The main mystery of quantum mechanics is contained in Wheeler's delayed choice experiment, which shows that the past is determined by our choice of what quantum property to observe. This gives the observer a participatory role in deciding the past history of the universe. Wheeler extended this participatory role to the emergence of the physical laws ("law without law"). Since what we know about the universe comes in yes/no answers to our interrogations, this led him to the idea of "it from bit" (which includes the participatory role of the observer as a key component). The yes/no answers to our observations ("bit") should always be compatible with the existence of at least a possible reality - a global solution ("it") of the Schrodinger equation. I argue that there is in fact an interplay between "it" and "bit". The requirement of global consistency leads to apparently acausal and nonlocal behavior, explaining the weirdness of quantum phenomena. As an interpretation of Wheeler's "it from bit" and "law without law", I discuss the possibility that the universe is mathematical, and that there is a "mother of all possible worlds" - named the "Axiom Zero".
The main mystery of quantum mechanics is contained in Wheeler's delayed choice experiment, which shows that the past is determined by our choice of what quantum property to observe. This gives the observer a participatory role in deciding the past history of the universe. Wheeler extended this participatory role to the emergence of the physical laws ("law without law"). Since what we know about the universe comes in yes/no answers to our interrogations, this led him to the idea of "it from bit" (which includes the participatory role of the observer as a key component). The yes/no answers to our observations ("bit") should always be compatible with the existence of at least a possible reality - a global solution ("it") of the Schrodinger equation. I argue that there is in fact an interplay between "it" and "bit". The requirement of global consistency leads to apparently acausal and nonlocal behavior, explaining the weirdness of quantum phenomena. As an interpretation of Wheeler's "it from bit" and "law without law", I discuss the possibility that the universe is mathematical, and that there is a "mother of all possible worlds" - named the "Axiom Zero".
Abstract This paper will deal specifically with the concept of extending some of the contentions and theories of John Archibald Wheeler into a more complete description of reality, supported in part by physical experiments. The subjects that will be dealt with are well known from quantum theory, and now lately - Nick Bostrom's simulation theory, but will be seen through a new reinterpretation that connects seamlessly, prior positions of Wheeler into a self-consistent model that defines the nature of the physical universe through the convergence of information universe models and the Everett/Wheeler hypothesis. Hints will be given, as to how the reported desires of so-called Silicon Valley billionaires to leave the simulated universe, can be fulfilled using on-the-horizon technology to accomplish time travel through the manipulation of the information based fabric underpinning reality. In whole, the following will be major points discussed: 1. J.A. Wheeler posited that even the greatest mathematical equation in the universe is missing something, the principle by which can become real. He also said, no phenomenon is a phenomenon until is an observed phenomenon. 2. Wheeler developed his theory of it from bit, explaining that the physical world was based upon information at a fundamental level 3. Seth Lloyd, taking that thought further, said that the universe acts like a giant computer processing the information contained therein. 4. Nick Bostrom posited that, in fact, our universe is a computer simulation created by our post-human descendants in the distant future. 5. Philip K. Dick science fiction writer and visionary, in his 1977 public statements mentioned, that due to to events in the past being reprogrammed, things in the present could be changed so that an alternate universe splits off. 6. The universe is participatory, not just with humans, but everything else. *Just as various events cause a variety of phenomena, in the extreme cases, the universe responds in the extreme by producing alternate universes. This process resolves many of the issues related to quantum phenomena, parallel universes and time travel* 7. The detection of a simulated universe and escape therefrom is similar but not the same as doing so with an information universe. Escape from a simulated universe is impossible just as its detection may be. However, in this paper, a series of experiments will be presented that for the first time ever, establish such a possible detection as well as the method of ultimate escape from our information based universe.
Introduction Of John Wheeler's “Really Big Questions,” the one on which the most progress has been made is “It from bit?” – does information play a significant role at the foundations of physics? It is perhaps less ambitious than some of the other questions, such as “How come existence?”, because it does not necessarily require a metaphysical answer. And unlike, say, “Why the quantum?”, it does not require the discovery of new laws of nature: there was room for hope that it might be answered through a better understanding of the laws as we currently know them, particularly those of quantum physics. And this is what has happened: the better understanding is the quantum theory of information and computation. How might our conception of the quantum physical world have been different if “It from bit” had been a motivation from the outset? No one knows how to derive it (the nature of the physical world) from bit (the idea that information plays a significant role at the foundations of physics), and I shall argue that this will never be possible. But we can do the next best thing: we can start from the qubit. Qubits To a classical information theorist, a bit is an abstraction: a certain amount of information. To a programmer, a bit is a Boolean variable. To an engineer, a bit is a “flip-flop” – a piece of hardware that is stable in either of two physical states.
Introduction First a word of thanks. When I first came across the papers of John Archibald Wheeler on the foundations of quantum mechanics, most of them reprinted in Wheeler and Zurek (1983), I could not believe what I read. Finally here was a colleague of worldwide reputation, given his many contributions to theoretical physics, who was not afraid to discuss openly the conceptual problems of quantum mechanics. The outstanding feature of Professor Wheeler's viewpoint is his realization that the implications of quantum mechanics are so far-reaching that they require a completely novel approach in our view of reality and in the way we see our role in the universe. This distinguishes him from many others who in one way or another tried to save pre-quantum viewpoints, particularly the obviously wrong notion of a reality independent of us. Particularly remarkable is Professor Wheeler's austerity in thinking. He tries to use as few concepts as possible and to build on this the whole of physics. A fascinating case in point is the title of one of his papers “Law without law,” the attempt to arrive at the laws of nature without assuming any law a priori. For me personally his work on fundamental issues in quantum mechanics has been particularly inspiring. The questions he raises are exceptionally far-reaching and some of his concepts in the foundations of physics are so radical that calling them revolutionary would not do them justice.
Whoever it was who first contracted the words 'binary digit' to form 'bit' can hardly have realised that he (she?) was coining a term not only for the smallest unit of information but also for the smallest unit of 'being' – or so the general relativist John Archibald Wheeler would have us believe. 'It from bit' is his declamation of the ultimate fount of significance of every physical quantity: all we can know about photons, fields, black holes – you name 'it' – depends at root, he emphasizes, on yes-or-no indications. Pursuing the implications of this observation through quantised strings, quantum measurement theory, computational representations of physical laws, information theory, thermodynamic entropy, evolution... those, he says, are routes to that happy state of perceived simplicity and beauty when we finally know the Final Answer to the question: 'How come existence?'
In his famous 1989 “it from bit ” essay1, John Wheeler contends that the stuff of the physical universe (“it”) arises from information (“bits ” – encoded yes or no answers). Wheeler’s question and assumptions are re-examined from a post Aspect experiment perspective. Information is examined and discussed in terms of classical information and “quanglement ” (nonlocal state sharing). An argument is made that the universe may arise from (or together with) quanglement but not via classical yes/no information coding.
In his 1989 essay, John Archibald Wheeler has tried to answer the eternal question of existence. He did it by searching for links between information, physics, and quanta. The main concept emerging from his essay is that "every physical quantity, every it, derives its ultimate significance from bits, binary yes-or-no indications". This concept has been summarized in the catchphrase "it from bit". In the Wheeler's essay, it is possible to read several times the echoes of the philosophy of Niels Bohr. The Danish physicist has pointed out how the quantum and relativistic physics - forcing us to abandon the anchor of the visual reference of common sense - have imposed a greater attention to the language. Bohr did not deny the physical reality, but recognizes that there is always need of a language no matter what a person wants to do. To put it as Carlo Sini, language is the first toolbox that man has at hands to analyze the experience. It is not a thought translated into words, because to think is to operate with signs as reminded us by various philosophers from Leonardo da Vinci to Ludwig Wittgenstein. [...]