Order out of chaos, Pulling waves and c out of the noise

An idea I've been trying to follow for a while is that the universe might simply be a rather chaotic collection of processing elementing peforming random processes and that the reality we experience is a combination of an evolution of what possible modes of operation in this network are sustainable, as well our interpretations of these that shapes our perceptions.

I'm going to skip over how a rather random collection of nodes could be viewed as a curved spacetime with varying local densities of space and just say this is a given, and instead focus on how the appearance of photons with wavelengths and a specific velocity of light could result due to an observational bias made from a subset of these nodes (or alternately a local area of space).

Resonance

First, let's consider that a random collection of binary processing elements has two classes of operations it can perform. 1) Information preserving or 2) lossy operations.

If we assume no additional energy is added to the system, then information can at most be retained in it. Any lossy calculations made, can only throw away a bit of information once. In binary calculations there are only a limited number of operations that don't destroy information. I won't bother detailing this here except simply to say that either the result of an operation can be reversed and the inputs can be exactly predicted from the outputs of the operation, or something is lost and multiple input states can be compressed into indentical output states, so that it's impossible to determine which input value was present.

Over a large enough time, only information propogating through lossless pathways in the network will remain. This can be viewed as a periodic repetition to the information present at any point in the network. In other words, there are "wavelengths" to the information flowing through the network. This can be viewed from another perspective as a steady state condition in which things are resonanting. For example, you can strike a tuning fork and and frequencies that aren't harmonics of the fundamental experience phase shifts that cancel the presence of these out quickly as they aren't self sustaining in this "medium".

The point of all this is simply that whether or not conservation of energy is truly a law of nature, over a large enough period of time, if no new energy is added, it might as well be a law because a unit of energy can only be destroyed once and over a long enough period of time information will only travel through pathways that deny this possibility.

(Personally, I think information might be added to the universe ... though I don't know if information can be destroyed. It seems unlikely)

What determines c?

Again, I'm going to skip trying to demonstrate how a chaotic collection of processing nodes can be perceived as a gradually curving space and simply take this as a given. (Basically any local subset of the network is only able to approximate the operations of the entire network. When local predictions begin to diverge, we see it as curved space)

Now, imagine a string of information flowing through a space that contains various local densities and propogation rates of information through it. Observers made from any local area in this occur a local rate. The density and propogation rate of any single serial pathway through space could be viewed as 1 or unity. The only manner in which these densities actually affect information is when two pathways operate in parallel and then recombine information. If either only 1 pathway exists between points or multiple disconnected pathways exist, the relative propogation rates of them is meaningless because they never interact - they all effectively represent alternate disconnected realities with no connection between them (at least with regard to that specific information).

The critical effect that variable densities have is in combining together spacial stretched information together. Information that's combined together at two different rates becomes diffused and blurred and just like the tuning fork example, decays.

So the absolute density of any area of space is unimportant to what an observer sees. It's only the relative densities compared to the local space of the observer that are visible and then these are only noticeable when there's an alternate pathway to take that has a different density to compare that to. (Sorry if that's a bit hard to follow, I'll give a better example in the next section)

Waves and wavelength

To rehash the important parts:

1) The density of space for a single pathway is unimportant. It's simply a chain that passes information at some rate and without alternate pathways to compare it to, the distances between nodes are meaningless and unknown.

2) When two pathways interact at more than one point they must do so in phase, so as not to diffuse and cancel out information. Combining a signal with itself out of phase creates cancellations and losses, hence is unsustainable and not part of an objective reproducible reality.

3) Observers can only witness the information that passes through their local space, which of necessity must occur at their local density.

From the viewpoint of a single stationary observer in this network, information they see flows through their node and can pass through either higher or lower density areas outside their space, but must be stretched evenly over its fundamental cycle across some diameter of the universe and come back in phase next cycle.

If the universe exists as a relatively large collection of nodes compared to the observer, this can appear to take many physical pathways of higher and lower density, but the information always returns to their own density when it's observed. (A wave collapse becomes real and detected or the zero crossing for light)

So a photon could be viewed as a lossless, periodic piece of information that can potentially flow in any direction through space but with the restriction that it can't interact with itself in a phase shifted manner, except if it's undergone an integral number of cycles delay with the additional restriction that it must pass through an observers node to be seen. Combined together this means it can only be observed at a specific node in spacetime in a certain phase. It can travel through higher densities of space for a time, but then it must either flow through a lower density area to compensate for the prior phase shift before reaching an observer (complex component of the phase), or alternately continue along a higher density path until an integral number of cycles phase shift occur before returning to be observed (though I believe this may already be compensated for by considering that ultimately it has a single period structure that must "resonate" with entire network...)

I'll admit I don't have these ideas as tightly knitted together as I'd like (and I've been up late and need to hit the sack ) but I'm hoping someone else can see the general path of logic and possibly tighten up the ideas a bit.

Why not, but such random processes can have quite predictable bulk behavior.
For example the diffusion is the result of chaotic fluctuations of potential quantity densities and it leads to wave equation behavior at water surface.



Have look at this huge collection of Java applets here, describing different aspects of microscopic world. Most of these applets is based upon single random particle dynamic.

You can do a wide variety of approximate analog calculations by just sending pulses of random densities into simply logic circuits.

For example, normally a division circuit might contain thousands of electronic components but with just a few you can "divide" the ratios of two pulsed bit streams.

The tradeoffs are that it's stochastic, so you have to average many values to approximate an analog value but an advantage is that you have no block processing delay and a course approximation is available within a small number of bit operations. Comparing that to a block divider, you might have tens of thousands of bit operations delay before a result if available.

An AND gate performs multiplication, while OR calculates (A+B-AB) and XOR calculates (A+B-2AB) and NOT calculates (1-A). Set/reset registers and J/K/ flip flops can approximate integration or division. For example, to calculate x^2, you take a signal and run it through a single delay and then AND the stream with itself. If the probability of encountering a 1 at some point is 50%, then the value could be seem as 0.5, but after ANDing it with a delayed (ideally uncorrelated) version of it, the resulting bitstream would have a pulse density of 0.25. 0.5 * 0.5 = .25.

So you can chain a few logic gates together and generate a complex function with almost infinite precision but the catch is that you will need a very long time to get a good approximation.

I'll check out the links you posted. Thanks

Thank you Steven for this thread.
I thought about this problem - Does the collection of the informations create a smart program or the smart program is creating a collection of the informations ?

I've simmilar question: is the information carieer of matter or is the matter carrier of information?

I've simmilar question: is the information carieer of matter or is the matter carrier of information?

If the information is an interaction of the energy with a space (aether) it is a matter too. May be it is just the same.

Well, that's the question... We can imagine inertia/time as the manifestation of limited mixing/diffusion speed of randomly moving points in space, but what's prohibiting the information carrier in movement by infinite speed? Such mixing would proceed by infinite speed after than - it means, some speed limitation is always required even for system of randomly moving points.



At least in our generation of Universe its no evidence, the mass can be formed by the mass and not vice versa. The information cannot spread by the superluminal speed - by the same way, as mass. It can serve as an indirect proof, the information is always carried by mass. Don't forget, the information is massless concept by itself.

The quite fundamental question is, how to derive such tiny, at least infinitesimal inertia, i.e. limited motion speed, i.e. the fundamental relation between space and time from truly NOTHING, just from geometry of randomly moving points spreading (i.e. Aether density fluctuations) in particular.

I suppose, here should be some mathematic limit, which defines the light speed supposedly with connection of diffuse equation phase transition (symmetry breaking).

If we solve this, we can answer the question, whether our Universe is truly eternal, or not. Or we can derive the speed of light just from the speed of fluctuation spreading through field of random fluctuations.

It's opened question for everybody.

Matter would seem represented by the compressed areas, or alternately where multiple pieces of information were processed through a smaller number of nodes. Space could be viewed as where a smaller number of pieces of information were sampled into a larger representation.

It's very easy to expand information losslessly, but difficult to compress it losslessly.

For example, rewriting 2 bits of information losslessly via. some random function into 3 bits is actually rather easy. Each one of the 2^2 input representations needs to be mapped to one of the 2^3 output representations without overlapping. Placing 4 different values into 8 different buckets without having 2 in a single bucket is rather simply and could be done by a random network.

The inverse of this is much harder though and creates more interactions between separate bits. If you have 3 bits of information and compress them down to 2, that's the equivalent of having 8 possible buckets for input representations and trying to fit them into 4 buckets without putting more than one value in the same bucket. If all 8 buckets could contain a value, then it's impossible to do losslessly. If we assume information has been flowing back and forth between these 4 and 8 bucket representations then the actual value left remaining would be at most one of 4 values and could be determined by only looking at the 2 bit representation (though looking at the 3 bit representation would also contain this information, but in an expanded representation). In reality, 2 values could be swapped between these representations each clock cycle and hold at a maximum information content of 4 bits, represented by 5 bits physically (though knowing whether you were at an even or odd cycle in time would be necessary to see this as a rigid state and not cycling back and forth). In a random network, you might only have 10 possible valid states representing ~3.3 or log2(10) bits of information losslessly over time from a network that stored 2+3 = 5 bits. Matter would seem correlated with the 2 bit representation and space with the 3 bits.

Taking the above and assuming observations of this are made by looking at information flowing in the network and not seeing the network itself, then the network would place constraints on where matter can exist as well as bias the specific types possible.

I deleted a couple paragraphs that did nothing more than reduce this view to a state machine. The intent of this thread wasn't to prove a closed universe would be the equivalent to a Turing machine. The real intent was to show that a random and closed network will "evolve" over a long enough period of time into losslessly propogating information, due simply to destroying the possibilities for loss as they are encountered. In a typical random network, this would appear much like a half-life to data content that would ultimately reach a cycle that would repeat.

The other observation is that this stable state could be viewed as pathways in which bits of information are cycled through it. The cycle time of this final lossless stable state could be viewed along the lines of spacetime as being the largest dimension to the universe, of which all other data could be seen as harmonics of it over shorter distances.

Another observation is that a single pathway operating as a shift register, or basically a 1-D circular universe with everything propogating at "lightspeed" along it, there would be no possibility for data cancellation to occur. A bit would need to interact with itself to be destroyed, or alternately overwritten by another bit. The evolution of these 1-D lossless circular characteristics is evident in orbitals. A planet follows a path where its components are held in phase together and don't collide. If parts of the planet were allowed to either move faster or slower in the orbital path, or alternately rise above or below the orbital path in order to phase shift themselves and this would alter the system. For information to not be lost, such alterations would only be possible under conditions where this action could be determined by other information in the universe ... it must be a reversible reaction and information preserving. If the position of a piece of matter could be randomly altered, then it would overwrite the prior location and this wouldn't be lossless.

Going back to the 1-D "lightspeed" lossless pathways and extending this to 2-D you get a spiral pattern, with smaller radius paths orbiting faster, similar to galactic arms (though I don't believe the scaling of orbital times is the same). Now information could travel up or down between the separate 1-D rings, but in general only with tight restrictions on phase. For example, one possible path from one ring to the next is to follow an entire orbit and then interact with an adjacent ring after completing a 360 rotation. Such modes of propogation and interaction are due to the necessity of avoiding information moving to a higher or lower ring, then phase shifting itself and reentering the ring it left. If this was possible, the a single unit of data could quickly spread through an entire ring and propogate throughout the system.

A 2-D spiral is similar to 1-D motion and is possible losslessly. Also swapping locations acts similar to a parity function and can preserve information, though location of the data changes and must be reversible - a bi-directional data flow allows for reversability. So you could have one particle moving forward at light speed and bit swapping everything in the path with itself, this would create a sub-light speed motion in the reverse direction inversely proportional to the distance over which this light speed path followed.

If a light speed particle travelling along a circular path 5 nodes long and bit swapped all information in locations it passed through, then every 5th cycle it would do a full cycle.

Here's an example wiht X being the particle and A-D being other objects.

X A B C D
A X B C D
A B X C D
A B C X D
A B C D X
X B C D A
B X C D A
...

Every 5 cycles it creates a reverse motion of 4 units of data. The fact that a larger number of units of data are being shifted backward at a slower rate due to the faster motion of a single light speed particle might in some sense be a reason for conservation of kinetic energy. Electricity tends to operate like this as well - "holes" are seen as travelling backwards, though electrons only flow in one direction.

Superconductors might operate along these lines also. Some forms of motion are more compatible with the "evolutionary" requirement of lossless transmissions.

I wish I could give you a good answer. I admitted earlier to having largely skipped trying to describe how we likely see the universe as largely flat and organized with life and intelligence etc.

Considering how we make our observation from within this network, or within some subset of the space, it doesn't seem to difficult how we would interprete and organize our observations of these lossless pathways into something that appeared locally flat and continuous and predictable. This is a a process we tend to associate with intelligence.

I believe most everything we view as intelligence has a correlation to data compression. There might be some correlations in space between matter and intelligence. Matter, to exist losslessly, must transmit information through it in a lossless manner and/or retain information over time without decaying. If matter interfaces to an expanded space around it then, then it would seem it must be able to interact with these larger amounts of data in a compressed format. Matter at smaller scales might have tighter requirements on this - for example, the ratio of spacial nodes near the surface of the Earth and nodes we see as matter near the surface is nearly 1 to 1. Matter can more easily interact with all nearby space in a one to one, lossless fashion without losing information. If we assume one characteristic of matter is to combine multiple streams of information so they appear to interact (again losslessly ... I'm sounding like a broken record huh? ) then matter has a stricter requirement and likely could be representative of the sole manner in which two information streams are combined. Space might simply represent those modes of propogation that operate in a 1-D non-interacting pathway.

I was going to say that very small particles of matter would have a high ratio of "spacial" nodes surrounding them versus "matter" nodes internally. If the particle interacted with all of these nodes in all directions or dimensions, then it could only do so in limited ways and not simultaneously. This at a minimum would seem to present delays for information flowing through matter, as for example, you couldn't guarantee being able to pass 10 bits of information through an 8 bit channel without some bits being delayed a clock cycle ... now of course a very intelligent system, could extract patterns existing the original 10 bit stream, assuming such existed, and compress it into an 8 bit stream without delay. Space doesn't need any intelligence because it's "task" is simpler and analogous to taking 8 bits of data and communicating them through a pipeline 10 bits wide.

Anyway, there are many unknowns and things to consider as well as the likelihood, IMO, that the universe isn't entirely a closed, finite system but it doesn't seem impossible to have evolution create systems that appear smart and are capable of compressing large amounts of information into an "understanding" of this data by maing correlations and removing redundancies. But this isn't necessarily the same thing as the consciousness and perceptions we see in life.

Another thing to consider is that if you could look outside the universe to the possible existance of a multiverse. From a perspective, existance may have no distinct defining traits in any way but simple be a collection of every and all possible processes. In that case, the observation of what our universe is, is a reflection of ourselves as it would be our local understanding and decisions that would shape something out of a shapeless sea of all possibilities ... sorry for the more metaphysical bent, but there still seems a more wholistic understanding needed. For example, you could map out the entire internet and get lucky and have not a single computer ever crash but execute every instruction code perfectly ... but this still isn't going to tell you exactly what information flows through the network without figuring out what the information is coming in through the keyboard buffer ... and then even knowing that there are operators pushing the keys still doesn't help. But that's a larger picture than I really wanted to deal with in this thread.

You need a non-uniform seed, but after that consider that everything is viewed in a relative sense.

Velocities could be infinite, but they're measured against other infinite velocities, so it's a calculus problem where you avoid the zeroes and infinities by taking values in the limit.

Now, there still does remain the ultimate perplexing question of why do we perceive space at a specific rate of time, but the same relative perspective answers that also, IMO. Consciousness is always 100% full. Time will be as fast or slow as you can understand it to be and yet it will always be at a "normal" rate, simply because you personally have no other rate with which to compare your consciousness with. Some people with brain damage don't experience time "normally". Some people feel others drive too fast or too slow on the freeway. It's a judgement relative to what rate you feel is normal.

The hardest part is figuring out where the initial non-uniformity came from, but my guess it was originate from a simple binary division and followed some algorithm in further subdividing time and space. It, of course, is very hard to envision how such a simple origin could get to where things are at now.

Hi, StevenA,

be warned, I'm not visiting this forum for reading pleasure and I'm not reading posts larger than, says, 10 sentences. By my experience, if somebody isn't able to express his idea in less than 10 sentences, it's highly probable, he's not able to express it at all. So please, don't address such larger post to me, I'll not read it anyway. I hope, You'll understand my stance.

Furthermore, I'm not interested about WHAT it should be but WHY it should be. In general, I'm not interested about ideas, but about reasons of such ideas. From my point of view it's quite obvious, the pure abstract concepts like information cannot form some real things.

We can discuss some random field of Aether (space, vacuum...) density, but such density is defined by some energy/mass fluctuations again. It's obvious, without some - at least infinitesimal - mass/energy density you cannot have its fluctuations at all.

It means, we're trapped in infinite tautology again, concerning the question, how to create inertial space just from some random quantity. I'm not interested about information compression problems in context of physic. I don't understand the importance of homology between register bit shifting and charge carrier in supercinductors - does it mean something in context of spacetime definition? If not, why we should read about it right here?

Of course, it's quite legitimate to talk about everything here, but it's quite legitimate to put such questions after than, too...

I'd include WHY things appear as they as very important. If you see things in the form of an Aether, I could easily ask WHY you picked this model. I happen to agree with much of it, but assuming the universe might have been almost anything, it seems worth asking why it happens to have the specific characteristics it has.

If instead you can start with most any random network and extract properties that must be present simply for it to exist long enough to be understood, then those properties are more general. If those general properties were capable of describing everything we can observe (I'm not trying to imply that's been done at all), then limiting ones focus to a specific model would be placing arbitrary constraints that might not be met in reality.

The appearance of a medium is inherent in any network with delays. Inertia and motion are a product of our interpretations of things over time. Light speed and multidimensional spaces simply represent delays and the most significant observabable paths that communication take. The only significant direction to space is scale, not an X,Y or Z axis. This simply means that not all dimensions of communication are equally significant in their delay and that likely there's some form of exponential decay to the observable impact made by different types of paths in the network.

To show how you can map any random network into a multidimensional medium of connected nodes, you simply place all nodes that share the same information simultaneously at the same point in space and place adjacent nodes at a distance along an initial dimension proportional to the delay in communication. Then you repeat this step in a new dimension for all their adjacent nodes. Thankfully the universe doesn't appear to have a large number of significant dimensions, but it might be interesting to again as WHY ... if some form of superexponential expansion or factorial explosion in the number of nodes connected at each step is possible, then maybe the observable universe really is connected in 11 dimensions.

I was showing how simply extrapolating on the ideas of information decay in a random network, and the resulting requirement for lossless transmission correlate with physical observations like superconductors. In a superconductor, it's envisioned that charges travel closely packed together without interfering with each other. The Aether model you present relies on a lossless medium to propogate. I'm simply showing that evolution itself automatically removes lossy modes of propogation. It also prohibits explosive recursions. Any states that lock up don't propogate information through them and so again, they wouldn't be visible.

Basically, I'm trying to apply evolution to a random network and see what characteristics the information left in it would have over time. It seems many correlaries with natural laws would exist.

You don't have to feel obligated to reply to my posts, Zephir. I appreciate that you often do but feel free to ignore anything you want

If u want to explain the formation of matter from vacuum, the simplest possible thing is to suppose, the vacuum is just a specific form of matter.

Any other model is more complicated, indeed....

Yes, I do agree.
The space has its property - It can carry an information, it is perfect elastic (energy conservation), it is not infinite hard (speed of light, information), it is discrete and reproducible (all particles are everywhere identical).

We do not know where the space come from, is it finite or infinite, how to produce the space or are there other kinds of the space anywhere.

If u want to explain the formation of matter from vacuum, the simplest possible thing is to suppose, the vacuum is just a specific form of matter.

Any other model is more complicated, indeed....

I hope you didn't assume I implied a need to have a physically differentiated matter unit. I was simply indicating what the aggregate effects of even using identical smaller units would appear as. You could even toss out the need for a global clock and storage by using asynchronous logic and then time would only exist in a relativistic sense. So virtually any computation, without a need for an external time reference could be created from 2 input NAND gates using asynchronous logic.

Now consider that Aether is seen as a lossless medium. Why? A random network doesn't need this requirement yet it still evolves into a lossless state.

I assume Aether has inertial characteristics and a regular dimensional structure. Why? A larger random network would generate diffusive characteristics with a spread of dimensional characteristics also.

Now, I understand the value of the Aether ideas and if you're satisfied all observed phenomenon fit into this model, that's great. I don't encourage using a random network to attempt to model any specific large scale phenomenon but if required physical characteristics to the universe can be extracted from considering what forms of computation and transmission of data are possible over time in a random network, then it would seem better to use this as a foundation in extracting a higher level approximation, like Aether.

Consider that with more restricted physical models you still need to extract macroscopic characteristics from this. Whereas a more pure information theoretic view operates by generating the laws of nature, which would apply on any scale or level of complexity.

For example, if a bit of information needed to travel through a network from point A to point B and satisfy the evolutionary requirement of doing it losslessly, then you can look at what forms of transmission and processing could do this and meet these requirements. A bit can be destroyed if it combines with itself, for example. A steady state isn't maintained if the bit reproduces each cycle ... this would be unstainable as it would be an exponential (or at least linear) explosion and overwrite other information. You can find cyclic (orbital) structures, equivalents to conversation of energy, requirements for wavelike transmissions with a complex phase component.

So it might be possible to take a single 2 input truth table of:

00 -> 1
01 -> 1
10 -> 1
11 -> 0

Then randomly connect a massive number of these components and extract what properties must be present for a node in the circuit to be able to observe data flowing through it over time.

Whatever properties exist in that would seem to likely to also be properties existant in the observable universe, or possibly a superset of these. If it's a superset then it would seem worth asking why the universe would be more restrictive or alternately see if we might be missing some of what the universe is capable of. Different models have different uses.

I don't know how easily higher order effects, like magnetic fields, gravity and mass can be extracted from a random network though, assuming these do naturally arise from a random network. A good distance metric (round trip communication delay?) would be needed to analyze what spacial motions would be apparent along with their corresponding forces. Cyclic structures of 1/d and 1/d^2 orbital periods seem likely to arise naturally though planetary orbitals don't follow either of these.

But, I posted this thread to point out some of the correlations between the evolution of data within a random network and observations of the universe like conservation of energy, lightspeed data with a complex phase component and variations in spacial density. Take whatever interests you and toss out the rest.