For more on Kevin Knuth's work please see http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.4172
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Stephen Paul King < [email protected]> wrote: > Kevin Knuth has shown how to derive space-time structure and lorentz > invariance from ordered lattices of observers. I suspect that the UD can > be considered to 'run' on chains of observer events per Knuth picture. This > gives us a nice toy model of how space-time is emergent. > > > On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 1:18 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 5/10/2013 10:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 10 May 2013, at 18:09, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 5/10/2013 1:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 09 May 2013, at 18:08, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 5/9/2013 1:44 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> I don't think that requires a wave function collapse, it's explained by >> Everett's MWI also, which is a kind of non-local hidden variable. >> >> >> Why non local? There is nothing non local in Everett's MWI. >> >> >> Sure it is. When you take the trace of the density matrix over the >> environment to get a set of orthogonal subspaces that's a non-local, >> mathematical operation. >> >> >> Local is about physical reality, not mathematical operation. The wave >> describing the physical (physicists included) evolves deterministically and >> locally. Non locality is in the (mathematical) appearances. >> >> >> In an EPR type experiment the wave-function's evolution is not local. It >> changes over a space-like interval. >> >> >> Only from the (first person plural) participators points of view, >> abstracting from the leaked information in the environment(s), a local, >> computable, phenomenon, at the correct dimensions. >> >> >> ?? The state exists in Hilbert space, not space-time. I depends on >> space-time variables which are space-like separate. So even in a MWI >> picture the state is not local and the change in state due to a measurement >> interaction doesn't propagate in space-time. >> >> >> Eventually to make this precise you need to marry GR and the quantum, >> and that's not easy. >> >> >> So will comp contribute to this? >> >> Brent >> Perhaps you are dreaming about building a non abelian anyonic >> quantum computing machine through some fractional quantum Hall >> effect? This is less elementary. >> --- Bruno Marchal >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/K7E-Vfwj4QU/unsubscribe?hl=en >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> > > -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
