At the most fundamental levels of physics, DP implies a totally discrete process called Philosophy of composition pdf Mechanics. All the fundamental quantities that represent the state information of the system are ultimately discrete. In principle, an integer can always be an exact representation of every such quantity. For example, there is always an integral number of neutrons in a particular atom.

Therefore, configurations of bits, like the binary digits in a computer, can correspond exactly to the most microscopic representation of that kind of state information. Such models are straightforward in the case where we are keeping track only of the numbers and kinds of particles. The possibility that DP may apply to various fields of science motivates this study. I am a brazilian philosophy student and interested about your digital vision about nature.

Specifically, my current studies concerns about ontological reductionism and emergentism. In ontological terms, your Digital Philosophy tends more to reductionism or emergentism? Perhaps even feeling a little vindicated! I thought I was the only one! I am a polymath, autodidact, and citizen scientist.

I am quite eager to dig in further! It’s so obvious this is it from bit. Thank you for taking the time to read this correspondence. Digital Mechanics available on your website the most up-to-date version of that particular work?

Time slows down a in a gravitational field because the computational load is increased. Non-local quantum effects are the result of delayed evaluation in a computational system. Ken Mroczek a retired psychologist with an interest in physics. I recently came across your work and believe I have some similar thoughts about the composition of the universe. I see the universe as composed, at its basic level, of information.

A photon, for example, is created as a probability function that moves through the information matrix as a wave form. A photon or any other particle thus does not move through space, but is created anew out of the informational substructure of the universe as the probability wave moves. We then get the illusion of movement much as a line of lights in a sign appear to move as each one is illuminated and extinguished. So, a photon exists only as a virtual particle in the form of a probability wave until measuring it collapses the wave into a particle which takes its identity from the underlying informational space that it is traveling through. Whether this information exists in digital form is an interesting question.

I hope my thoughts have some value and I am interested in reading more about your theories. Fredkin i used your billiard ball analogy to write this essay. Susskind are correct that information is both conserved and destroyed. To elaborate, discrete particle information is destroyed over time due to entropy but the information of where, when and how the particle existed over time is essentially preserved in the standing quantum wave functions. For example, the double slit experiment with single release events. Now the interesting aspect of this comes from Dr. Reversible computing is a model of computing where the computational process to some extent is reversible, i.

In a computational model that uses transitions from one state of the abstract machine to another, a necessary condition for reversibility is that the relation of the mapping from states to their successors must be one-to-one. Reversible computing is generally considered an unconventional form of computing. Now the interesting part is what Dr. In fact, James Hartle of the University of California Santa Barbara, and I have proposed that space and imaginary time together, are indeed finite in extent, but without boundary. They would be like the surface of the Earth, but with two more dimensions.

The surface of the Earth is finite in extent, but it doesn’t have any boundaries or edges. I have been round the world, and I didn’t fall off. This says that in the imaginary time direction, space-time is finite in extent, but doesn’t have any boundary or edge. The predictions of the no boundary proposal seem to agree with observation. The no boundary hypothesis also predicts that the universe will eventually collapse again. However, the contracting phase, will not have the opposite arrow of time, to the expanding phase. So we will keep on getting older, and we won’t return to our youth.