Here’s an idea that’s been helping me to procrastinate. 

1. Suppose that spacetime is an embedding of entanglement. An evolved quantum 
error correcting code (QEC) that enables a network to form geometries like the 
reality we see. 

2. Suppose the Big Bang the result of a unifying supermassive black hole. 

3. Like other black holes, it had high entropy. 

4. That final black hole, lacking an exterior, launches a new universe. 

5. The new universe might appear to be smooth in its geometric expansion, but 
that would only because of the embedded QEC. It would be rich with unseen 
entanglement that was not subject to the QEC. 

6. In this view, universes could evolve or even be nested. Universes with no or 
crude QECs would be unstable and prone to collapse. Universes with strong QECs 
could have orderly environments where life could emerge, as Eric describes in 
his book.


7. A Big Crunch would be like checkpointing a virtual machine. The evolved QECs 
could still be in the checkpoint and cause the next version of the universe to 
inherit its desirable properties. Maybe it would be like a junkyard with some 
interesting parts that would find novel uses in the next go.

8. Speculating further, very sophisticated civilizations (after billions of 
years) might discover how to stack the deck to invent new metaphysics at the 
next Big Bang. Simple beings, like humans – not being billions of years old -- 
might invent words for that like God. 

9. The whole thing could be deterministic and not facilitate any free will!

Now I should get back to work. 

From: Friam <[email protected]> on behalf of Pieter Steenekamp 
<[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, June 8, 2025 at 10:38 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]>
Subject: [FRIAM] Free will—ghost in the machine or just clever wiring? 

Seth Lloyd’s Turing test for free will 
(https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/lloyd/Turing_Test.pdf
 
<https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/lloyd/Turing_Test.pdf>)
 is to consciousness what EPR was to quantum physics: a challenge to the 
theory's completeness. EPR said quantum weirdness must hide something deeper; 
Bell said “let's test that”—and nature replied, “nope, it’s weird all the way 
down.” Nobel Prize, case closed.

Lloyd asks: can we prove the mind is just machinery? His test says: build a 
machine that behaves indistinguishably from a human and believes it has free 
will. If you succeed—great. But failure proves nothing.

Unlike Bell’s inequality, this test can only confirm, never deny. No 
ghost-busting here.

Until then? It’s speculation. The Standard Model explains almost 
everything—except the quantum gremlins and how observation messes things up. So 
maybe the mind still has an ace up its sleeve. Or a soul. Or a bug in the code. 


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... 
--- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to