model of a relativistic computer that is not hypercomputing? 

@philipthrift

[spudb...@aol.com]

For me, a simpleton, it's hard to imagine a singularity (gravitational?) doing anything but falling in on itself, black hole style. If it somehow, goes into very fast spinning, I could see it being a cosmological wormhole, and thus, being a tunnel to somewhere else in the cosmos. There are, of course, other, views on this more, physics-oriented to my, wee, conjecturing. Does this hypercomputing go on somewhere else on the edge the universe? Like I imagine malament-hogarth universes are supposed to be?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c7bd4d81-0f9f-4148-815d-5be88832b944%40googlegroups.com

.

[Philip Thrift]

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 9:25:26 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote:

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 9:19:00 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell wrote:

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 6:06:18 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote:

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 6:47:41 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote:

REALITY.SYS Corrupted: Re-boot universe? (Y/N/Q)

 John K Clark

@philipthrift

No hypercomputation. The event horizon of a black hole and what might be called the quantum horizon are a parts or dual aspects of a general epistemic horizon. 

LC 

What is a model of a relativistic computer that is not hypercomputing? 

@philipthrift

I realize it is via this approach 

quantumetric computer

combines

• quantum computer (quantum mechanics)

• relativistic computer (general relativity)

     =

quantum neural network

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_neural_network

https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.03918 - an artificial quantum neural network based on gravity-like synaptic connections and a symmetry structure that allows to describe the network in terms of geometry of a d-dimensional space

The neural network can be described in terms of a quantum field, via identifying the different neurons with the different momentum modes of the field, while identifying the synaptic connections among the neurons with the interactions among the corresponding momentum modes. Such a mapping allows to attribute a well-defined sense of geometry to an intrinsically non-local system, such as the neural network, and vice versa, it allows to represent the quantum field model as a neural network.

       

@philipthrift

[Brent Meeker]

Obviously, this set-up assumes, quite unrealistically, that the computer never crashes,
is free of programming bugs, has access to an arbitrary large memory and
to an arbitrarily large amount of energy, and never encounters any other
obstacle to its proper functioning. Alas, none of this is true of the computer
on which this essay was written. However, these assumptions are consistent
with the laws of physics as best we currently know them and shall thus not
stall us in our considerations of matters of principle.7

These assumptions obviously are NOT consistent with the laws of physics as expressed in quantum mechanics.

Brent

[Philip Thrift]

And thus, as you seen, the latest, better, approach.

@philipthrift 

[Brent Meeker]

If you send your computer off on a spaceship to do its computation; then when it comes back it's done relativistic hypocomputing.

Brent

[Philip Thrift]

That's not what I'm looking for.

@philipthrift 

[Brent Meeker]

You don't always get what you're looking for, but you get what you ask for.

Brent

[Philip Thrift]

Good thing I got the answer somewhere else.

@philipthrift 

[Lawrence Crowell]

Malament-Hogarth spacetimes rely upon an infinite chain of event that can be observed in some frame to occur in a finite time. These involve Cauchy sequences of events at some limit, such as with a Cauchy horizon. Cauchy horizon that occur in this timelike region require a violation of the Hawking-Penrose stress-energy condition, or that happen with the internal horizon in a Kerr or Reisner-Nordstrom spacetime. In this latter case Hawking radiation disconnects the inner horizon from I^∞, and thus terminates any hypercomputation. The violation of the Hawking-Penrose energy conditions lead to wormholes and exotic spacetimes that can give rise to closed timelike curves. These in turn can act to duplicate quantum states. In fact a range of conditions imposed by the Hawking-Penrose conditions has similar analogues to conditions in QM, such as no-signaling and others.

The hypercomputation appears to be a generalization of a nonlocal hidden variables. To the extent these "exist" they do so beyond a general form of epistemic horizon and are then completely unobservable. 

LC

[Philip Thrift]

The quantumetric neural network defined above

     https://arxiv.org/pdf/1801.03918.pdf

( by Giorgi Dvali https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giorgi_Dvali )

makes no mention of hypercomputation, super-Tuting, or any of that stuff that I can see.

@philipthrift

[Lawrence Crowell]

The reference  https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5555 you posted involves hyper-computation.

LC

[Philip Thrift]

But as I said

   "I realize it is this approach" 

   https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/YAsEUVQIj8s/U0BMY0NcFQAJ

But you can pursue the model you like.

@philipthrift

[Philip Thrift]

   "I realize it is via this approach" 

   https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/YAsEUVQIj8s/U0BMY0NcFQAJ

Maybe I should have written

    https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/YAsEUVQIj8s/U0BMY0NcFQAJ

     "I realize it is via this approach INSTEAD"

@philipthrift

[Bruno Marchal]

A computer. A universal number. In pure GR (non quantum) you can build machines which might be more powerful than computer, but they re usually thought to be non realisable in any practical way, and even theoretical way once we dd the quantum assumption. In fact Newton classical Mechanics is not Turing emulable, but that is not saying much, as it is basically inconsistent, as Newton already argued. 

Bruno