>>10827123I get the Gary hate. He's basically a Brad Pitt, Justin Timberlake type character that you just want to strangle because of how skewed they make the curve... But objectively that paper is pretty remarkable. It shows that Gary is not just bullshitting with his "unified theory automaton". It was a logical progression of his earlier "Fluid Universe Theory". Reading the paper, he himself did not even know if finding the correct automaton would be possible, only that he knew if it was, that it would have certain qualities. And he was right.
Like I said, I talked to him for a few hours, and he says he went through around 1,000 different iterations of the automaton before he figured it out. Most of them were not continuous. His first assumptions were that it would be more of a binary automaton. He said his biggest breakthroughs were in assuming a truly infinite automaton, not just in "depth and scope" but also cell states, and then it became obvious to him that if the Universe is a fluid then the automatons operator must be division (averages), since that would simulate the fluid being spread to its neighbors.
