Emmett Shear Profile picture
Aug 11 21 tweets 4 min read Read on X
Since the cool kids are doing it, my quantum gravity prediction below! Epistemic warning: crackpot physics from someone who isn't a physicist. Epistemic upside: I think I have one maybe actually correct idea buried in it.
Ok, so there's just one quantum field. Likely in C^4 interacting via CP^3 ala Twistors or teleparallel gravity, so we'll go with that. A "particle" excitation in this field is a probability density, basically a (mixed-state) spinor.
There's only one force, sortagravity: spinors want to be in the same state as other spinors they interact with, and also want to stay the way they are. The precision of the distribution is sortamass, since interactions are basically Bayesian. Faster change = lower precision.
This is basically quantum bayesian turned to 11. For some interesting work in this direction those less crackpot than I, I suggest "A free energy principle for generic quantum systems" by Fields, Friston, Glazebrook, and Levin (what an author list!) arxiv.org/abs/2112.15242
(The spoiler for the paper is that unitarity can be seen as a statistical property of free-energy minimizing systems, which Bayesian updaters like these spinors are, so the fact that my update rule isn't unitary is fine!)
It can be seen as a fully connected spin lattice with C^4 nodes interacting in CP^3 as (unit) velocity, w precision as mass. Hops per timestep is sorta-speed-of-light, the "learning rate" of the spinors is the sorta-G, and ħ is the residual stochasticity scale (the noise floor).
("Fully connected???" I hear you cry. Sure, at first. But as you get symmetry breaks, a noise floor emerges along those shared basis directions, effectively pruning edges for distant states, until the spacetime connectivity graph we know and love emerges).
Quantum darwinism ala Zurek is correct, but deeper than realized. Guesses: the first pointer dimension is the color field as an eigenbasis of CP^3, then a CP^1 fibration pointer gives spacetime and electroweak, then a chirality break pointer creates EM. nature.com/articles/nphys…
So there's some kind of universal "background time" that determines the update rate, but time itself is some kind of direction of rotation in CP^3. Fun side effect: anti-matter moving "backwards in time" translates as "off-phase rotation" nicely here.
But the point is, basically all particles are some number of these spinors orbiting by the force of sortagravity each other in one of the shared preferred bases, which may or may not involve motion in the spacetime basis.
Which makes all the forces some flavor of this sortagravity force. Gravity directly. Other forces are much stronger bc small changes to the orbits get amplified into significant increases in updates via the local interactions. Repulsive vs. attractive is in-phase vs. out-phase.
The lower level sortamass (spinor phase momentum) shows up either as angular phase momentum in the color fiber (polarization for photons, W/Z bosons, gluons), angular phase momentum on the spacetime basis (mass), and linear phase momentum (energy).
<--- NOT AN ACTUAL THEORY OF QUANTUM GRAVITY
There are a bunch of unexplained phenomena (generations...eigenmodes of the fibers?) and the whole "fully connected lattice of spinors" thing is computationally insane and I'm sure real physicists will point out even more issues.
But I'm sharing it anyway bc (a) it was fun to think about and I learned a lot putting it together, and sharing the fun is more fun, and (b) I think extending Zurek's QD insight further is actually a really good idea and I hope I inspire some real physicist to think about it.
The periodic table of elements is kind of obviously emergent from some underlying generative process, even if you don't know what it is.
The quantum zoo and spacetime are similar. They're obviously coming from *something*.
There are all these arbitrary choices that have to be made, all these shared preferred bases that don't have any obvious source. All these little numbers and fundamental constants that need explaining, why this much?
"It's just another pointer state" allows for very parsimonious. It gives you global synchrony while allowing imperfections, it says that all the arbitrary constants actually COULD have been otherwise, but that also you will always see stable patterns bc they are more fit.
It explains why you'd have really really long lived particles, but then they'd eventually decay -- because past a certain point, Darwin doesn't care if protons eventually decay, it's not relevant to winning the global pointer state war.
If you combine it with Blowtorch Theory (basically Smolin's evolutionary cosmos theory) you get Darwin-all-the-way. The initial conditions of the lattice evolve via blackhole reproduction, and are the hyperparameters for quantum's evolutionary search. theeggandtherock.com/p/the-blowtorc…
Anyway I was kind of hesitant to share this for a while because like...publishing theories of quantum gravity is how you destroy your intellectual reputation.
But I think ppl are smart enough to tell I'm offering this as serious play, with the delusion that I Solved Physics.
OK, enough caveats. If you're a physicist or can play one on TV, let me know what you think!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Emmett Shear

Emmett Shear Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @eshear

Jul 24
Google exists bc of a grand bargain: scrape the open web, and profit from directing traffic to the best sites. Around
2010, the betrayal began. YouTube artificially ranked above other video, then over time maps results injected, shopping, flights, events. Now AI answers.
It’s funny-sad watching it because while Google makes billions in the short run, they’re systematically destroying the very foundations of their own business and have been for a decade. Google is cancer.
The walled gardens are *worse* than the open web. AOL lost for a reason. But the only businesses that can long-term survive operating on the internet must find some way to lock Google out. So the walled gardens return, under the new selective pressure. What waste.
Read 12 tweets
Jul 14
METR’s analysis of this experiment is wildly misleading. The results indicate that people who have ~never used AI tools before are less productive while learning to use the tools, and say ~nothing about experienced AI tool users. Let's take a look at why.
I immediately found the claim suspect because it didn't jibe with my own experience working w people using coding assistants, but sometimes there are surprising results so I dug in. The first question: who were these developers in the study getting such poor results?
“We recruited 16 experienced open-source developers to work on 246 real tasks in their own repositories (avg 22k+ stars, 1M+ lines of code).” So they sound like reasonably experienced software devs.
"Developers have a range of experience using AI tools: 93% have prior experience with tools like ChatGPT, but only 44% have experience using Cursor." Uh oh. So they haven't actually used AI coding tools, they've like tried prompting an LLM to write code for them. But that's an entirely different kind of experience, as anyone who has used these tools can tell you.
They claim "a range of experience using AI tools", yet only a single developer of their sixteen had more than a single week of experience using Cursor. They make it look like a range by breaking "less than a week" into <1 hr, 1-10hrs, 10-30hrs, and 30-50hrs of experience. Given the long steep learning curve for effectively using these new AI tools well, this division betrays what I hope is just grossly negligent ignorance about that reality, rather than intentional deception.
Of course, the one developer who did have more than a week of experience was 20% faster instead of 20% slower. The authors note this fact, but then say “We are underpowered to draw strong conclusions from this analysis” and bury it in a figure’s description in an appendix.
If the authors of the paper had made the claim, "We tested experienced developers using AI tools for the first time, and found that at least during the first week they were slower rather than faster" that would have been a modestly interesting finding and true. Alas, that is not the claim they made.Image
Read 8 tweets
Jul 6
A greater theory of system design: what’s wrong with modernity and post-modernity, how to survive the coming avalanche, and how to fix the major problems we are facing.

Part two: Modernity as systematic accuracy
In the beginning, we managed the world intuitively. Early human tribes did not set quarterly hunting quotas, did not have rainfall-adjusted targets for average gathering per capita. We lived in the choiceless mode:. meaningness.com/choiceless-modeImage
There are models in the choiceless mode too. If you believe that the hunt succeeds because of the favor of Artemis, this is a model of hunting. Choiceless mode models are simple models made of very complex parts.
Read 23 tweets
Jun 24
A greater theory of system design: what’s wrong with modernity and post-modernity, how to survive the coming avalanche, and how to fix the major problems we are facing.

Part one: Systems are Models. But what’s a Model?
I promise this gets practical at some point, but first we have to lay some groundwork. If you find the groundwork obvious or you’re willing to just take my word for it, feel free to skip it. But ultimately, without the background you can’t even really understand the proposal.
Without loss of generality, any system can be seen as a parameter graph connected by edges, where sensory nodes receive inputs that drive both internal graph changes and produce outputs at active nodes.
Read 19 tweets
Jun 20
I found an old list of blog post ideas that I will probably never write, but I thought it would be fun to turn them into a thread. I wrote these years ago, fun to see the trajectory of my journey. I find them all delightful, even if some are wrong in retrospect.
Power is like radioactive ore…drives the engine of an organization but dangerous to everyone who touches it. Needs to be contained and channeled.
Media empires have replaced media nation-states.
Read 25 tweets
Mar 9
When I was CEOing at Twitch one of the thing I’d do every batch of interns was a very short presentation on the origins of the company and then a Q&A. One of the questions was always, “Where should I work and what job should I get, or should I start a company?”
It’s an interesting question to try to answer for an intern I didn’t really know, because of course the actual answer is dependent on that person and their life. So I had to figure out how to articulate the framework I used.
First there’s money. Obviously you want money. But money is well-known for diminishing returns, after you have enough for rent and food and so on. So you don’t want to optimize for cash, it’s more of a constraint.
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(