On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 07:18:06AM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > No 5D embedding space. The rate of expansion is just the intrinsic > processor cycle 'rate'. The only real measure of that is how it manifests > in the computations it produces because only they have any measure because > only they have dimensionality. Again whenever we try to measure p-timel we > end up measuring only what it has computed because only what it computes > has measure including all measuring sticks, clocks and devices. P-time > computes all dimensionality, and all measuring devices. Thus those > measuring devices only measure other things that have been computed, not > the p-time that computes them all. > > Thus when I speak of a processor 'rate', it's only an illustrative analogy > because that rate has no direct measure. The only glimpse we get of it is > in the minimal quanta of time measured in clock time, and presumably the > curvature of the universe. So in clock time terms the p-time processor > cycle must be very short, on the scale of what scientists misleadingly call > the Planck time scale. > > The p-time processor rate must obviously be fast enough to compute all > events in clock time, so in CLOCK time measures, the duration of a p-time > processor cycle must be shorter than the shortest clock time event. > > Edgar >
Let me see if I've got your idea now: you suppose that there is some primitive ontological computer running a specific program that computes all physical events on the fly, perhaps like Wolfram's CA. Then for any events, there must be a specific clock cycle on which it is computed, and for any two events, there is a matter of fact whether event A is computed prior to event B (or vice verse), or that the two events are computed simulatenously, in case the ontological computer is a parallel computer with synchronous updates (like Wolfram's model). Is this close to your idea of "p-time"? Of course there are many criticisms to this, if that is the case: 1) If something like the universal dovetailer is implementing our physics, then there is no matter of fact as to which order events are computed, as there are many different equivalent programs for computing something that are being emulated by the dovetailer. This is the essence of the UDA. 2) Even if it were a direct compution of reality a la Wolfram, an asyncronously updating parallel computer need not have a matter of fact to whether A is computed before B, just so long as the relativistic causal structure is preserved. Cheers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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.
