starship-design: Re: Quantum Gravity

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

Hi Zenon,
 
>>I guess the article suggests that. However like Lee suggested, the cells 
>>may be streched, something that I haven't seen in cellular automation.
>
>I wonder what this stretching means for space quanta?
>Can we "stretch" the energy quantum?

Streching would mean changing the properties. Eg When (st)rings get
streched, they get more rigid and information has to travel faster than in a
sloppy loose string.

>>(Indeed this doesn't change the speed of c locally.)
>>I also wonder how one would incorporate effects like timedilation 
>>into cellular automation.
> 
>I have no idea (yet ;-).

I guess I've to stretch your imagination first :))

>>Speaking about time... How does this ring-universe see time? Is it
>>continuous or discrete too (like in cellular automation).
> 
>In the article time has been reported to be quantized too -
>only then the "cellular automaton" vision and the Ca speed limit 
>make sense.

Hmm, if Zeno had known this, he would never have had a paradox about the
frozen movement: If you want to move 1 meter, you have to move 0.5 first,
but then you have to move 0.25 first, ad infinitum. In his time he would
have concluded that there is a smallest step, so movement isn't frozen. (Of
course now we know about finiteness of infinite sums.)

>>Maybe most mistakes will selfcontain. If you get uncontrolable mass/energy
>>creation, you may create a blackhole which on its turn can loop ZPF around
>>and separate the anomaly from the rest of the ZPF.
>>Other errors may collapse to the lowest energy state (that of normal ZPF).
>>
>>Of course in local environments the effects are likely to be catastrophic.
> 
>Probably many will do, but would there bee a guarantee
>that none can lead to switching off the entire computer?

The last few tens of billion years no one seems to have succeeded...

>But all this is a speculation much more far-fetched
>than the wildest Kyle ideas, I am afraid... ;-)

OK, I get the hint ;) We'll close this subject soon.

Timothy