DoYouEvenBTC on Nostr: I am not a physicist, not even close. My formal education stopped at one semester of ...
I am not a physicist, not even close.
My formal education stopped at one semester of calculus and physics.
I have a vague notion of what some of the next steps would be, and can appreciate the vast ocean of things that I do not know.
That being said, I’ve spent the last 10 to 15 years immersing myself pretty deeply in popular literature, playing with ideas in my head. Knocking them against each other studying the collisions and debris etc.
My day job tends to leave my hands occupied, my ears available, and my immediate surroundings unoccupied.
******
I understand some of the flavor of some of the current problems in physics: right here and right now I’m talking about non-local weirdness in quantum mechanics.
Don’t have citations available off top of my head. The kind of experiments that seem to suggest information traveling faster than the speed of light, which we also think should be impossible.
*******
Thinking about bitcoin has given me another angle to look at these problems.
Maybe someone’s already tried it out, or it just doesn’t work, maybe it’s “not even wrong“.
****
But I am wondering if hashing functions may be part of a solution.
A deterministic process, that for all analysis seems to have a random output, yet obeys precise mathematical laws.
****
Hand-waving example:
An experiment that detects whether an electron is spin up or spin down, and a specially separated corresponding electron that, when checked, has a corresponding (opposite?) spin. But time-spatially separated enough to ensure signal can’t pass between them.
No way to determine which one will be which way ahead of time, but anytime you check one, the other one always matches (or is opposite, ha ha ha can’t remember the detail).
is it possible that in these places where we have experimental observations that are “random“, what we are actually seeing is a non-random hash function, and we are doing something analogous to just checking if the total is odd or even and the corresponding “entangled” bit is deterministically correlated, but unpredictable by any means other than just running the algorithm?
My formal education stopped at one semester of calculus and physics.
I have a vague notion of what some of the next steps would be, and can appreciate the vast ocean of things that I do not know.
That being said, I’ve spent the last 10 to 15 years immersing myself pretty deeply in popular literature, playing with ideas in my head. Knocking them against each other studying the collisions and debris etc.
My day job tends to leave my hands occupied, my ears available, and my immediate surroundings unoccupied.
******
I understand some of the flavor of some of the current problems in physics: right here and right now I’m talking about non-local weirdness in quantum mechanics.
Don’t have citations available off top of my head. The kind of experiments that seem to suggest information traveling faster than the speed of light, which we also think should be impossible.
*******
Thinking about bitcoin has given me another angle to look at these problems.
Maybe someone’s already tried it out, or it just doesn’t work, maybe it’s “not even wrong“.
****
But I am wondering if hashing functions may be part of a solution.
A deterministic process, that for all analysis seems to have a random output, yet obeys precise mathematical laws.
****
Hand-waving example:
An experiment that detects whether an electron is spin up or spin down, and a specially separated corresponding electron that, when checked, has a corresponding (opposite?) spin. But time-spatially separated enough to ensure signal can’t pass between them.
No way to determine which one will be which way ahead of time, but anytime you check one, the other one always matches (or is opposite, ha ha ha can’t remember the detail).
is it possible that in these places where we have experimental observations that are “random“, what we are actually seeing is a non-random hash function, and we are doing something analogous to just checking if the total is odd or even and the corresponding “entangled” bit is deterministically correlated, but unpredictable by any means other than just running the algorithm?