...why would they go "witness" to those people who are about to kill them?
"I can see the future, and the future is me dying!"
I could make a sarcastic reply, but I don't think Jon was realy going for a Jesus allegory anyway.
Although if the Middle Pangaeans nail the Topekan missionary to, say, the wall of a pub, then I'll consider myself corrected.
isn't there a paradox about a future predicting machine that is part of the universe it is attempting to predict? Something about it cannot acurately portray possibilities in a universe that it inhabits because it would have to have a model of itself and within that model another model of the fake world and it would just keep spiraling down?
I'm just hoping that Phillip doesn't don a Cowputer skin and rule Topeka for 10,000 years.
If a single q-bit can simultaneously hold all values between, for example, 0 and 255 and the actual value that is observed is dependent on the situations under which it is observed, then why are you confused at the notion that the universe could simultaneously contain a model of itself?
It is an interesting problem in quantum informational dynamics to determine the actual maximum range of a single q-bit. Some meta-theoritictians suspect that a single q-bit can actually represet all values on the Complex number line.
per your example of a q-bit simultaneously holding all values between 0 and 255,that same q-bit cannot hold more than the limit of its values, correct? In this instance, as soon as you throw the model itself into the equation, you have an (0 - 255)X! situation, where the X variable is the prediction of the model, so not only does the primary model have to make a prediction, it also has to make a prediction on the secondary, and make a prediction on the prediction of the secondary model on the tertiary model that the secondary model contains, and so on and so on and so on as X approaches infinity, and the initial values the q-bit represent are no where NEAR inclusive enough for this situation, therefore the predictive modeler must be outside the system it is looking to model.
We'll just call it an epsilon.
Nahh, it's definitely a moving target. So it's a delta, really.
Although Southwest is by far the better airline.
So the real problem with the paradox supplied by LG is that, while it's a fun thing to think about, it's not a requirement in this case.
If we look at our qbit over the lifetime of the universe - and since we've established that our universe is deterministic - then there is a set Q made up of all values that our qbit will be observed to have. Mind you, there's nothing that says that the qbit actually has to hold those values - just that it is observed to hold them (the difference between the two is actually a probelm in AI, so we won't cover it).
For each t moment in time, then q(t) is the value in Q that the qbit will be observed to have at that moment t.
Since we have already shown (or at least taken as a working assumption) that the observed value depends on the means of observation - then we can actually clearly express the difference between t and t+1 as "a change in the means of observation" - and in fact it's a good definition for time in the first place - that the qbit is observed to hold a different value than previously.
But there's nothing to prevent an observer in moment t to being able to somehow observe the value that the qbit will hold at t+delta or t-delta for that matter.
Thus, we see that predicting the future is exactly as hard as time-travel. And Calvin achieved that with a cardboard box and a strong imagination. What possibilities are there for those who can make beer out of organic hyper-wheat? (And maybe now we know why Topeka Prime is a dry county - power-hoarding - and also where the inaccuracies in the Almanac come from).
