Self aware in what sense?

On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 2:09 AM, Felix Hoenikker <fhoenikk...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Sorry again, but I want to add one thing:
>
> The broadest mathematical closure of "the existence of computation",
> "the observation of consciousness anywhere" suggests the following, in
> my mind: all possible numbers (including transfinite-ones) are, in
> fact, self aware substructures in the mathematical universe,
> recursively "communicating" to "each other" by exchanging bits in an
> attempt to develop the algorithm which compresses themselves to a
> single state, which represents the number "one", after which it
> promptly forgets and starts all over again, everywhere, and all at
> once.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Felix Hoenikker <fhoenikk...@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 3:03 AM
> Subject: The final TOE?
> To: Everything List <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Consider the following fully general way of saying this is the
> following: quantum mechanics and general relativity are symmetrically
> "the exact same theory", modulo the additional "bit" of information
> that quantum entanglement reduces net gravitational energy.  This is
> the EXACT answer to the EPR paradox, and all paradoxes about
> singularities, and consistent with our picture of reality in every
> respect, as it "necessarily must be" since it follows exactly from the
> asssumption of 3+1 spacetime embedded within some higher dimensional
> structure of "any" form (i.e. including string theory).
>
> Since no "true" gravitational singularities exist, then "every point
> in space is an apparent black hole" because "no point in space is an
> apparent black hole".  Thus, at every point in space, a "bit" of
> information (or a "photon") can escape from the "observable" universe
> on our scale, "go into the past", and come out "in the future" in a
> symmetric manner for all observers, without considering your frame of
> reference in 3+1 space time.  This qualitatively predicts all features
> of GR without QCD or QFT.  However, since photons travelling through
> locally closed loops can look like "point" particles with some net
> entanglement coming out, then they can look like bundles that, for all
> intents and purposes, appear to randomly add information in some way,
> and in some spherically symmetric fashion, which predicts the
> divergence and appearance of other "fundamental forces" early in the
> inflating universe.
>
> It is often said that QM and GR differ from each other exactly by the
> contemplation of the "singularity", and that our inability to discover
> the "true" laws of the universe has been limited by our lack of
> knowledge about the twin singularities: the inflationary bubble and
> the black hole.  It follows that this fact was "exactly true" all
> along, and the laws of physics are a completely dimensionless
> consequences of our "local" geometry of space, and our civilization
> has, in fact, rather than been trying to "discover" the next laws of
> physics, has in fact been struggling to "unlearn" the concept of
> "Indeterminacy" and "quantum mechanics", since QM follows from GR, the
> postulate of 3+1 spacetime and E = mc^2 (a nice, dimensionless
> equation).  Einstein, in fact, was right all along, and successfully
> completed the "fully" deterministic general laws of physics.
>
> Consider then, the reason why indeterministic QM was ever suggested:
> the apparently subjective indeterminacy of the universe from each
> "observer" point of view (i.e. the uncertainty principle).  Or
> actually, consider the fact that, if the universe is completely
> deterministic, and "you" for any defined "you" is getting non-random
> information from any source, then that information must, in fact, be
> added to you by the "rest of the universe" in some systematic fashion,
> down to the tiniest quantum of "universe".  This implies that there
> "is" actually, some "quanta" of the universe, a "photon", and each
> "photon" is having information added to "it" from the "rest of the
> universe", in a systematic fashion, and recursively so for every
> "observer".  This is actually a fully generic model for the universe,
> and the absolute generalization of QM and SR.
>
> Next, consider the fact that you are "conscious" and possibly
> "indeterminstic" (i.e. have subjective free will).  I think I do.
> Therefore, I am not a "quanta" of information, or a "bit", but it was
> "added to me" from "somewhere".  No, consider the mathematical closure
> of this observation.  What does this imply about and anthropic
> principle and "fine tuning"? Does that make sense anymore.  Also, does
> this not mean that our "observable universe", for "some definition of
> observable", from "any subjective observer's point of view", is
> constantly being added non-random information from "outside".
>
> I truly beg you all to consider this argument fully.
>
> Please let me know what you think,
> F.H.
>
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Felix Hoenikker <fhoenikk...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Every "apparent" event horizon is really a separation of two
> > universes, where the outside universe is entangled geometrically with
> > the inside universe. The Hubble volume is sitting inside of an
> > expanding supermassive black hole, of another universe. However, by
> > the uncertainty principle, this means the "outside universe" is
> > "really" simultaneously in a superposition of a large but countably
> > finite many possible universes (i.e. bitstates), with the net
> > information between the "inside" and "outside" views cancelling out to
> > zero. Equivalently, every "classical" black hole is really in a
> > microscopic superposition of countably finite many bitstates, again
> > with the net information "inside" and "outside" cancelling zero.
> > However, it cannot converge to a singularity, because it cannot encode
> > "bitstates" forever in the same volume, therefore it must leak
> > information in the form of "photons" (i.e. Hawking radiation).
> >
> > Equivalently, the Hubble volume receives information one photon at a
> > time from the "outside" in the form of cosmic background radiation,
> > that information being about the prior state of the otherwise casually
> > disconnected universe. (i.e. CMB == Hawking radiation). The
> > equivalence principle implies length contraction and time dilation.
> > Gravity mediated by photons is the single fundamental force of the
> > universe. All other sources of apparent information and causal
> > connectivity (i.e. all other forces) are the result of the initial
> > state of the universe at the Big Bang, the only true singularity. The
> > laws of the universe are extremely simple.
> >
> > This is the digital unification of GR and QM.  What do you think?
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to