> information (and not energy or matter) should be considered the most fundamental entity in our universe
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.
dabadabad00•15m ago
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.