Strangely enough, the first thing that some subconscious forces brought me to was to listen to Beethoven's 9th symphony (the file in media sub folder in the home folder).
The important thing to me is to distinguish between the abstract concept of asynchronism and how it can be implemented, and by the latter I mean both at the abstract level of a programming language and by technical coordination means in a machine. For the abstract concept at the highest level, well, it is just the dual of synchronism: two (or more) parties that somehow need to work together (i.e., one has a dependency on the other in a way that certain things need to happen before another one can continue) are not synchronized, meaning that it is not known or not defined when the things that need to happen after something else will be done. Seen that way, this definition is not hard. The hard thing can be the abstract means designed in a language: the amount of cognitive effort it takes in order to comprehended them and/or use them (in an fault-free way).
Thanks for the paper analogy. First, I don't agree that if we bring the other half of the paper away that no information has traveled. What else is the shape of the cut than information? Second, do we know that no dual of entanglement exists, meaning that we start from one piece of the paper (far way) that we can somehow select and (re-)create the other half "here", thus being able to see its shape "here", all this not subject to the laws of mass physics? Sure this is all just thinking going on in my mind and I'm really not an expert in all these things; not at all. I just have questions that sometimes provoke ideas; which might be naive (due to lack of information).
Define „I“. Are you mass (obviously) and information?
I'm talking about information that you „have“ in the sense of the one that is part, or maybe more importantly, makes up your mind. If we were able to entangle it with a (partial) information set somewhere else in space then we could achieve what I would call information traveling. And since at quantum level there seems to be something very similar, I hope this would allow us „traveling without mass“.
I think we need a complete paradigm shift in the concept of traveling. Instead of traveling mass we need to think about traveling of information, assuming that information traveling is not subject to the same laws of physics that mass is. I hope quantum mechanics will be key here such that some day it will allow an organism that is some combination of mass and information to let the information travel rather than both together. I.e., we need to find solutions to decouple the information from the mass and let the information travel while the mass remains at essentially the „same“ position in space. I think this could allow us instant interstellar traveling, maybe with some overhead of preparation and finalization in the range of minutes or hours, i.e. in the time scale of classic human traveling.
I don't like these category of articles that put the name of a language into its title if the article is in fact not about the language itself but its entire ecosystem. So this one. It's mashing up things that should be kept/viewed/discussed separate.
What is more, as with any (formal) language, the test of time doesn't show how "good" a language is. It shows how a language and the entire ecosystem around is able to adapt to current needs. In other words, whether a "language organism" is "good" or "bad" is subject to personal preferences/opinions. Whether a "language organism" survives the test of time shows how viable the entire organism is. It's the same evolutionary process as in nature.
Feels to me like Pandora's box to UUID collisions. Even though UUID space is so huge human mind is always so tiny, as it is always subject to some bea5 (pronounce it "bias").
I'm waiting for the day when we have all agreed that what is done here is not time travelling. Rather, it is a simulation of time travelling, or pseudo time travelling, if you will. At the same time, I'm afraid this will never happen since it is already too late, since we have missed the point in time when there was the chance to call it right. For this, we would need real time travelling.
Ok, if the spatial concept of aspect ratio is the equivalent of electrical resistance, and given the analogy in the article of the painting and the resistor network, what is the equivalence of color then? Frequency?
Define "sound better", please. As we all know this is something subjective - mostly everyone has individual preferences. I would have found it better if the title was "Why is frequency stable in spacetime and amplitude not (which can be verified so easily by listening to audio radio)".
I'm no expert but somehow I think post-quantum cryptography will become what IP6 is to IP addressing: we all know very well what problem it solves but the problem doesn't hit us that hard in practice that we are actually forced to make the switch.
Very well done...