Oh my. Four years of work? Oh my.
Originally Posted by Marty Wollner
First, see the tag line below. We make observations, then develop a theory based on those observations, then use the theory to make predictions, then evaluate the results. Then back to the start. You have deliberately ignored the observation part. You have a theory in search of supporting observations. The cart is before the horse. It will quickly run off the road.
Secondly, as others have pointed out, none of your first three assumptions is true. Number four is meaningless, since points are by definition dimensionless and therefore cannot fill space. Between any two points, INTEGER or otherwise, there are an infinite number of other points. As for number five, IIRC, time appears to flow continuously even below the Planck interval.
So, aside from all the underlying assumptions being incorrect, you have an interesting idea, treating the universe as a sort of 3-D version of John Conway’s game of Life. On a very small scale, ignoring random quantum events, it might work. Your thoughts on this?
Regards. John M.
I'm not a hardnosed mainstreamer; I just like the observations, theories, predictions, and results to match.
"Mainstream isn’t a faith system. It is a verified body of work that must be taken into account if you wish to add to that body of work, or if you want to change the conclusions of that body of work." - korjik