Liz, There is no FTL because this is not a physical dimensional space, it's a computational space. The notion of 'together' is computational interaction rather than dimensional co-location.
Clock time doesn't produce the processor cycles because clock times are computed by those cycles. Only a separate Present moment P-time can provide processor cycles that clock time can be computed within. Edgar On Monday, January 13, 2014 8:36:31 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > On 14 January 2014 14:15, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected] <javascript:>>wrote: > >> Liz, >> >> Good question which I've given a lot of thought to and which is still not >> completely clear in my mind... >> >> The processors are not separate physical entities processing the data and >> they are not separated from the data (the information). >> > > They aren't physical entities at all, according to what you've said > previously. I would imagine they're best described as abstract entities. > > >> So far as I can see all actual information has to include both >> applicable code and data in a single evolving information structure. That >> seems to me the only way the processor, code and data states can always be >> together where the computations actually occur. They probably occur only at >> the most elemental level so there have to be googles of these elemental >> computations taking place in every processor cycle. >> > > Well, code and data can be the same thing, for example in Lisp. Given > googles of these processors interacting only with their closest neighbours, > as I assume they must if no influences are to travel FTL, then you do have > something at least somewhat analogous to the Game of Life. The next logical > question is what is an elemental computation? > >> >> So the actual picture is more like computationally evolving information >> rather than the PC model of code strings passing through silicon processors >> sequentially accessing data as needed. All the information that makes up >> the universe has to include its own applicable (and likely pretty simple) >> rules of evolution as it interacts with other information. >> > > So perhaps you have something like a Turing machine here. A state table > and input/output data. (With the possible proviso that the state table can > be rewritten?) > >> >> Since all information exists only in the present moment processor cycle >> there cannot be any information code sequences that are waiting to be >> processed (as there are in silicon code). Because they would correspond to >> a pre-determined future. Everything has to be re-computed in the current >> p-time cycle. Anything that is not re-computed is left behind in the past >> and thus ceases to exist. >> > > Well, in a normal computer (von Neumann type) on any given clock cycle > there is a processor state, and in a sense that's all there is (there are > also signals on the I/O ports and external patterns of data, such as the > current state of the memory and the hard drive, and any other items that > are connected to the processor, but these are all "latent" in a sense - the > processor is only aware of its own state), > >> >> Thus it is not information data states waiting to be computed by strings >> of pre-existing code sequences. That doesn't work because when multiple >> code sequences predicting a local future interact there would inevitably be >> inconsistencies and the computations would fall apart. Not sure if this is >> clear or not. >> > > It sounds as though there are no programmes. There are only data states. > Sorry to keep saying this but it does sound like a version of the Game of > Life (although presumably a far more advanced one than Conway imagined). > >> >> Thus everything that exists is in a continual state of re-computation in >> every processor cycle. What exists is the active evolution of all >> information, not sequential static data states one after the other. >> > > Presmably all the information involved can be represented digitally? If > so, then it can only take on certain values - a single processor would > perhaps be storing a particular number on a given clock cycle. The limiting > case would be a single bit - which is what happens in the Game of Life. > More likely, if the processors are going to output the universe, they would > have to store larger value, but one of a finite range of values. > > I'm not sure I see how the "active evolution" differs from "sequential > data states", given that the computations are synchronised by a universal > clock. > > > -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
