Thread by @inftoe

In the thread is.gd/L7tevL we have substantiated the fine-tuned universe. And since the InfToE allows to solve such problems (this is exactly what the ToE should do), let's apply it to more fundamental, and therefore interesting tasks.
1 ↣

Let's figure out what time is and what space is.
In modern physics, since it does not have the prospect of sufficiently deep penetration into the foundation of the universe, this task is simply not relevant.
2 ↣

Physics solves more particular problems: it tries to understand how something exists in time and space. The very time and space physics actually considers to be "godgivens" (is.gd/Lhp9QN).
3 ↣

This approach – replacing the question of the existence of time and space with the question of existence in time and space – generates funny effects like the idea of a multiverse, in which universes - balls are distributed in space and can even collide from time to time.
4 ↣

To understand how these two questions differ from each other, let's ask clarifying questions that physics is not only unable to answer, but even (at least in the mainstream) does not ask them, and if it does, then somehow it does not very intelligible.
5 ↣

For example, why are there only two of these Sith – time and space? Why is there no third of the same order, for example, a certain "meow"? Why do we have no reason to say that the universe exists in time, in space and in meow?
6 ↣

Why in space it is possible to move forward, backward and sideways rather arbitrarily, while time drags us by itself, and always only forward and never back?
7 ↣

Why can time slow down in relativistic effects and space can contract, but there is no way to speed up time and space to stretch?
8 ↣

Why is the speed of the passage of time and the length of space exactly what they are, and not some others?
9 ↣

What is more important - space or time? Time flows in space, or is space located in time?
10 ↣

Time and space once arose, but before that they did not exist? (The question only seems trivial, asking for the answer "arose in the Big Bang", because the very concept of "arising" makes sense only in time.)
11 ↣

Why is the size and age of the universe exactly that, and not some others, for example, 1 second and trillion trillion light years?
12 ↣

Is it possible for something to exist outside of space and/or outside of time?
13 ↣

Well, enough for now.
Traditionally, the answers to such questions are not dealt with by physics, but by philosophy, since it is not formalized and therefore allows one to indulge in any free fantasies that do not entail any responsibility, which philosophers actively use.
14 ↣

Since philosophers rely on observations, sometimes they manage to determine some patterns that are more or less suitable for cognition. But being related only on particular external manifestations of unimaginably complex processes, this cognition is far from complete.
15 ↣

Philosophy, due to its superficiality and informality, is doomed to drown in endless verbal discussions of biased thought experiments.
16 ↣

The ToE (see is.gd/0pQGi5) has neither the opportunity of physics to limit the depth, nor the ability of philosophy to put forward ideas free of formalism. It must answer questions strictly, like physics, and these must be all questions that philosophy deal with.
17 ↣

The only possibility for the ToE not to give a strict answer to any questions is the technical inability of the human mind to cognize phenomena, the complexity of which exceeds the complexity of the models of reality available for representation by the human brain.
18 ↣

The #superperson will be engaged in the cognition of these phenomena. But, at least, the ToE at an accessible level should not contain contradictions indicating the impossibility of this future cognition.
19 ↣

So, what is time and space in InfToE.
To begin with, let's recall the idea on which InfToE is based: the universe is only information and nothing else. It is grounded here:

https://twitter.com/inftoe/status/1218826934190321665

20 ↣

The development of this idea leads to the understanding that the entire universe is an information structure consisting of multilevel combinations of two elementary concepts - "the same" S and "the other" O. There is nothing else in the universe.
21 ↣

The existence of the universe is ensured by observing these combinations of each other. Each of them acts as an observer in relation to the underlying combinations of which it consists, and is itself observable in relation to the higher combinations in which it is included.
22 ↣

Since the observed combinations have different structures, from the point of view of their observers, they receive a certain semantics due to coincidences and differences in them. The more complex the combinations, the more varied and more specific these semantics are.
23 ↣

Starting from some levels of complexity, the semantics of combinations becomes so varied and specific that it forms, from the point of view of their observers, the reality of the universe. The combinations included in this reality are the beings of the universe.
24 ↣

The various combinations that are observed by a particular being form a cone of observations (is.gd/dPZFs4) of this being. It contains, directly and indirectly, all the combinations that make up this being.
25 ↣

The entire universe is a cone of observations of final being, the most complex in the universe, that is, the universe itself. This cone is contained in unimaginable sea of all possible combinations, determined by the rules of combining information (is.gd/XtXO2u).
26 ↣

The set of mutual observations within the full cone of observations of the universe is just such that the information that constitutes them does not contradict itself anywhere, that is, for the universe to exist. This is the fine-tuned universe (is.gd/L7tevL).
27 ↣

Let's take some combination, e.g., from the 4th level. This is the level of the simple concepts, but the semantics of this combination will most likely remain a mystery to us. There are 6128 combinations at 4th level, and no one has yet begun to understand what they mean.
28 ↣

However, its semantics is not important to us now, since we are solving a formal problem.
So let it be a combination of (((SO)O)SO)SO.
That's all that can happen to the beings in the universe: they can be observed.
29 ↣

For example, consider the simplest observation of this being, that is, one that consists in adding an elementary combination – the concept of either S or O.
30 ↣

As a result of this observation, at the 5th level of combinations, a new being will appear, depending on the content of the observation: either ((((SO)O)SO)SO)S, or ((((SO)O)SO)SO)O.
31 ↣

The new being is an observer in relation to the observed being, and contains additional information that gives it some new semantics that inherits the semantics of the observed being, but develops it due to the added observation information.
32 ↣

That is, we can say that this observer is a consequence of all its observations, both direct (like the considered addition, for example, S), and indirect, made by the beings, underlying in its cone of observations.
33 ↣

And all the underlying beings contained in these observations, both direct and indirect, are the reasons, direct and indirect, of the existence of this observer.
34 ↣

So, we found ourselves in the conceptual field of causality. The entire information structure of the universe, its entire gigantic cone of observations, is just a multitude of causes and their consequences.
35 ↣

All consequences in the universe differ from their causes by the addition of some information, complex or simpler, but minimally S "the same" or O "the other".
36 ↣

Obviously, the consequences and causes in this structure are not equal. There is a strict sequence between them: the consequence exists as a result of its causes, but not vice versa.
37 ↣

In each observation, the observer must be separated from the observed by a certain distance necessary for the information of the observation - cause to differ from the information of the observer - consequence.
38 ↣

If this distance did not exist, then the observed information would not exist, since the observation information is part of the observer, and it would be impossible to distinguish where the observable and where the observer is.
39 ↣

This distinction, which ensures the sequence of causes and their consequences, is time.
40 ↣

From what has been said it is clear that in the cone of observations the axis on which these differences are deposited, that is, the time axis, is directed from bottom to top, from causes to their consequences, from the observed beings to its observers.
41 ↣

This distance, obviously, has a minimum value required to ensure observation in cases where the observer differs from the observed in elementary information - exactly one concept S "the same" or O "the other".
42 ↣

This value is the Planck time: 5,391247(60)⋅10⁻⁴⁴ s.

How is the value of the Planck time determined?
43 ↣

It is clear that the discreteness of time causes a kind of "flickering" of reality: if the time scale were continuous, then at some very strong resolution it would be visible that the observed being exists not at every point, but only at points spaced by the Planck time.
44 ↣

This means that if two observers simultaneously observe the same being, then they are forced to observe it at the same quantum of time, that is, it in the same state, while on a smooth time scale they would have to observe it from their positions in slightly different ways.
45 ↣

So, as a result of fine tuning of the universe, this quantum turned out to be small enough so that in the entire history of the universe (past and future) the contradictions caused by this factor would never be large enough to lead to the non-existence of the universe.
46 ↣

With time, everything is clear.

What is space?
47 ↣

Let's take the already used being of the 4th level (((SO)O)SO)SO and remember that at the 5th level it has two observers - the consequences that are minimally different from it: ((((SO)O)SO)SO)S and ((((SO)O)SO)SO)O.
48 ↣

(Of course, there are many consequences as a result of more complex observations of this being at the 5th level, but these two minimal are enough to understand the principle.)
This distinction of beings, not connected by a causal relationship, is space.
49 ↣

Obviously, this distinction is provided by a certain distance, the minimum value of which in physical space corresponds to the Planck length of 1,616255 (18)⋅10⁻³⁵ m.
This is where coincidences with the nature of time end. Let's list the fundamental differences:
50 ↣

• The beings considered here are equable, none of them is a consequence of the other. In this particular example, they are at the same level of the information structure, but to generalize: the space is determined by relations that are not causal.
51 ↣

• As we see, here there are two degrees of freedom, not one like with time. They do not define an axis, but a "plane". In the observation cone, this "plane" is orthogonal to the time axis, that is, in our poor graphical representation, space is represented by horizontal.
52 ↣

• Despite the both degrees of freedom are discrete along the Planck length, their independence leads to the fact that space, in contrast to time, is not quantized: a pair of degrees of freedom determines any point of it both in distance and direction.
53 ↣

• The independence of these degrees of freedom ensures the arbitrariness of directions in space. Unlike time, which has only one direction, in space we can move in any direction.
54 ↣

• The absence of causality relations ensures the arbitrariness of movement in space. Unlike time, which "goes by itself" because the consequences are obliged to follow the causes, there is no dictate on location and directions in space.
55 ↣

It should already be obvious why there is only time and space, and there is no third "meow". Time and space are determined by the relationships in the informational structure of the universe, and there are only two types of these relationships: causal and non-causal.
56 ↣

It should also be clear which of them is "more important". Changes in time are independent: causes and consequences are not necessarily associated with changes in space. But changes in space are always associated with changes in time. Time is primary, space is secondary.
57 ↣

And should also be obvious that no existence of anything outside of time and space is possible. Everything in the universe is a combination of the elements S and O that make up the informational structure of the universe, and time and space are immanent to this structure.
58 ↣

Once more: time and space, unlike everything else, are not the beings, that is, they are not combinations of the S and O.
Otherwise, the rules for combining information (is.gd/XtXO2u) and, as a result, the differentiation of semantics would have worked for them.
59 ↣

But nothing of the kind is observed: everything in the universe is always completely determined in time and space. Their semantics and significance for any beings does not change.
60 ↣

Well, perhaps, using the offered InfToE toolkit, you already will be able to "physically strictly" answer "philosophical" questions on your own. Or wait for our next threads on the speed of time and the length of space, the age and size of the universe, etc.
61.

@threadreaderapp unroll