Quantum Information as Everything(vlatkovedral.substack.com)
vlatkovedral.substack.com
Quantum Information as Everything
https://vlatkovedral.substack.com/p/quantum-information-as-everything
3 comments
Thanks for the tear down. IDK anything about quantum (my knowledge there starts and ends with https://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec9.html), but amused enough to follow in the background. See whether it ends crazy-bad or crazy-good. :-)
And just today now I saw this https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.07352. What's your take on it?
Am old enough to have witnessed more than one wave of "impossible things" happen for real in my lifetime, so lets see. As long as the scientific method (evidence, publication, replication, testing, etc) is mostly followed am curious enough to check blog posts or interviews from time to time.
And just today now I saw this https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.07352. What's your take on it?
Am old enough to have witnessed more than one wave of "impossible things" happen for real in my lifetime, so lets see. As long as the scientific method (evidence, publication, replication, testing, etc) is mostly followed am curious enough to check blog posts or interviews from time to time.
Your first link is very insightful, and you should know not the way I have come to learn.
I have peeked beneath the skirt if you will and I can hazard to tell you something of quantum truths that no one will accept or agree with in our time.
Spin disposition is not the most information dense property of the quantum domain, nor is it even ideal. Qubits are a dead end. It is like saying the information density of a coin is heads or tails, while ignoring that absolutely any image may be etched into either side.
The quantum domain conceals quantum holography, which over a long enough timeline will reveal that analog multidimensional holographic memory can store anything, and I do mean anything.
Entanglement allows this domain to be increased to any scale, just like actual holography, in which the larger the hologram (more entangled wave fronts) the greater and sharper the resolution, and breaking this down will result in proportionally degraded resolution of the whole.
I contend that life does this in our very own minds, and that is the true nature of consciousness, the manipulation of holographic memory through mass entanglement.
Modern thinkers will balk that science has not proven any part of that and therefore cannot be considered true.
This “constructor theory” is like the cognitive constraints described in the first link. Engineers must constrain themselves to provable rules.
If you look at living systems, anything can be kludged together, and refined or optimized over time. From shape shifting cuttlefish, electric eels, various forms of flight, limb regeneration, bioluminescence, and so much more. All things that “holograms” can easily render and project through biofeedback upon physical reality, yet none of which can be understood or explained by such highly constrained rules based systems devisable by modern scientific thinkers.
I have peeked beneath the skirt if you will and I can hazard to tell you something of quantum truths that no one will accept or agree with in our time.
Spin disposition is not the most information dense property of the quantum domain, nor is it even ideal. Qubits are a dead end. It is like saying the information density of a coin is heads or tails, while ignoring that absolutely any image may be etched into either side.
The quantum domain conceals quantum holography, which over a long enough timeline will reveal that analog multidimensional holographic memory can store anything, and I do mean anything.
Entanglement allows this domain to be increased to any scale, just like actual holography, in which the larger the hologram (more entangled wave fronts) the greater and sharper the resolution, and breaking this down will result in proportionally degraded resolution of the whole.
I contend that life does this in our very own minds, and that is the true nature of consciousness, the manipulation of holographic memory through mass entanglement.
Modern thinkers will balk that science has not proven any part of that and therefore cannot be considered true.
This “constructor theory” is like the cognitive constraints described in the first link. Engineers must constrain themselves to provable rules.
If you look at living systems, anything can be kludged together, and refined or optimized over time. From shape shifting cuttlefish, electric eels, various forms of flight, limb regeneration, bioluminescence, and so much more. All things that “holograms” can easily render and project through biofeedback upon physical reality, yet none of which can be understood or explained by such highly constrained rules based systems devisable by modern scientific thinkers.
Potential, not information energy or matter is the fundamental aspect of our Universe.
Potential resolves to state (information) or matter or energy in the “moment of now.”
> states of physical systems, which are vectors in quantum physics
Physical systems are potential resolving into state during discrete measurements. And state (or information if you prefer) are vectors.
As anyone who knows anything may tell, information decays instantaneously and must be refreshed and re-propagated for any useful work to be done.
> Another axiom says that the dynamics of quantum systems is such that the relative information between two states (signifying the degree of similarity between them) can never change in time.
No such axiom exists in reality.
“States” are influenced by constructive and destructive interference. Even if this refers to entanglement, entanglement may itself become incoherent unless preserved.
> quantum physics preserves information.
It does not.
The quantum domain is potential resolving, represented as the amplitude of states, and is only preserved when insulated from interference, which includes decay.
> Third, and the final axiom, says that things that we can observe should be represented in quantum physics by “catalogues of catalogues of information” (which are, speaking somewhat loosely, multiple states considered together at the same time).
More rubbish. Does this mean “context”? States are fleeting renderings in a single moment of resolve. States are relative to something else, as are the nature of vectors. Without a frame of reference, meaningless.
Unsupported by these conjectures, the remaining devolves.