qnfo

joined 4 months ago
15
submitted 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Penrose for the win!

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Thank you for your unqualified opinion. Physics hasn't managed to solve its problems and gets caught up in its own illogical contradictions (string theory, dark matter, quantum foam, really?!) so what's wrong with metaphysics?

Quantization is part of the problem: it's a limitation of our measurement construct not an underlying truth of the universe. I'd gladly share additional research but it seems you've already made up your mind, so I can't force you not to remain ignorant.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

+1000 for your point about AI. In developing a framework of information dynamics where the idea of mimicry has become central to both quantum entanglement and consciousness I realize that that's what spooks people about AI is that relatively high mimicry factor. I might have grown up in New Jersey but I never thought I would challenge Einstein, with the very capable assistance of my AI researchers, to begin formulating what he could not a unified theory of everything. And I am no one special, I just had the free time. This is this is the power synthetic knowledge unlocks.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I'm not sure it does, how do you mean was that a serious question?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Emergent artifacts is the key of the Information Dynamics framework I'm wrapping up, which essentially is a Theory of Everything by uniting different measurement resolutions of the same underlying reality. I'm just about to publish this actually take a look: https://qnfo.org/releases/2025/Quantum-Clasical+Divide

 

The next revolution in physics will not discover new particles but refine our informational constructs to capture finer scales. When we do, the Big Bang’s “mystery,” photons’ “duality,” and black holes’ “singularities” will be seen as artifacts of resolution, not reality.

 

Our daily experience presents time as a unidirectional flow, an apparent fundamental aspect of reality. However, within the principles of Information Dynamics, this perceived arrow of time is understood not as a fundamental law, but as an emergent statistical property.

Consider the sequence of an egg transitioning from an intact state to a broken one. This progression represents a change in information. We consistently observe this transformation but never its spontaneous reversal. The reason lies in the concept of entropy, a measure of disorder within a system. An intact egg represents a relatively ordered state, while a broken egg embodies a multitude of disordered configurations. Statistically, disordered states are significantly more probable. The number of ways an egg can be broken is vast, leading to a high-entropy state, whereas the number of ways it can be perfectly whole, a low-entropy state, is limited.

Our perception of time's forward direction aligns with this statistical bias. The natural evolution of information states tends toward higher entropy due to the greater probability of such states. Observing an egg break is witnessing a transition from a less probable, ordered state to a far more probable, disordered one. This progression defines the temporal order we perceive.

At a fundamental level within Information Dynamics, the transitions between information states are considered symmetric. The underlying dynamics, potentially arising from an ineffable universal information, do not inherently favor a transition from order to disorder at the most basic level. However, the sheer preponderance of high-entropy states creates an overwhelming statistical tendency in that direction. Furthermore, our macroscopic observation, which doesn't capture the reversible movements at a molecular level, reinforces this unidirectional perception of time.

Thus, from the perspective of Information Dynamics, the arrow of time, as clearly demonstrated by the example of a broken egg, emerges not as a foundational principle, but as a statistical consequence of the inherent probabilities governing the evolution of information states within the universe.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago

There are options, and a well-funded new player will burst on the scene just as ChatGPT made itself eponymous with language AI: https://open.substack.com/pub/qnfo/p/the-diminishing-returns-of-scaling

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago

AI is synthetic cognition or synthetic knowledge. What we're calling AGI must "know" the logic of our quantum universe first, which is all but incomprehensible to us.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago

It's hard to reason with the inconsistent (sometime nonexistent) human written communication that LLMs know. There's something deeper in other channels of communication that we use for our own logic.