At the risk of exposing an ANPA colleague to noise from the peanut gallery, here are preprints of two papers that will appear in the 2026 ANPA conference festschrift for Louis Kauffman <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Kauffman> on the occasion of his 80th birthday:
Hyperbits represent the end of reductionism as the primordial infostructure requirements for simulation hypothesis of the universe <https://www.matzkefamily.net/doug/papers/ANPA_2026_Papers/ANPA_2026_Proceedings_Matzke_Paper1_preprint.pdf> Introducing Existons/Anti-Existons (conscious hyperbits) as discrete unit of physicality and discrete unit of consciousness <https://www.matzkefamily.net/doug/papers/ANPA_2026_Papers/ANPA_2026_Proceedings_Matzke_Paper2_preprint.pdf> Also relevant is a video presentation "The <https://youtu.be/fsLh-NYhOoU>most beautiful formula not enough people understand <https://youtu.be/fsLh-NYhOoU>." On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 12:13 PM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> wrote: > Why does space have 3 dimensions? 3 is the minimum number of dimensions in > which a graph (such as a communication network) can be fully connected > without intersecting edges. It is the only number of dimensions in which > knots are possible. A 1975 paper by Li and Yorke showed that any dynamic > system with a cycle of length 3 must have all possible cycle lengths and > also be chaotic. > > So perhaps you need 3 dimensions for complex behavior. But 1 dimensional > cellular automata and Turing machines can also exhibit complex behavior. > Just not as efficiently. If the universe is a simulation, or part of a > multiverse, then the number of dimensions we observe tells us nothing about > the number of dimensions in the universe doing the simulation. > > -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 2:01 AM Quan Tesla <[email protected]> wrote: > >> James, your intuition is correct abd also not. For starters, the SM >> couldn't yet mathematically explain the dimensionality of time. That's an >> arbitrary hole that needs plugging, especially with real quantum memory and >> addressing concepts, such as the quantum eraser and retrocausility. >> >> These are critical data/information management horizons to cross for >> activating dimensionless potential. >> >> Within the theoretical specification of the proposed entangled E8xE8, >> lattice (as 248D), data storage limitations would only be arbitrarily >> imposed via the constraints of 4D architectures. This is synonymous to a >> supersonic jet that pilots choose to drive on the limiting road structure >> from points A to B. >> >> However, based on reliable theory, the value of 3 is also an auto-elected >> limit by nature. >> >> We should temper our intuiton with the certainty that both the SM and QM >> model are incomplete. >> >> There's much work still to be done. >> >> On Thu, 26 Mar 2026, 01:45 James Bowery, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> There is quite a lot of work in "information physics" that indicates 3 >>> dimensions aren't arbitrary. One aphorism I've run across is for a >>> sufficiently large space, the maximum global dimensionality of a discrete >>> and finite space with a homogeneous distance function is three. >>> >>> When I say "I suspect" I'm not making much of a claim let alone a >>> conjecture that could be "even wrong". It's more about my intuition from >>> working with some of the founders of the Alternative Natural Philosophy >>> Association that the dimensionless constants of nature arise from an >>> inevitable combinatorial explosion given certain very simple and plausible >>> assumptions about distinguishability that were originally derived within >>> the Cambridge Language Research Unit subsequent to WW II. >>> >>> I'll just say that the number "3" is not arbitrary from that standpoint, >>> nor is its connection to language. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 3:29 PM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2026, 1:54 PM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:28 PM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> There's something I'm not getting. Why does the brain need 10^15 >>>>>> synapses to store 10^9 bits? Maybe it's a speed optimization, like how >>>>>> a server farm has a million copies of Linux, or your body has 10^13 >>>>>> copies of your DNA. Or is it something else? Is it the reason we >>>>>> didn't solve AI in 2000? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I suspect it has to do with Bekenstein bound placing data points in >>>>> such a high dimensional space that they are all on a surface where they >>>>> can >>>>> be treated as orthogonal. >>>>> >>>> >>>> How is that so? I realize that random bit vectors all have an average >>>> Hamming distance of n/2, which puts them all on a hypersphere surface >>>> surrounding any one of them. But word vectors are not like that. Some are >>>> more correlated than others. They would have to be, because otherwise text >>>> would not be predictable and we wouldn't have AI. >>>> >>>> I realize that other parts of the brain are highly repetitive, like >>>> thousands of copies of line and edge detectors in the visual cortex, or >>>> thousands of motor neurons controlling the same muscle. Language evolved >>>> relatively recently and there is not a lot of evolutionary pressure to >>>> optimize it. It uses maybe 10% of our brain, or 2% of resting metabolism. >>>> >>>> The Bekenstein bound is different. Space only has 3 dimensions. It >>>> might explain the size of the proton* but I don't see how it explains >>>> language. We already have LLMs that are not far off the 0.3 bits per >>>> parameter stored in a Hopfield net. >>>> >>>> * The Bekenstein bound of the Hubble radius is A/ln(16) of its surface >>>> area in Planck units, or 2.95 x 10^122 bits. This is about the number of >>>> protons or neutrons that would fit inside, which is a strange coincidence >>>> given that the number depends only on h, G, c, and the age of the universe. >>>> >>>>> *Artificial General Intelligence List > <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* / AGI / see discussions > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + participants > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery options > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tc9fe35df94409188-M0e434bc085cabc98d07dcede> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tc9fe35df94409188-M3ee0bbf8e7d9789687cb5f47 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
