starship-design: Re: Quantum Gravity

[TLG.van.der.Linden@tip.nl (Timothy van der Linden)]

Zenon,

>>>I wonder - does the software running on a computer
>>>have an access to the computer's master clock?
>>>E.g., can it make it tick faster?
>>
>>No, but *we* can make it faster.
> 
>But in the "cellular automaton model" of the universe,
>*we* are the software (or rather, even something more abstract:
>the patterns of cell states produced by software,
>consider "gliders" and "spaceships" in the game of "life"...).

I wasn't sure if I wanted to include this last time, I wish I had:
We are software that can manipulate the computer. It is like AI-"software"
in a computer that has hands and may be able to upgrade its own memory.

>>>Even if so, it will not change the situation
>>>within the world modelled by the cellular automaton -
>>>ticks may become shorter (in the whole computer's frame 
>>>of reference...), but the amount of action
>>>per tick will be still the same (hence c will not change).
>>
>>Indeed, this is the case with FTL theories where space is warped long before
>>a trip is made. Ie. The formation of the "wormhole" is still limited by c.
>>After the wormhole is established one may go through it and reach a
>>destination in a faster way.
> 
>This amounts to local change of the topology of space
>in the cellular model.
>It is doubtful if the "patterns of cell states"
>(i.e., *we*) can do that...

Well we would use some of natures tools that can interact with the topology
of space in a way we would like. For that matter, masses do interact with
the topology of space, all we may have to do is put them in the right
configuration.

>> >The only way to go faster within world's frame of reference
>> >would be to change the topology of cell connections:
>> >i.e., make more cells around any given one be "adjacent"
>> >to it (that is, accessible in a single tick).
>> >But this also will not make FTL possible - 
>> >it will only make the limit speed (c) higher.
>> 
>> True, but I suggested, that there may be something underneath space-time,
>> something that isn't discrete. 
>> 
>True, but then *we* would have no access to this level of the world.

I assumed the underlying structure of space time interacts with space-time.
(If it didn't there was little use of mentioning it.)
I also assumed that interaction was in two ways: spacetime is influenced by
the underlying structure, and the underlying structure is influenced by the
presence of spacetime.
So if spacetime changes, by our influence (Eg. placing matter in a special
configuration) than we can manipulate the underlying structure.

Timothy