Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction 1.THE Code-Theoretic Axiom
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Philosophy
Metaphysics

The Code Theoretic Axiom: The Third Ontology (Expanded Version)

Profile image of Klee IrwinKlee Irwin

2019, Reports in Advances of Physical Sciences

https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424942419500026
visibility

…

description

25 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

A logical physical ontology is code theory, wherein reality is neither deterministic nor random. In light of Conway and Kochens' free will theorem and strong free will theorem, we discuss the plausibility of a third axiomatic option-geometric language; the code theoretic axiom. We suggest free will choices at the syntactically free steps of a geometric language of space-time form the code theoretic substrate upon which particle and gravitational physics emerge.

Related papers

Stephen Hawking ’ s Ontology of Physical Theories 1
Wojciech Grygiel

2011

At the present stage of the unification of physics, there is a thriving and vivid philosophical debate over the meaning of such basic notions as time, space, motion and causality1. It is believed that the future theory of quantum gravity will not only demand a novel, sophisticated mathematical apparatus but will bring forth a fundamental change (generalization) in the understanding of the notions mentioned. Current literature offers a great variety of sources which discuss the conceptual and theoretical intricacies involved in both the physical2 and philosophical3 aspects of quantum gravity. The authors postulate various spacetime transformation

View PDFchevron_right
Some Aspects of the Relationship between Mathematical Logic and Physics. I
Paul Benioff

Journal of Mathematical Physics, 1970

Quantum mechanics has several deficiencies as a complete theoretical description of the measurement process. Among them is the fact that the quantum mechanical description of correlations between the single measurements of a sequence is quite problematic. A single measurement is defined to be a preparation followed by an observation. In particular, one feels that an infinite sequence of such single measurements which corresponds to the measurement of a question O on a state &eegr; where &eegr; does not lie entirely in an eigenspace of O should generate a random output sequence. However, quantum mechanics seems to say nothing about this. In this paper, physical theories are defined in such a manner that correlations between single measurements are explicitly included. In particular, a physical theory is considered to be a mapping U, with domain in the set [QsΤ] of infinite instruction strings for carrying out infinite sequences of single measurements and range in the set of probability measures defined on A, the usual σ algebra of subsets of Ω. Ω is the set of all infinite sequences of natural numbers. A fundamental property which any valid physical theory must satisfy is that it agrees with experiment. It is proposed and discussed here that much of the intuitive meaning of agreement between a theory U and experiment with respect to H is given by the statement ∀QsΤ [U(QsΤ) defined⇒E(H,U(QsΤ),&psgr;QsΤ)], where U(QsΤ) is the probability measure U associates with the infinite instruction string QsΤ and &psgr;QsΤ is the outcome sequence obtained by carrying out QsΤ. E(H, U(QsΤ),&psgr;QsΤ) is the statement that all formulas in H with one free sequence variable which are true on Ω almost everywhere with respect to U(QsΤ) are true for &psgr;QsΤ. H is a subclass of the class of all formulas in a formal language L. A theorem is proved which states that, if U(QsΤ) corresponds to a nontrivial product probability measure and U H-agrees with experiment, then the outcome sequence &psgr;QsΤ is H-random. H-randomness is defined here in terms of the statement E(H, P, &phgr;). Another property of a valid physical theory, which is defined here, is that, for some QsΤ, U(QsΤ) must be determinable on much of AH from &psgr;QsΤ. Sufficient conditions for this property to hold are given. AH is the class of all H definable subsets of Ω. Some properties of the statement E(H, P, &phgr;) are given. Among other things, it is proved that, if E(H, P, &phgr;) holds and P is a nontrivial probability measure on A, then &phgr; is not definable in H.

View PDFchevron_right
Toward an Axiomatic Pregeometry of Space-Time
Gustavo E Romero

We present a deductive theory of space-time which is realistic, objective, and relational. It is realistic because it assumes the existence of physical things endowed with concrete properties. It is objective because it can be formulated without any reference to knowing subjects or sensorial fields. Finally, it is relational because it assumes that space-time is not a thing, but a complex of relations among things. In this way, the original program of Leibniz is consummated, in the sense that space is ultimately an order of coexistents, and time is an order of successives. In this context, we show that the metric and topological properties of Minkowskian space-time are reduced to relational properties of concrete things. We also sketch how our theory can be extended to encompass a Riemannian space-time.

View PDFchevron_right
The Free Will Theorem
simon kochen

Foundations of Physics, 2006

On the basis of three physical axioms, we prove that if the choice of a particular type of spin 1 experiment is not a function of the information accessible to the experimenters, then its outcome is equally not a function of the information accessible to the particles. We show that this result is robust, and deduce that neither hidden variable theories nor mechanisms of the GRW type for wave function collapse can be made relativistic. We also establish the consistency of our axioms and discuss the philosophical implications. † Superscript numbers refer to the corresponding Endnotes. ‡ For simplicity, we have spoken of measuring x, y, z in that order, but nothing in the proof is affected if they are measured simultaneously, as in the "spin-Hamiltonian" experiment of Endnote 1. * Nevertheless, relativistic versions of GRW have been claimed; eg. Tumulka[T]. * * Or perhaps the possible free decison ("prompton") at an earlier time t 0 that prompted this response-see the proof of the theorem.

View PDFchevron_right
Information Codes and Space-Time
Michael J Bull

This Paper 9 explores the form of 'information' as it relates to the cosmos based upon prior work with space-time (S-T) units of measure which have been developed in the previous 8 Papers by this author. (The experimental and mathematical bases for S-T units are contained in Paper 1, 'Mass, Gravity and Unity'.) The Quantum of Electric Charge as Capacitance as it relates to the Quantum of Length, the Fine Structure Constant and the influence of Gravity are explored to ascertain the possible effect on the geometry and nature of space-time as well as the behaviour of Time itself.

View PDFchevron_right
Philosophy Beyond Spacetime: Introduction
Christian Wuthrich

2021

The present volume collects essays on the philosophical foundations of quantum theories of gravity, such as loop quantum gravity and string theory. Central for philosophical concerns is quantum gravity's suggestion that space and time, or spacetime, may not exist fundamentally, but instead be a derivative entity emerging from non-spatiotemporal degrees of freedom. In the spirit of naturalised metaphysics, contributions to this volume consider the philosophical implications of this suggestion. In turn, philosophical methods and insights are brought to bear on the foundations of quantum gravity itself. For instance, the idea of functionalism, borrowed from the philosophy of mind and discussed by several essays, exemplifies this mutual interaction the collection seeks to foster.

View PDFchevron_right
Exact Philosophy of Spacetime
Héctor Vucetich

International Journal of Modern Physics D, 2011

Starting from scientific ontology, we expose a materialistic relational theory of space-time, that carries out the program initiated by Leibniz, and provides a protophysical basis consistent with any rigorous formulation of General Relativity. Space-time is constructed from general concepts which are common to any consistent scientific theory and they are interpreted as emergent properties of the greatest assembly of things, namely, the world. * Facultad de Ciencias Astronómicas y Geofísicas -Universidad Nacional de La Plata, ARGENTINA.

View PDFchevron_right
Space-time-hap: a coordinate system for the multiverse and its application to show that free choice is observer-dependent
Ghislain Fourny

This note proposes a paradigm and coordinate system that extends flat, four-dimensional Minkowski spacetime to a broader framework that identifies an event not only in space and in time, but also in terms of possible world, with a third category of coordinates called "hap" modelling contingency and counterfactuals. Semantically, hap is based on a Bohmian-like configuration space, in which initial conditions at a specific moment in time uniquely identify a trajectory. This framework can be used to support reasonings that rigorously distinguish between causal dependencies (through time), statistical dependencies (through space) and counterfactual dependencies (through hap). As an example, we use this framework to show that the assumption of free choice is not absolute, but rather depends on the chosen frame of reference: while Alice may see a choice made freely, which is formally a unilateral, single-coordinate translation in hap, Bob sitting in another reference frame might see this same choice not made freely and observe instead a translation in hap jointly across multiple coordinates, which indicates a counterfactual dependency. The framework is agnostic regarding which flavour of the De-Broglie-Bohm theory is considered, as it only makes general assumptions on the set of trajectories that are commonly accepted in the Bohmian mechanics community. It is also general enough to support reasoning on theories for which the separation between possible worlds might also depend on the frame of reference, i.e., two observers might disagree on whether two spacetimehap events happen in the same world or not.

View PDFchevron_right
Steps towards an axiomatic pregeometry of space-time
Gustavo E Romero

We present a deductive theory of space-time which is realistic, objective, and relational. It is realistic because it assumes the existence of physical things endowed with concrete properties. It is objective because it can be formulated without any reference to cognoscent subjects or sensorial fields. Finally, it is relational because it assumes that space-time is not a thing but a complex of relations among things. In this way, the original program of Leibniz is consummated, in the sense that space is ultimately an order of coexistents, and time is an order of succesives. In this context, we show that the metric and topological properties of Minkowskian space-time are reduced to relational properties of concrete things. We also sketch how our theory can be extended to encompass a Riemmanian space-time.

View PDFchevron_right
Meaning, Truth, and Physics
László E. Szabó

Making it Formally Explicit, 2017

A physical theory is a partially interpreted axiomatic formal system (L, S), where L is a formal language with some logical, mathematical and physical axioms, and with some derivation rules, and the semantics S is a relationship between the formulas of L and some states of affairs in the physical world. In our ordinary discourse, the formal system L is regarded as an abstract object or structure, the semantics S as something which involves the mental/conceptual realm. This view is of course incompatible with physicalism. How can physical theory be accommodated in a purely physical ontology? The aim of this paper is to outline an account for meaning and truth of physical theory, within the philosophical framework spanned by three doctrines: physicalism, empiricism, and the formalist philosophy of mathematics.

View PDFchevron_right

References (67)

  1. J. Conway and S. Kochen, The free will theorem, Found. Phys. 36(10) (2006) 1441-1473.
  2. J. H. Conway and S. Kochen, The strong free will theorem, Not. Am. Math. Soc. 56(2) (2009) 226-232.
  3. M. H. Levinson, The clockwork universe: Isaac Newton, the Royal Society, and the birth of the modern world, ETC., Rev. Gen. Semant. 69(4) (2012) 479-480.
  4. P.-S. Laplace, Pierre-Simon Laplace Philosophical Essay on Probabilities: Translated from the Fifth French Edition of 1825 With Notes by the Translator, Vol. 13 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2012).
  5. N. Zettili, Quantum Mechanics: Concepts and Applications (John Wiley & Sons, 2009).
  6. D. Bourget and D. J. Chalmers, What do philosophers believe?, Philos. Stud. 170(3) (2014) 465-500.
  7. D. J. Gri±ths, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics (Pearson Education India, 2005).
  8. M. McKenna and D. J. Coates, Compatibilism (2004), http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ compatibilism.
  9. J. A. Wheeler, \Information, physics, quantum: The search for links," in Proc. III Int. Symp. Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (1989), pp. 354-358.
  10. S. Wolfram, A New Kind of Science, Vol. 5 (Wolfram media, Champaign, 2002).
  11. G. 't Hooft, Can quantum mechanics be reconciled with cellular automata?, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 42(2) (2003) 349-354.
  12. E. Fredkin, Digital mechanics: an informational process based on reversible universal cellular automata, in Cellular Automata: Theory and Experiment, ed. H. Gutowitz (The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1991), pp. 254-270.
  13. J. Schmidhuber, A computer scientist's view of life, the universe, and everything, in Foundations of Computer Science (Springer, 1997), pp. 201-208.
  14. S. Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science 273(5278) (1996) 1073-1078.
  15. D. Deutsch, The Fabric of Reality (Penguin Books UK, 1998).
  16. P. A. Zizzi, Emergent consciousness: From the early universe to our mind, arXiv: gr-qc/ 0007006.
  17. C. F. von Weizsäcker, Die geschichte der Natur: Zw€ olf Vorle Sungen, (Hirzel, Stuttgart, 1948).
  18. M. Tegmark, Is \the theory of everything"merely the ultimate ensemble theory?, Ann. Phys. 270(1) (1998) 1-51.
  19. C. Doran, M. Faux, S. Gates, Jr., T. Hubsch, K. Iga and G. Landweber, Relating doubly- even error-correcting codes, graphs, and irreducible representations of n-extended supersymmetry, arXiv:0806.0051 [hep-th].
  20. H. P. Nilles, Supersymmetry, supergravity and particle physics, Phys. Rep. 110(1-2) (1984) 1-162.
  21. C. Rovelli, Relative information at the foundation of physics, in It From Bit or Bit From It?, (Springer, 2015), pp. 79-86.
  22. N. Bostrom, Are we living in a computer simulation?, Philos. Q. 53(211) (2003) 243-255.
  23. R. Aschheim, Hacking reality code, in Proc. FQXI Essay Contest 2011: Is Reality Digital or Analog? (2011).
  24. J. Y. Lettvin, H. R. Maturana, W. S. McCulloch and W. H. Pitts, What the frog's eye tells the frog's brain, Proc. IRE 47(11) (1959) 1940-1951.
  25. R. Pizzi, A. Fantasia, F. Gelain, D. Rossetti and A. Vescovi, Nonlocal correlations be- tween separated neural networks, in Defense and Security (International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2004), pp. 107-117.
  26. W. Seager, Theories of Consciousness: An Introduction and Assessment (Routledge, 2016).
  27. N. Bostrom, The simulation argument: Some explanations, Analysis 69(3), (2009) 458-461.
  28. B. Ledewitz, Church, State, and the Crisis in American Secularism (Indiana University Press, 2011).
  29. F. Wilczek and B. Devine, Fantastic Realities: 49 Mind Journeys and a Trip to Stockholm (World Scienti¯c, 2006).
  30. C. C. Linder, Particle Physics and In°ationary Cosmology (CRC Press, 1990).
  31. R. Penrose, The rôle of aesthetics in pure and applied mathematical research, Inst. Math. Appl. Bull. 10(7-8) (1974) 266-271.
  32. K. Irwin, Toward the uni¯cation of physics and number theory, arXiv:1702.XXXX.
  33. K. Irwin, A new approach to the hard problem of consciousness: A quasicrystalline lan- guage of \primitive units of consciousnes" in quantized spacetime (part i), J. Conscious. Explor. Res. 5(5) (2014) 483-497.
  34. R. Oerter, The Theory of Almost Everything: The Standard Model, the Unsung Triumph of Modern Physics (Penguin, 2006).
  35. F. Gursey, P. Ramond and P. Sikivie, A universal gauge theory model based on e6, Phys. Lett. B 60(2) (1976) 177-180.
  36. M. Jaric, Introduction to Quasicrystals (Elsevier, 2012).
  37. K. Becker, M. Becker and J. H. Schwarz, String Theory and M-Theory: A Modern Introduction (Cambridge University Press, 2006).
  38. S. Weinberg, Dream of a Final Theory: The Scientist's Search for the Ultimate Laws of Nature (Vintage Books, 1992).
  39. Y. Kajiyama, M. Raidal and A. Strumia, Golden ratio prediction for solar neutrino mixing, Phys. Rev. D 76(11) (2007) 117301.
  40. S. F. King and C. Luhn, Neutrino mass and mixing with discrete symmetry, Rep. Prog. Phys. 76(5) (2013) 056201.
  41. S. King, Tri-bimaximal-Cabibbo mixing, Phys. Lett. B 718(1) (2012) 136-142.
  42. H. Minakata and A. Y. Smirnov, Neutrino mixing and quark-lepton complementarity, Phys. Rev. D 70(7) (2004) 073009.
  43. F. Fang, K. Irwin, J. Kovacs and G. Sadler, Cabinet of curiosities: The interesting geometry of the angle ¼ arccosðð3 À 1Þ=4Þ, arXiv:1304.1771 [math.MG].
  44. M. Esmaeili and M. Esmaeili, A Fibonacci-polynomial based coding method with error detection and correction, Comput. Math. Appl. 60(10) (2010) 2738-2752.
  45. J. Sarfatti, Retrocausality and signal nonlocality in consciousness and cosmology, J. Cosmol. 14 (2011).
  46. D. I. Radin, Electrodermal presentiments of future emotions, J. Sci. Explor. 18(2) (2004) 253-273.
  47. L. Susskind, Addendum to computational complexity and black hole horizons, Fortschr. Phys. 64(1) (2016) 44-48.
  48. J. Maldacena, Black holes and wormholes and the secrets of quantum spacetime, Sci. Am. 315(5) (2016) 26-31.
  49. S. Brierley, A. Kosowski, M. Markiewicz and Paterek, Nonclassicality of temporal cor- relations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115(12) (2015) 120404.
  50. K. L. Tsakmakidis, T. W. Pickering, J. M. Hamm, A. F. Page and O. Hess, Completely stopped and dispersionless light in plasmonic waveguides, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112(16) (2014) 167401.
  51. F. Fang, J. Kovacs, G. Sadler and K. Irwin, An icosahedral quasicrystal as a packing of regular tetrahedra, Acta Phys. Pol. A 126 (2014) 458-460.
  52. H. Atmanspacher, Quantum approaches to consciousness, (2004), http://plato.stanford. edu/entries/qt-consciousness/.
  53. J. Goldstone, A. Salam and S. Weinberg, Broken symmetries, Phys. Rev. 127(3) (1962) 965.
  54. L. M. Ricciardi and H. Umezawa, Brain and physics of many-body problems, Kybernetik 4(2) (1967) 44-48.
  55. M. Jibu and K. Yasue, Quantum Brain Dynamics and Consciousness: An Introduction, Vol. 3 (John Benjamins, 1995).
  56. J. McFadden, The conscious electromagnetic information (cemi) ¯eld theory: The hard problem made easy?, J. Conscious. Stud. 9(8) (2002) 45-60.
  57. A. S. Fraenkel and S. T. Kleinb, Robust universal complete codes for transmission and compression, Discrete Appl. Math. 64(1) (1996) 31-55.
  58. J. E. Kim and M.-S. Seo, Quark and lepton mixing angles with a dodeca-symmetry, J. High Energy Phys. 2011(2) (2011) 1-29.
  59. G. Sadler, F. Fang, J. Kovacs and K. Irwin, Periodic modi¯cation of the Boerdijk-Coxeter helix (tetrahelix), arXiv:1302.1174 [math.MG].
  60. S. Hamero® and R. Penrose, Consciousness in the universe: A review of the `Orch Or' theory, Phys. Life Rev. 11(1) (2014) 39-78.
  61. G. Tononi, Integrated information theory of consciousness: An updated account, Arch. Ital. Biol. 150(2-3) (2012) 56-90.
  62. C. Koch, Consciousness: Confessions of a Romantic Reductionist (The MIT Press, 2012).
  63. T. Nagel, Mortal Questions (Cambridge University Press, 2012).
  64. F. I. Dretske, Naturalizing the Mind (The Mit Press, 1997).
  65. A. Peruzzo, P. Shadbolt, N. Brunner, S. Popescu and J. L. O'Brien, A quantum delayed- choice experiment, Science 338(6107) (2012) 634-637.
  66. I. Aleksander and H. Morton, An Introduction to Neural Computing, Vol. 240 (Chapman and Hall, London, 1990).
  67. K. Irwin, Quasicrystalline cold fusion; why need it and how it works, arXiv:1702.XXXX.

Related papers

Coding the Universe
Constantinos Challoumis

This paper analyzes the case that the Universe is a result of the hypothesis of the existence of the universe. The Universe is a result of an internal infinity and external infinity, then for an external observer of the Universe we never existed, but for an internal observer, we exist for infinity time. This is a result of the existence-possibility scrutinized in the paper “Why the cosmos exist?”. The result is that an asymmetry caused by time and not space created a space-time Universe. Then, the mathematical asymmetry created the other attributes of the Universe, like physical phenomena which are projections of mathematics. The background of mathematics in combination with the result of physics is translated as a code. Math in a combination of series that come from physical attributes creates code in the universe. Then if someone affects the code it is plausible to affect the universe. This code is between the first layer of maths and the third layer of physics. The code is in the second layer. The strongest paradigm that code exists is the possibility that exists in biology. It is a result of random statistics, and not a result with a cause, then not a physical phenomenon.

View PDFchevron_right
From Physicality to Mathematicality, to Informaticality, to Ontology, and Consciousness
Janko Kokošar

2015

Extraordinary mathematicality of physics is also shown by dimensionlessness of Planck spacetime and mass. At the same time the Planck granularity of spacetime also shows that physics can be simulated by a binary computer. So physics is informational. But mathematics is not everything in physics, consciousness cannot be solely explained by mathematics, and free will also not. The author claims also that consciousness without free will does not exist. Quantum mechanics (QM) is not complete, because foundational principle is not yet known, because consciousness and Quantum gravity (QG) are not yet explained, and because agreement between measurement and calculation is not everything. QG as dimensionless theory is the foundation of QM and not oppositely. The free will and quantum randomness are similar unexplained phenomena. Even philosophy is important in physics, because what mathematics cannot describe in physics is ontology. And, intuition affects what is mainstream physics. Simplic...

View PDFchevron_right
A STRUCTURAL LANGUAGE FOR THE FOUNDATIONS OF PHYSICS
Francis Heylighen

International Journal of General Systems, 1990

It is argued that the difficulties to establish foundations for a unified physical theory are due to the predicative structure of the traditional scientific languages, whose descriptions reduce all phenomena to static, independent elements. A new language is therefore proposed, whose descriptions are fundamentally dynamic and holistic. It is based on the concept of "arrow": a relational entity which is completely determined in a bootstrapping way by the other arrows it is connected with, so that it has no independent meaning. An arrow represents an elementary process, and connected assemblies of arrows represent physical structures. It is shown how the fundamentals of space-time geometry can be expressed in this extremely simple, "structural" language. It is argued that this description could be extended to the observation process, and thus to the fundamentals of quantum mechanics, by introducing cognitive structures.

View PDFchevron_right
A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON SPACETIME ONTOLOGY
Andrea Castelli

The intention of this paper is that of proposing a method of approaching the problem of spacetime ontology that is, at least at the beginning, independent from the previous ones concerning the "Hole Argument": to propose an approach based on the possibility of describing the gravitational field at three distinct levels. Observing the theory of General Relativity from this perspective, we can find a "triple modality" for describing the gravitational field that is essentially based on a geometric interpretation of the spacetime structure. The gravitational field is now no longer "visible" in terms of its autonomous degrees of freedom, but it is analyzable through three levels: a first one, called the potential level, a second one, known as the connections level and, finally, a third level, that of the Riemann tensor, which is peculiar to General Relativity only. Focusing from the beginning on what is called the "third level" seems to present immediately a first advantage: to lead directly to a description of spacetime properties in terms of gauge-invariant quantites, which allows to "short circuit" the long path that, in the treatises analyzed, leads to identify the "ontic part" of the metric field. It is then shown how to this last level it is possible to establish a "primitive level of objectivity" of spacetime in terms of the effects that matter exercises in extended domains of spacetime geometrical structure; these effects are described by invariants of the Riemann tensor, in particular of its irreducible part: the Weyl tensor.

View PDFchevron_right
The Ontology Of Spacetime
Dennis Dieks

2006

The sixteen papers collected in this volume are expanded and revised versions of talks delivered at the Second International Conference on the Ontology of Spacetime, organized by the International Society for the Advanced Study of Spacetime (John Earman, President) at Concordia University (Montreal) from 9 to 11 June 2006. Most chapters are devoted to subjects directly relating to the ontology of spacetime. This book starts with four papers that discuss the ontological status of spacetime and the processes occurring in it from a point of view that is first of all conceptual and philosophical. The focus then slightly shifts in the five papers that follow, to considerations more directly involving technical considerations from relativity theory. After this, Time, Becoming and Change take centre stage in the next five papers. This book ends with two excursions into relatively uncharted territory: a consideration of the status of Kaluza-Klein theory, and an investigation of possible rel...

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Physics
  • Theoretical Physics
  • Quantum Physics
  • Ontology
  • Fundamental Physics

    • Cited by

    The Self-Simulation Hypothesis Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
    David Chester

    Entropy, 2020

    We modify the simulation hypothesis to a self-simulation hypothesis, where the physical universe, as a strange loop, is a mental self-simulation that might exist as one of a broad class of possible code theoretic quantum gravity models of reality obeying the principle of efficient language axiom. This leads to ontological interpretations about quantum mechanics. We also discuss some implications of the self-simulation hypothesis such as an informational arrow of time.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Geometric State Sum Models from Quasicrystals
    Klee Irwin

    Foundations, 2021

    In light of the self-simulation hypothesis, a simple form of implementation of the principle of efficient language is discussed in a self-referential geometric quasicrystalline state sum model in three dimensions. Emergence is discussed in the context of geometric state sum models.

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved