I feel this video has an important message in this video, but I admit that it’s not connecting for me. I get visions of John Baez’s decades of work on symplectic maths that never resulted in anything testable.
Even worse, I no longer accept smooth manifolds as sufficiently fundamental to capture the deeper nature of quantum mechanics. I used to love these maths, but after focusing on the information density issue, they now feel like an addiction. I cannot do it anymore.
From an information density perspective, smooth manifolds are necessarily emergent and approximate. The resulting relations are real, but full-tilt differentiability is too complex, information-hogging, and (especially) classical to be the starting point.
The good news is that I'm just a poor, bewildered computer person who merely takes information density issues far more seriously than most mathematicians and physicists. Surely, I'm wrong, and physics needs only the 1700s hyper-classical, pre-quantum, pre-relativity, infinitely smooth, cost-oblivious maths of men who believed that absolute precision and perfection were cost-free for powerful men such as themselves.
I feel this video has an important message in this video, but I admit that it’s not connecting for me. I get visions of John Baez’s decades of work on symplectic maths that never resulted in anything testable.
Even worse, I no longer accept smooth manifolds as sufficiently fundamental to capture the deeper nature of quantum mechanics. I used to love these maths, but after focusing on the information density issue, they now feel like an addiction. I cannot do it anymore.
From an information density perspective, smooth manifolds are necessarily emergent and approximate. The resulting relations are real, but full-tilt differentiability is too complex, information-hogging, and (especially) classical to be the starting point.
The good news is that I'm just a poor, bewildered computer person who merely takes information density issues far more seriously than most mathematicians and physicists. Surely, I'm wrong, and physics needs only the 1700s hyper-classical, pre-quantum, pre-relativity, infinitely smooth, cost-oblivious maths of men who believed that absolute precision and perfection were cost-free for powerful men such as themselves.