[zmgehlke]

Well, the inspirtation in my mind was the interference from the double slit experiment.

If we think about a particle going from A to B, over t from 0 to 1, then the common interpretation is that it takes all paths and that those paths can interfere with eachother.

If we think about t=0.5, then the "particle" is not in a definite place, but sort of "smeared" out across its possible paths. The thought was if those possible paths, together, could form an embedded sphere in 3+1D, and in some sense could have similar computational knotting behavior. (And moreso that form shells of equal probability in a solid in 3+1+1D, with the extra dimension coming from the probability associated with each point.)

Im not sure how you'd "read" that, though possibly by "weakly" interacting with it in flight or it might contribute to the "random" outcomes of measured values. Since knotting is low-energy in general, we might not notice that behavior under normal conditions because of thermal interference adding a lot of computation in flight, hence making the values seem random. Similarly, heavily controlled experiments likely don't permit enough freedom to be anything but the trivial knot.

I expect that there is a reason that doesn't work, but figuring out where my hunch fails will help learn more about QM.