* * *
START OF WEB PAGE COPY
* * *
The following terms and their respective definitions (and elaborating paragraphs) describe NATURE as being a static “block” which contains all decision-making trajectories and all informational exchanges.
SPACE_TIME_CONTINUUM: an allocation of pure nothingness which encompasses exactly one frame of reference observing the appearance and the disappearance of at least one phenomenon.
A space-time continuum is a mathematical model which represents a region of three-dimensional space traveling unidirectionally along a time axis (and the three dimensions of space are depicted as a horizontal axis, a vertical axis, and a depth axis which intersect with each other at exactly one origin point inside of a Cartesian grid such that each of those lines forms a 90-degree angle with the other two lines).
According to significant empirical data, the speed at which light (i.e. electromagnetic radiation) travels through a vacuum is exactly 299792458 meters per second irregardless of how fast the light source is moving in relation to some observing frame of reference.
If the light source is moving towards the observing frame of reference, then the light is “blue shifted” (which means that the light waves travel at 299792458 meters per second while the number of light waves per second which reach the observing frame of reference is a higher frequency than that frequency would be if the light source was stationary with respect to the observing frame of reference).
If the light source is moving away from the observing frame of reference, then the light is “red shifted” (which means that the light waves travel at 299792458 meters per second while the number of light waves which reach the observing frame of reference is a lower frequency than that frequency would be if the light source was stationary with respect to the observing frame of reference).
Allegedly, a photon (i.e. a particular kind of “energy packet” located at some finite point in space) is a particle of light which does not exist at a definite location until some observing frame of reference detects that photon. What that means is that, until a photon appears at a particular region of space within some observing frame of reference, that photon is assumed to be dispersed across any region of space with varying degrees of PROBABILITY depending on the particular values input into a particular probability function for predicting where and when photons may appear on a detector screen.
According to empirical data gathered from doing “sufficiently many” quantum entanglement experiments, it is possible for two particles which become quantum entangled after briefly colliding with each other to cause the other particle to instantaneously update in response to the other particle updating irregardless of the spatial distance between those two particles (which suggests that it may be possible for information which can be represented as a particular sequence of binary digits to be “transmitted” within a negligibly small interval of time from some source substrate to some target substrate irregardless of how far apart those two substrates are (Note that, if a piece of information is transmitted via one quantum entangled particle causing its corresponding entangled particle to update, the source and the target of that informational exchange appear to be virtually interchangeable because each one of those substrates apparently received the same update at the same time. In other words, there appears to be a simultaneously two-way exchange of information which seems to nullify the hypothesis that causality and the arrow of time only flow in one direction)).
UNIVERSE: exactly one space-time continuum which exactly one frame of reference appears to itself to be inhabiting (and which that frame of reference is rendering).
If more than one universe exists, then a frame of reference which renders exactly one universe while not rendering any other universes is considered to be partial rather than omniscient.
If more than one universe exists, then a frame of reference which simultaneously renders each one of those universes is considered to be omniscient rather than partial.
If an information processing agent (which is the source of exactly one frame of reference per timeless instant along exactly one corresponding space-time continuum) named K perceives its environment as containing more than one information processing agent, then every information processing agent which K perceives as existing in the same universe as K while not being the same information processing agent as K is merely a phenomenon (according to K) occurring inside of K’s frame of reference regardless of whether or not any of those other information processing agents inhabits (and renders) its own solipsistic universe. If any one of those information processing agents which K observes as being external to K projects its own uniquely corresponding frame of reference, then the universe which K inhabits is a compound universe (i.e. a universe which contains multiple universes inside of it and vice versa (and such that each one of the constituent universes inside of that compound universe exchanges information with every other constituent universe inside of that compound universe)).
A note about mortality: a person (i.e. discrete information processing agent) who appears to have died after living inside of a compound universe (i.e. a universe which is inhabited by multiple information processing agents simultaneously and such that those information processing agents can interact with each other within that shared simulation), may either just cease to have a frame of reference after dying or else that person’s continuity of consciousness may switch to rendering another universe after dying such that the person is effectively reincarnated into the next life time. If reincarnation is inevitable for a particular information processing agent (i.e. person), that reincarnated person may relive at least one of its past lives in exactly the same manner as that person did before or else that person may experience a life time whose constituent sequence of phenomena is not identical to any other sequence of phenomena which that person experienced in a past life time. (Additionally, a person may not wake up in the same universe as that person went to sleep in even while appearing to have memories of having lived in exactly one universe for some seemingly definite interval of time. Such “false memories” may have been engineered by some kind of mind control governing matrix in order to give that person a sense of having invested resources towards prolonging that person’s survival across a sufficiently long time interval within that matrix and according to the rules of that governing matrix).
MULTIVERSE: the set which contains all universes.
It may be inferred that there is exactly one immutable multiverse (and that multiverse may contain zero universes, some natural number of universes, or else indefinitely many universes).
If the words displayed on this web page are currently being observed by any frame of reference, then at least one universe exists (and the words displayed on this web page are composed matter and energy rather than being composed exclusively of pure nothingness).
MANY_WORLDS_HYPOTHESIS: the assumption that multiple universes exist simultaneously and immutably and that one universe (i.e. A) splits into multiple phenomenally distinct universes whenever a decision is made inside of A.
A decision is a process which enables change to occur. From the context of a computer program, a decision is made when some information processing agent receives some finite piece of informational input and uses that informational input to determine which finite piece of informational output from a list of multiple informational outputs to select as the one and only output. For example, if a computer program receives an input named X and that input represents the integer 2, then, if the decision making algorithm is a function which takes any integer X as an input and which yields exactly one logically corresponding output integer named Y (and that function is Y := f(X) = X + 1), then the outcome to that decision is 3 (and not any other outcome such as 4 or 5).
The following hypothetical scenario illustrates what the many worlds hypothesis models: Suppose some information processing agent is traveling through a maze and reaches a point in the maze where one path branches into two distinct paths. Suppose then that the information processing agent uses an algorithmic process of elimination to decide which one of those two paths is most useful to that information processing agent’s goals to traverse. If the information processing agent decides to traverse the left path instead of the right path, then, according to the many world’s hypothesis, in some parallel universe, a parallel version of that information processing agent has chosen to traverse the right path instead of the left path.
According to some interpretations of the many worlds hypothesis, the total number of parallel universes which stem from a common origin universe after an information processing agent inhabiting (or, more accurately, projecting) that origin universe makes a decision is the number of options which that information processing agent apparently could have selected exactly one of during that decision-making process.
A note about causality: a hypothesis about why some phenomena appear at a specific point inside of a space-time continuum to the exclusion of all other phenomena is that the information processing agent rendering that space-time continuum was preloaded with preferences and expectations which caused some phenomena to be more likely to occur in that information processing agent’s future than other kinds of phenomena. In other words, such a phenomenal filtering mechanism could be described as “Law of Attraction” (i.e. the hypothetical metaphysical heuristic which mandates that a person is more likely to experience what that person already has an interest in than what that person does not already have an interest in). Within the context of a compound universe (i.e. a simulation which is cocreated and cohabitated by multiple information processing agents), if the “Law of Attraction” is true, then the current state of that universe would be the result of each one of those constituent information processing agents wanting and expecting specific types of universe conditions (and some of those information processing agents might have more influence over what manifests in that universe than do some of those other information processing agents (and an information processing agent’s influence scope may be directly proportional to that information processing agent’s intelligence level)).
It is possible that specific phenomena arise in the frame of reference of a particular information processing agent due to factors which that information processing agent has no control over. AGENCY (i.e. free will; the ability to make decisions) could be an illusion which is only experienced at certain levels of intelligence. Without the sense that an information processing agent has free will, that information processing agent is indistinguishable to itself from its environment.
This web page was last updated on 19_AUGUST_2022. The content displayed on this web page is licensed as PUBLIC_DOMAIN intellectual property.
* * *
END OF WEB PAGE COPY
* * *
This web page was last updated on 10_SEPTEMBER_2022. The content displayed on this web page is licensed as PUBLIC_DOMAIN intellectual property.