>>12202499Interesting.
The point about ‘Simulating without Summoning’ actually makes me think about things in the line of the Poincaré recurrence theorem; Boltzmann brains can ‘simulate’ your material processes without actually being you. This is obviously something that would instantiate—or at least, indicate—that there exists some type of non-material transcendental object that makes ‘you’ the person ‘you’ are.
The DCQE (Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser) shows how time is diffuse, a bunch of potentialities that are not actual, but become actual due to observation (simulation without summoning; you can simulate different world-lines without actualizing them, and observers could likely ‘tweak’ the world-lines to their favor when they are still only ‘potentials’.)
This essentially reminds me of something. Quantum entangled states always strive towards thermal equilibrium (
https://journals.aps.org/pre/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevE.79.061103), possessing the signs of decoherence and entropy. In some rudimentary way, I could imagine that decoherence is what turns the potential world-lines into actual ones, trying to get the most optimized and efficient causal paths. Something like Quantum query complexity, trying to optimize the amount of qubits needed for a specific computation. Something like that, anyway.
I’ve been thinking about Gravity and decoherence lately. Penrose put forth a hypothesis that says while things like particles could be in a wavefunction pretty easily, their gravitational field can’t be superpositioned as easily—hence the gravitational field, when interacting with something that is not in a superposition, would initiate decoherence in the system.
Just an after thought. Some gravitational geometries in GR allow for retro-causality. CTCs and such, and CTCs can produce entangled states (
https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.00538).
Too many things floating around, too many to think about. Interpretations of QM are strange.
