|
|
|
|
|
by sdwr
1226 days ago
|
|
I remember being thrilled by his 2015(?) piece (the really long "cellular automata as universal foundation" one). Felt like a proper stab at combining physics + CS, thin on details, but fertile ground. Wolfram is an explorer there, barely charting the edges of an unknown continent. The speed of light, light cones, and speed/time equivalence make a ton of sense through the lens of updates propagating through a grid of cells. Don't remember the QM part so well, but from what I do remember, he proposes that probability/alternate timelines are subject to the same computational constraints over probability space, that physical objects have in real space. As an aside, entangled particles were only ever a conceptual issue, right? From an engineering perspective they seem completely practical. |
|
Entanglement is also deeply weird. I'm not a physicist, but believe it works this way: Particles A and B are entangled. Later, particles A and C become entangled. That doesn't mean that A and B are no longer entangled. Schroedinger's Cat becomes entangled with the particle which does/doesn't decay. When I open the box I become, in a very complex way, entangled with the Cat. Either it is dead and I become depressed, or it is alive and I start looking for milk. But the Cat and the particle are still entangled. If someone, unaware of my existence, later measures the particle they will absolutely know the state of the Cat. Or they could measure me; if I'm hunting for milk then the particle state is "didn't decay." Eventually, everything becomes entangled with everything else. How is that kept track of? How massive (literally) would that amount of information be?