[bordercases]

The information would "appear" to be processed "faster" to the digital system merely because the digital system would have no memory of there being a moment in between its current state and the next computed state. Even supposing that it's possible for there to be a subjective experience of a computer: this goes in to physical time and psychological time and whether the two bear a strict relation, as well as the relative nature of time in physical space.

On the first topic, if you can stomach having to reformat a PDF, the "No Free Lunch in Machine Learning" guy wrote a paper on thermodynamics and psychological time:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226069884_Memory_sy...

On the second one... I think it's more interesting to think if there's a theory of relativity for computation. Imagine if two systems were updating one another's state but were separated by physical distance. Wouldn't you have to hold the state of one to only update when it a receives a message from the other, for the systems to "experience" instantaneous communication? That would mean there would be a third system for whom time would have to pass to transfer the message and compute it in such a way that the amount of updating required for the receiving systems are minimal.

Maybe we have to guarantee that at least one system has to experience time more slowly than the others, to compute the information necessary for instanaeity to be true for the communicating systems.