Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 19

a proposal for developing quantum computing in software

BY ALAN N. SHAPIRO AND ALEXIS CLANCY


(with special thanks to Jeffrey Gormly for important contributions)
[EDITORIAL NOTE: We are pleased to publish this ground-breaking paper by two of our regular contributors.
while there are some technical and difficult concepts from mathematics in here, I feel that this work exemplifies
how metaphors from choreography and dance as understood at choreograph.net can be used to create radical
breakthroughs in non-arts based fields. JG]

Alan N. Shapiro (1): Star Trek: Technologies of Disappearance (Berlin: AVINUS Verlag, 2004), examines the
relation between science fiction and the modern scientific imagination. It uncovers the influence of cultural
artefacts such as Star Trek on the epistemology of generative sciences and engineering. It rigorously explores both
the real science behind the futuristic technologies of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Artificial Life, Artificial
Languages, cyborgs, androids, virtual reality (the Holodeck), teleportation (beaming), time travel, and faster-
than-light (warp) speed, and the recursive influence of these fictional projections on the possibilities for real
science. The book has been, and will continue to be, recognized as rigorously consistent with, and driving of, the
most advanced knowledge in fields as diverse as media studies, cultural studies, simulation technology, theoretical
physics, and computer science.
This book has become the foundational text of Shapiro Technologies, a company of futurists whose mission is not
only to design and build futuristic technologies, but also to seriously concern itself with the ethics of what is to be
done with these technologies. The crucial question is not if Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Life, Animatic
Automata, cyborgs, virtual reality, teleportation, and time travel are possible. They are indeed possible. The crucial
question is what will we do with these technologies once we have them?
However, Shapiro Technologies is not based only on a foundational text but is an emergent phenomenon, growing
out of a dreaming matrix of ideas of which Technologies of Disappearance is but one wild instance. Shapiro
Technologies is a thinking dancing vehicle exploring and working with new ideas; it is a collaboratory social
choreography within a network of similarly avant-garde entities including Daghdha Dance Company, R.I.C.E.
Radical Institute of Cybernetic Epistemology, choreograph.net, and the AVINUS Press/Verlag.
I believe that the invention of a new computer science, one more powerful than that which presently exists, is
possible; a more powerful computer science that often goes by the name of Artificial Intelligence. Shapiro
Technologies will go beyond the digital or binary computing paradigm that has persisted since the seminal work of
the Second World War generation of information theorists such as Alan Turing, John von Neumann, Norbert
Wiener, and Claude Shannon, so as to achieve quantum computing.
THE CHALLENGE OF QUANTUM COMPUTING
Alan N. Shapiro: The goal of quantum computing has been clearly and explicitly defined by computer scientists,
but the mathematics of how to implement qubits and superposition states does not yet exist. It should be noted
right away that most efforts to realize quantum computing are, in my view, too one-sidedly hardware-centric.

A crucial characteristic of quantum mechanics known as entanglement occurs under certain experimental
conditions. Subatomic particles become inextricably linked in such a way that a change to one of them is
instantly reflected in its counterpart, no matter how physically separated they are. Quantum theory postulates
a superposition of states that destabilizes the intuitive sensorial notion of spatial separation. Entangled
particles transcend space and remoteness. They belong to a shared system that acts as a single entity.
The distance that divides the particles no longer plays any influencing role that would lead them to be regarded as
having distinct identities. Once the entanglement state is established, the subatomic duo stays forever bonded. The
two particles will always have either precisely opposing or elegantly complementing relative values of key
quantum properties such as polarization direction, regardless of how far apart they travel from one another.

Quantum mechanical phenomena, such as superposition and entanglement, are made use of to perform operations
on what are called quantum bits, or qubits. Instead of the classical binary or digital bit, which has the discrete value
of 0 or 1, there is a qubit, which may have a third state, an in-between-state, the momentary value of which is
determined by the superposition of the state of many other bits in the system.

Entanglement and superpositioning enable this third state, which can be cultivated to
correspond with the anticipated choice space of the user.

EXISTING METAPHORS FOR QUANTUM COMPUTING
In a landmark article called Polynomial-Time Algorithms for Prime Factorization and Discrete Logarithms on a
Quantum Computer, MIT mathematician and computer scientist Peter W. Shor defines algorithmic sequences for
quantum computing in software. Shor asserts that digital computing, contrary to common belief and to the famous
statements in information theory of Alan Turing (On computable numbers, with an application to the
Entscheidungsproblem) and Alonzo Church (An unsolvable problem of elementary number theory), is not an
efficient universal computing device. It is believed able to simulate any physical computing device with an
increase in computation time by at most a polynomial factor, he writes. But this may not be true when quantum
mechanics is taken into consideration. (2)

Shor considers two mathematical problems in cryptography, factoring integers and finding discrete logarithms,
which are highly challenging to implement on a digital computer. He formalizes efficient randomized algorithms
for these two problems but still leaves a crucial difficulty remaining to be solved by the hypothetical quantum
computer. To compute the period of a function f, we evaluate the function at all points simultaneously. But
quantum physics imposes on us the limitation that this information is never available to us. Since the mid-
twentieth century, physicists have discovered that there is a reality of quantum physics, but have had trouble
observing that reality. It is up to the designers of the quantum computer now to implement the quantum property of
the superposition of states.

A measurement of superpositions yields only one value, and at the same time destroys all the others.
Computer scientists working on quantum computers therefore rely heavily on the Fourier transform, a
mathematical operation that transforms one function of a real variable into another, called the frequency domain
representation of the first function, as the hypothesized way to solve the problem. The quantum Fourier transform
is primarily thought of as being implemented in hardware. A hypothetical quantum computing device would have
so-called reversible logic gates which continuously allow sequences of reversible decompositions into
mathematical unitary matrices.
In January 2007, I attended the conference Consciousness and Quantum Computers in Lucerne, Switzerland,
organized by the Swiss Biennial on Science, Technics & Aesthetics (SBSTA). In his opening remarks, Ren
Stettler, Founder and Director of the SBSTA, talked about the trans-disciplinary work that would be involved in
the project of bringing to fruition quantum computing. It is especially an expanded understanding of consciousness
that would be required to gain a real grasp of quantum physics. Yet, as Stettler pointed out, universities do not
even seem to be striving for this trans-disciplinary knowledge. Hans-Peter Drr, former executive Director of the
Max Planck Institute for Physics and Astrophysics, and former collaborator of Werner Heisenberg, emphasized in
his keynote address that physicists do not have the philosophical training necessary to understand what quantum
physics really means. The celebrated mid-twentieth century physicists who discovered quantum mechanics did not
understand it, they only spoke about it in metaphors. They settled on the practice of using applied quantum
physics statistically without understanding what quantum physics means.
But quantum physics, according to Drr, is the most profound rational knowledge that we have gained about the
world. The necessary expanded understanding of consciousness and action would have to come from engagement
with philosophical traditions like phenomenology, Buddhism, and Hindu cosmic perspectives like Vedanta.
Excellent talks on the relationship between Buddhism and the philosophy of science were given at the conference
by Geshe Obsang Tenzin, a Tibetan Buddhist psychologist living in America and working on mind/body medicine,
and German philosopher Christian Thomas Kohl.
A MORPHOGENETIC FIELD
The matrix that is Shapiro Technologies, by its very designation a fertile space, gives life to new and
unforeseeable thoughts. This space can also be thought of as a series of overlaid morphogenetic fields:

First, morphogenetic fields work by imposing patterns or structures on otherwise random or indeterminate
processes in the systems under their control. Second, they contain attractors, which draw systems under
their influence towards future goals. Third, they evol ve, along with living organisms themselves. The
morphic fields of all species have history, and contain inherent memory given by the process I call morphic
resonance. Morphic resonance works across space and time, from the past to the present. Through morphic
resonance, each member of a species both draws upon and contributes to a collective memory of the species.
Morphogenetic fields are part of a larger class of fields, called morphic fields, all of which contain inherent
memory given by morphic resonance. Morphic fields also underlie our perceptions, thoughts and other
mental processes. The morphic fields of mental activities are called mental fields. Through mental fields,
the extended mind reaches out into the environment through attention and intention, and connects
with other members of social groups. (5)

By working with metaphor, we can create the epistemological conditions that allow us to think, and
by extension design, code and implement, the quantum computer, or Artificial Life, into
existence. What follows is a description of both the morphogenetic field that contains our thought work on this
problem, and also an enumeration of the strange attractors in operation in this field.

NEW TOPOLOGIES, STRANGE ATTRACTORS

Alexis Clancy (3): * Third Space mechanics: I consider a model to be a dynamic series of frames.
In modeling a universe, I consider two sets. First, the set F of everything that I know. Second, the set D of
everything that I do not know. Something can either be known to me or unknown to me. It cannot be both.
[Feicte is the Irish word for seen. Dofhiecte is the Irish word for unseen.]

The set F of everything that I know is characterised by collapsed wave form Kroneker Delta functions which are
finite, bounded and measured. [A Kroneker Delta function is a function whose value is one at a unique instance,
zero everywhere else. It best describes the collapse of a waveform on measurement, the wave collapsing to an
absolute negation of probability at a certain point on this measurement.]
The set D of everything that I do not know is characterised by Schrdinger type equations, spacewise infinite and
unbounded. However, the perimeter of the set F of everything that I know presents a problem, as a point on this
perimeter exists in both spaces F and D [Imagine someone standing on the border of Belgium and The Netherlands
essentially, they are standing in both countries at the same time]. This contradicts the first Rule. I correct this
model by introducing a small cleft about the perimeter, small yet big enough to exist. Epsilon small. I call this cleft
the Epsilon Cleft. This is the Third Space.

Locally and superficially, the dimensionality of F strictly does not go beyond 2D, and it is Euclidean. The
dimensionality of D is a function of time; as time progresses, symmetry breaks [ie the character of an
absolute law dictating the character of D is no longer a given] and as many dimensions as are needed to
patch the model are used. Ignoring the first term, the sequence (as stated previously) is 4, 11, 26, 57
The Epsilon Cleft is the source of these dimensions. My assertion that symmetry will always break (as
long as there is time) dictates that the Epsilon Cleft will have an inexhaustible supply of dimensions. [This
assertion is taken as a direct inference of Gdels Incompleteness Theorems.] It is therefore countably infinite.
Adopting this attitude towards a model renders the problem of innumerable infinites not a problem, but rather an
actual contributor to an overall dynamic and evolving model.

I like to view spaces like the Epsilon Cleft as a novelty space. I find them to be analogous to the No Mind
structure referred to in the Samurai Creed (I have no sword. I make No Mind my sword.) and the characteristic
consciousness produced by Samadhi practices of Buddhist and Hindu Yogic meditation; I place my faith in the
Epsilon Cleft to provide a space for novelty to emerge. In this case, we design the solution space such that
the novelty that emerges is Artificial Life.

Faith: The interesting thing to me about a probability spike, as derived and described in Shors paper, is that
even if it hits, say, a 99.9999999999th percentile of certainty, 0.0000000001 must be taken on faith. Faith is a
qualitative rather than a quantitative construct once it is there, it is there and it becomes a fundamental
aspect of the overall paradigm, contributing to the overall efficiency of the paradigm. To negate it would take
an infinite amount of time. I feel that faith is critical to any sort of AI paradigm, quantum or otherwise.
I remember speaking about faith with a friend of mine who is a Jesuit priest. He said that what a lot of people
forget is how practical a construct faith is. Indeed, faith is a large part of the Bushido creed: faith in
discipline, faith in training, faith in No Mind, faith in the Way or Path. Faith is a real time saver.

To have gaps in the spacetime model provides many advantages: the possibility of motion, for one, and more to
the point, the capability to creatively evol ve and provide the model with as many dimensions as needed. Since
it exists outside spacetime mechanics, the novelty space is fast. Thus we have the qualities of dance:
motion, creative capacity for change, speed; this is the kind of dance Choreographer Michael Klien
describes as a state of excitement in a system whereby change becomes possible (5).

My theory of mutation relates to stochastic (a stochastic method is a method whereby a guess is made as
to the operation of an observed phenomena and then the guess is tweaked into rigor) methods, more
precisely genetic algorithms. It is an example as to how the behaviour of quantum geometries can be used in
developing solutions strategies for the macro world. While I have only observed the probability of mutation
as being a constant in contemporary theories, my preliminary theory tries to state otherwise. As stochastic
modelling methods rely on their closeness of adherence to natural processes and phenomena,
viewing mutation as a multi-variable function improves the algorithm.

I am beginning to think that this theory of Mutation is much more important than I originally surmised, as it
bridges Darwinistic theories of evolution and assertions of intelligent design. Once the system comes into a
bind, mutating seems like the intelligent thing to do. A shrinking probability interval and the existence
of choice is key. So there is a randomness (albeit a shrinking one) and a free will paradigm at play. In terms
of theology, I do not feel there is any need to delve any more to further the understanding of the model; a choice
exists, that is all. So the mutation theory can stand out not just as stochastic proposal, it is also a bold
illustration as to how Mbius (symmetry breaking) Incompleteness in a Riemann geometry can give rise to what
can be deemed intelligent behaviour.
Consider any object in a Riemann Geometry. It is a property, a mathematical truth of this object that any line
section of it is Mbius (i.e. contains a 180 half twist. See here) in structure - the Riemann object can be
described as a pinched S^3 sphere and, by examining it as a Clifford (Fibre) bundle of a Riemannian manifold, we
can say that all sections are Mbius in character, as there exists a choice of sign with respect to the vectors
therein. The Mbius twist itself the interval of inflexion leaves a gap in the model this concept is
expounded on shortly.
In a Riemann type geometry, a conic represents a pinch of some sort. An unmolested bounded space can be taken
to be a sphere but some stress on the system will render it not so the most basic morphing will be hyperbolically
conical. I state gravity to be a constraint simply due to its universality with respect to binding a system. With
respect to separating the time and space factors, I feel that, as we are dealing with a spacetime metric, the mutation
function is a coupled bivariable function. It is almost a rule of thumb that nature will not use a simple linear
function to do anything a simple non-linear function is generally the case. The geometry can be taken to be a
quantum geometry, but I believe that most of what we experience has its origin in these kinds of spaces. I feel that
the solution space metric we will design should embody these qualities and also be breathable (my term)
and elastic a mathematical weave as opposed to a mathematical covering (6). I am inspired by Goethes
quote: Search nothing beyond the phenomena, they themselves are the theory.


Take the interval of inflexion and call it the Aleph Point. This is the point where symmetry breaks (down) in the
overall section and the system is called on to evolve to a higher dimension. Now consider a closed space under
some sort of constraint, gravitational or otherwise, and represent it as a conic, with a time interval T operating.
Note that as we travel down the conic, taking sections at points a, b, c, and d, we can deduce, as we travel down
the conic, that the probability of an Aleph Point being called on increases for two reasons. First, because the
section interval is shorter (|a|>|b|>|c|>|d|), so the aleph point is more likely to be chosen. Second, because the
time interval is operating faster as spacetime is getting denser toward the bottom of the conic. The overall
conclusion is that the greater the strain/constrain(t) on a system, the greater the probability of
symmetry breaking.

With respect to genetic algorithms, I propose that symmetry breaking is analogous to mutation.
The challenge lies in fabricating an appropriate metric for the solution space so that a suitable
variable mutation function can be applied and a more efficient algorithm developed. It must be a
Mbius weave, as opposed to a covering. It must be non-Euclidean. It must not be decimal or binary in base
foundation, as, to my mind and acumen, there are no universal harmonics bound to 2 or 10. Right now, 360 seems
to be the most appropriate base.

This is a very important demonstration as to how Mbius topologies, incompleteness and Riemann
geometry combine in a sense that seems intelligent.

One of the fundamental challenges with respect to our quantum computing/A-Life project
surrounds waveform collapse. There is the choice space of the mind of the user and the solution space of
the A-Life device. The probability space of the range of choices presented to the user collapses into a decision
and the superposition of states offered by quantum computing/A-Life must collapse into the same decision.
My investigations of waveform collapse suggest that it happens due to a well of incomplete spaces, and collapse
happens in pairs of wave potentials. This is due to the anticipation of Newtons third law every action has an
equal and opposite reaction. So there is an instance (action) vector and a shadow (reaction) vector, one
anticipating the other. In terms of the dimensionality of the event (i.e. waveform collapse), it is infinite in potential
and finite in eventual unfolding this finitude following the sequence 1, 4, 11, 26, 57, 120, 247 [see the figures
the symmetry breaking of aleph] (based on dynamic patching of incomplete spaces generated by Mbius
inflections). In my modelling, the only way that I could stop the well being infinite (and the event taking an
eternity to happen) is by observing the origin (the origin being the ordained source of vectors of a given
framework) being sucked into the event as all vectors are brought to the events location. There is a kiss of
origin and event, the dimensionality of the collapse reaches a finitude, a moment of absolute parity is
achieved and then the collapsed waveform unwinds.

It is this moment of parity that we must strive for the equality of what is in the mind of the operator
and the equivalent member of the solution space. I have meditated on the = symbol for many years and
the result of these contemplations is that the symbol is actually quite special and not to be used lightly. I regard it
as a parity license and, like all licenses, it must be applied for.

Where the challenge lies is in accessing a Schrdinger waveform to play with. It may be of use to
draw on a conjecture that I developed regarding Schrdingers Equations and Parametric Normal
Distributions. The question I pose is this: Do statistics imitate life, or does life imitate statistics? The
conjecture is based on the meditation that, because Gauss rigorous definition of the Normal Distribution [the
ubiquitous Bell Curve (because it looks like a bell) seen in most statistical models, particularly in models
whose elements have the possibility to chose their state] predated the development of Quantum Theory, the
results of experimentation and thought experiments were mathematically retrofitted into Gauss model and
taken to be a system of statistical aggregates. However, it is my view that Gauss Normal Distribution is a
trans-dimensional fractal, mimicking in form and behaviour its quantum origins on a macro scale.

This conjecture is supported by David Bohms first postulate of his highly regarded quantum theory: that the
Schrdinger equation is not only a mathematical object it is also an object of form. This
expansion of consciousness permits the accessing of a Schrdinger waveform through
parametric data. There must be an analogue input at some instance, but the scale is not important. I feel that this
search for the appropriate input could be like Edisons search for the appropriate filament for his lightbulb.

numbers
3, or threeness, is very important with respect to escaping the tyrannies of binary/digital. Indeed, the
trick with respect to our macro q-device will be to build a device that goes beyond Turings definition in
On Computable Numbers of a universal computing device while using components which conform to that
definition.

12 has many strengths. Its combination of three and four make it a very musical number, and it has almost
self-organizing properties. This is also the case in a strong way for things divided into 360 parts. It is well to
remember that base 2 and base 10 are to be seen as some sort of enemy to our thinking regarding this project.

64 is important with respect to partitioning a vector space. My research has led me to conclude that anything after
a 64th part partition is meaningless. It represents the gauge of the vector net that we are to establish.
I believe that complete coverings cannot be applied to real-world scenarios as they fail to incorporate concepts of
incompleteness. *Breathable metrics are what is called for*. In order to fabricate these metrics, there is a
requirement for a given, acceptable tolerance to this metric and its least element. I propose that 64 be this
tolerance. Although it is a classic number in binary computing, it does have a nice twelveness to it in that there are
4 parts of 8 and 8 parts of 4, and this twelveness is crucial in modelling a nexus of any given spacetime scenario.
There must be some analogue input somewhere along the way. Resonance is, as far as I know, one of the few
quantum phenomena that can be experienced on a macro level. It is a way to access a Schrdinger waveform in a
fractal, macro sense.


MANIFESTING QUANTUM COMPUTING
Alan N. Shapiro : As in object-oriented software development, there is the design of a model, with data and
operations. Software models something in real-world processes, but what we need for quantum computation is a
way that allows the model to breathe and facilitate emergence of intelligence. Breathable models,
mutable axioms.

Alexis Clancy : The mathematical proposal with respect to quantum phenomena would not be best described as
particle physics. It is more of a fractal investigation of the behaviour of waves with a view to creating
a metric space that can shadow the thought of a human mind, particularly its choices. This I hold to
be possible seeding (my term) a specially constructed metric with the appropriate fractal
incompleteness. It is nearly as important to understand what we do not want to do.

Alexis Clancy and Alan N. Shapiro :
We want incompleteness. Some methodologies exist in electronic engineering where a least element is
applied to create a mesh for the mathematical space used for examining given problems. But this has little to do
with Gdels incompleteness it is just a method that works. Where the novelty in our proposed methodology lies
is in the assertion that the gaps left in a given frame due to a Mbius inflection are the physical
manifestation of incompleteness. This is a significant breakthrough, and it is the real way forward for
Artificial Intelligence.

Alexis Clancy : Incompleteness is almost treated as a dirty word in modern physics I am of a polar attitude.
I find it to be critical, and, if harnessed properly, the way forward with respect to the development of true Artificial
Intelligence. I cannot stress enough how important Gdels work is to my overall thesis. It throws wobbles into
any proposition. Furthermore, on examining the epistemology of axiomatic reasoning, a rigorous examination of
any axiom-based theory will inevitably reduce to an examination of the word itself. Axiom: that which can be
taken as self-evident truth. Well, what is truth? It is certainly no objective matter, so, indeed, it is a matter of
faith that it is taken to be true. Though the faith element may be considered epsilon small in dimension, it still
exists, but is habitually glossed over. I have come to see axioms as totems, as opposed to hardline written-in-
stone truths. In view of the incompleteness theorem, it behoves one to have mutable, evol ving, breathable
axioms or else the theory will be crushed by incompleteness at some later point in time and space.

What we will practice is the strategy of reversibility overturn the negatively connoted perception of
limit into a positive opportunity. Incompleteness will be a positive program for
growing embodiment and vitality. For the first time, computer programming (Java) will be extended from
classical combinatorial logic to the programming of the real conditions for emergence.
The first step will be to program in Java a Universal Incompleteness Generator. This is eminently doable, since
computing as we know it today can produce undecidable statements in a negative way, starting from any set of
arithmetical axioms. Any computer program can be expressed as a mathematical function, then converted into an
arithmetical formula, then Gdel-ized. This negative use of Gdels incompleteness theorem in computer
science establishes the limit of what can be proved or disproved from axioms. Existing computer science thereby
points directly to the limit of its own paradigm, and is clueless as to how to proceed further. This Universal
Incompleteness Generator establishes the stumper (a key word for our project many of the great advances of
twentieth-century mathematics and science have stuck for a very long time on these stumpers).

Another important aspect of the incompleteness theorem as the way to the emergence of Artificial Intelligence
is dimension hopping. Dimensional history follows quantum developments, as illustrated in the below diagram,
which looks at the fractal nature of incompleteness. In this diagram up to 11 dimensions are labelled, and 26
dimensions are marked but unlabeled. The aleph approaching x indicates the timeframe of the event, the hammers
of the aleph hopping over the trunk (the trunk is the long diagonal shaft of the Aleph) represent two time lines
(the instance and the shadow) that are not touching. As the main time line is fractally phased smaller, the aleph
approaches x. Indicated in the diagram are the creati ve evolutionary properties of both Mbius and
Incompleteness the capacity to reach higher dimensions so as to ensure the survi val of a system.
This can be percei ved as intelligence. The predicted dimensionality gives the opportunity to catch the
strands of an event as it evolves.

This intelligence stems from the presence of the Mbius Pi half-twist in the frame. This has more to do with the
existence of choice than anything else. From the perspective of an observer looking at the frame, there exists this
inflexion in the frame for which no power can be discerned as its cause. Yet something is the cause. I [Alexis
Clancy] label an operator that brings it about, and leave the rest to the imagination. I call this the aleph operator.
It has an energy signature, albeit a very small one, just enough to exist epsilon small. (7)

We do not want a covering. A covering is a topological abstraction where the collection or union of subsets
is posited as equivalent to the whole topological space. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy restricting the topology in
advance to the combinatorial and the impossibility of emergence.

We want a weave. Tailoring the weave so that Intelligence may arise is an amazingly elegant solution,
infinitely superior to all of the other proposed Artificial Intelligence paradigms. It will be simple, and we will do it
fast, and it will be fast. We will discover and open up to visibility the reality of non-Euclidean geometry. The
topologies and the programming in software of this new geometry will be simultaneous.

We do not want binary stasis. Binary stasis is the Endgame of computing as we know it today. However, (1)
a binary model can be set up to stand in as a placeholder for holistic emergence, then (2) the suppression
of radical uncertainty that is imposed by static binary simulations metaphysical rejection of the third term can
be overturned to liberate Otherness and substantiate in fact that all is not simulation.

We want dance. By displacing the incompleteness argument away from the semantic and more towards the
semiotic and the fractal, we set motion into motion, and also free motion from symmetrical images,
which are always static simulation models. Dance for us is the animation that emerges from all kinds of
asymmetrical movements.

We want to create something breathing, evol ving that has the capacity to be novel. A huge aspect
of modelling incompleteness is the clocking of the space. This is achieved by slowing the clocks of the other two
spaces (Cartesian space and Schrdinger space). The behaviour of events pertaining to incomplete spaces,
particularly with respect to symmetry breaking, is known to us on a theoretical basis, so the modelling is distinctly
achievable.



PUTTING THE METAPHORS TOGETHER; DIALOGUE: AN EXPANSION OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Alan N. Shapiro : Peter W. Shors work on quantum computing in software is important, but I think that his
approach actually represents precisely the direction that we do not want to go in. The two principal efforts in
quantum computing are either to imagine a reversible gate implemented in hardware (an effort which honestly is
not going anywhere) or to formalize algorithms like Shor does, thus isolating the problem to the quantum Fourier
transform, which the hardware gate still must implement and (as yet, cannot) solve.
Quantum physics was never philosophically understood by its practitioners, who opted to just use it, and
subsequently developed practical statistical methods for doing so. No trans-disciplinary knowledge there. So far,
all that the physicists and mathematicians have done are clever tricks. Even the quantum teleportation
experiment has to use the clever trick of the joint Bell-state analysis or measurement of a third particle that is
independent of the entangled pair.
Shors algorithms and all the ideas about quantum computing in hardware continue this reductionist history of
quantum physics that never tries to philosophically understand the weirdness of reality, the absolute fact
that reality is being created anew at each moment. But this reductionism just will not do anymore!
Only with an expansion of consciousness does a protected space open up where the impossibilities of
quantum mechanical observation are suspended (as an act of friendship by the divine towards us, so to
speak). In this protected space, we can do transformations in a different way. It will not be the Newtonian taking of
a measurement that destroys the state measured.

Alexis Clancy : I am pretty much in complete agreement with your assessment of the Shor paper and of
Western quantum thinking generally. There seems to be a satisfaction in drawing a line between the known and the
unknown and leaving the rest to statistical aggregates. My fascination is with that very line.
While Shors paper has much merit (and is an extremely good study aid), it is hard to imagine that the decoherence
problems could ever be eliminated to the point of being cost-effective. I have an issue with the quest for the true
randomness criteria that the factoring algorithms are based on. I believe that, while things at a certain point in time
and space may seem random, stepping out of that inertial frame of reference often reveals a pattern. I
often say that 8nothing is truly random. There is no sense in breaking our necks trying to generate true
randomness. I also have a mixed attitude towards noise I do not think that it matters if the model is framed
correctly unless the noise is cataclysmic. (8)

Alan N. Shapiro : The way to take measurements on both sides of a created universe, of the model and its
phantom, to access all of the quantum information that is going on in the system, is to have a safe, protected
space in between where one is allowed to be, prior to becoming (measurable).First, we will have a
portion that conforms to the definition of a universal computing device made by Turing in On Computable
Numbers, the q-state, the third possible state of the qubit, as a statistical aggregate of all the other states that we
are interested in (for a particular systems design). That is no problem. Second, we will have a portion that goes
beyond Turings definition. Along these lines, we want to perceive quantum states of musical resonance which are
going on in the system in real-time, not just Normal Distribution stuff that existing computer science and
mathematics have been able to handle.

Alexis Clancy : Just a quick word on Fermats Last Theorem (x^n + y^n = z^n has no integer solutions for n >
2). Im not sure that I have told you this, but ALL my work stems from an image of a splitting Mbius band and
there being a correlation between it and a solution to the theorem. What has spawned from this is an ongoing
evolving body of work that should keep me busy until I die. But what occurred to me in this examination is that
this is one of the most succinct mystical sign posts that the West has to offer. Whereas Wiles offered a proof for
the cases of n = 3 to infinity, I look at Pythagoras as being a special case. My examination of least triangles has led
me to conclude that they are bound by Kroneker Delta functions (collapsed waveforms). Any other slight deviation
other than an orthogonal view leads to Mbius incompleteness. Fermat hints at this.

Once we step off a surface, the mathematical texture deviates. I have gone through Euclids Elements
(Book VII in particular), which is the bible of the set of all definitions and postulates for classical number
theory. Its measure, measure, measure all the way It is no great leap (I think) to suggest that it is
collapsed waveforms, measured as they are, as opposed to uncollapsed probabilistic waveforms
(mathematically, Schrdinger Equations operating in a complex Hilbert space), which are at play in the
formulation of nearly all of the postulates and proofs set out by Euclid, if they are to be taken in a
physical sense. I actually have a problem with the concept of a Hilbert Space I consider it to be a barrel for an
ashtray solution to housing a wave equation.

Alan N. Shapiro : Here is the answer to the riddle of quantum physics: not measure, but percei ve. And an
expansion of consciousness supports an expanded perception. Quantum behaviour is a reality.
Physicists thought that they could not observe or measure this reality without destroying the information therein.
But they conceptualized the methodology of observation conventionally. The space from which one can observe
the reality of quantum behaviour without destroying the information therein is also a reality, a fact of nature. We
do not have to invent this space, we only have to perceive it. This space of non-destructi ve observation
really exists, just as quantum behaviour really exists, and we will get it working in software. To perceive this
space, we have to change our consciousness. Thats all that we have to do! We have to recognize as being
scientific some ways of perceiving that belong to other traditions that Western science has so far small-mindedly
regarded as non-scientific. This expanded perceiving includes creative mathematics, the deconstruction of classical
spacetime mechanics, Buddhist and Hinduist meditation/ontologies, Aboriginal-sacred-mystical-expanded
consciousness thinking, and Continental semiotics/grammatology.

Alexis Clancy : I try to stay away from equations, as the equalto operation reduces everything to a Euclidean
realm (measure, measure, measure) that really does not concern us. Most of the work is fractal, either a fractal
Aleph or a Schrdinger. We do not have to prove anything, we just have to get the thing working. The
equalto only exists for that brief moment within eternity when Newtons Third law is satisfied. We are
drowning in the equalto operation. It is one of the first things that has to go if we are to break our minds out
of this lens space and see things as they truly are. (William Blake)




I do think that what lies ahead of us is developing a new type of stochastic method. I am looking forward to
discovering it with you.

Alan N. Shapiro : Your idea of the Epsilon Cleft is a very good representation of that protected space which
provides an extra framing dimension enabling observation of the set of bits (in a body of real numbers
that is beyond Turings idea of what is computable) which are in a 0 state, and the set of bits which are in a 1
state. The Epsilon Cleft is safe and protected, non-destructive, a breathable space based on
breathable axioms, outside spacetime mechanics.

Alexis Clancy : In terms of the Epsilon Cleft, the initial instantiation is straightforward enough to introduce the
idea of a Third Space from the point of view of mathematical modeling (after all, the model is the reality, I
believe), but what I have yet to formulate is the Epsilon Metric, which is how I view spacetime: as a Mbius
weave with Epsilon spaces throughout. But I have more than a strong informed instinctive feeling that it
has the texture and character of a fractal Aleph.

This is, I believe, the fundamental challenge that confronts our project. Harnessing what for some are considered
to be problems symmetry breaking and incompleteness to a mathematical model, and turning them, in
relation to the overall model, into a source of zero point energy. Clocking the metric will be fun the spacetime
of some aspects of the metric are going to be vastly different from others. It is then that the faith element comes
into play, and the building of resonating phenomenal forms in this Epsilon metric. Not only is the Epsilon
Space non-computable, so too is the Unknown space, as, ultimately, the wave can collapse anywhere.

Alan N. Shapiro : So ultimately we will need much faster hardware as well, quantum computing hardware. At
first, well have a little bit of AI (which will already be a lot, will be worth its weight in gold), but to get lots of AI
will be a long-term project.

Alexis Clancy : Here is an idea for the nuts and bolts aspect of the project. This has emerged as the result of
contemplating an Aboriginal Dreamtime model of parallel timestreams. This is opposed to a certain model of
Western narrative. We in the West operate in but one single node of the Aboriginal model, our obsession with the
workaday real, leaving us bereft of many riches. In my models of quantum computing and Artificial Life, I have
discerned three timelines in a given event. Two of them are vector timelines, and one is scalar. To instantiate the
metric, we need three different types of clocks, three nodes of Dreamtime.
The three different types of clocks are:
Metronome (vector).
Elastic (vector).
Superfast (scalar).
The Metronome clock is Cartesian and represents physical real time.

The Elastic clock represents the time frame for the Schrdinger space. I have discerned that the spacetime
compacts and decompacts at intervals. The Elastic time is complex, Mbius, and has dimensionality of 4, 11,
26, 57, depending on symmetry breaking.

The Superfast clock time frame relates to the incomplete spaces. The Superfast time is Aleph 0
(countable), infinite in dimension, and also Mbius in character.
Both the Metronome time and the Elastic time are considerably slower than that of the superfast time. This gives
us an opportunity to take advantage of simulated annealing the stochastic method whereby the solution space
provides the overall method with an opportunity to hop to a better optimum solution.

From the hardware point of view, the STI Cell microprocessor architecture looks interesting. We will do a lot of
programming in C as well as in Java. What I think is significant is that we have a very definite line of inquiry with
respect to the practical implementation of quantum computing and Artificial Life in software. (9)

Alan N. Shapiro: I create a database with 65,536 entries. Its a simple comma-delimited text file for now, one
key-value pair on each line. The key is a 4-digit instruction. Each digit is a hex number ranging from 0 to F. After
the comma, is a 4-digit reply, arbitrarily using the upper-case letters G to V. This has no meaning, only that each
reply is unique. So its something like a John Searle Chinese Room or a primitive conversation database. You
give an instruction and get back a reply.

Using a random shuffle or a binary search tree, whatever, I load the key-value pairs from the database to a Java
TreeMap. Ill have 8 mechanistic-conventional data structures going which handle instructions or queries that are
coming in and the reply to the instruction. There will then be a 9th data structure which has the aspiration of not
being mechanistic but rather holistic or quantum.

The goal is to have a new kind of data structure built on top of q-bits which can acquire values (0 or 1) by
autonomously perceiving what is going on holistically in a system in real-time, going beyond the explicit setting of
the values of bit-based data structures by the subject-centered programmer, which is what existing computer
science is all about. This holistic perception or receiving of information from an elsewhere has something
crucially to do with the question of how does one obtain quantum information in a way that is not a statistical
reduction, a statistical aggregation of many possible outcomes. Alexis hypothesizes in his unconventional
mathematics that we are in effect dealing with two qualitatively non-local, albeit relatively near quantum
systems. In a very brief moment of time prior to the waveform collapse that produces the results available to us in
the real (or simulation) quantum system, there exists another system where a small edge in quantum knowing
whether an outcome is going to be 0 or 1, which of two left-right parallel slits the photon is going to pass through,
whether the roulette ball is going to fall on a red or a black number is available.

To achieve the Hello World of the LIMERICK METRIC SPACE in software will not necessarily mean that we
will then have functions in our software library that always reliably return the same calculation result. This is no
longer about equations or calculations in the traditional sense, about looking up cosines in a trigonometric table,
knowing the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle. It is about being a sort of magician who has a
sixth sense of special sequences of numbers with certain magical powers. It is about developing a sense of time,
the running of unconventional clocks, which are other than linear time. Passing data through these special
sequences of numbers in a data approximation transform to gain a special edge in the knowledge of outcomes, to
attain that slightly more than 50% certainty that a gambler needs. Gamblers deal with gaining a special mastery
over incompleteness, not with definitively overcoming incompleteness in hard results as the APIs of
conventional programming language math libraries do. Thus the Limerick Metric Hello World will perform the
impossible feat of both satisfying the criterion of what software is it will really work and really do something
and rewriting the rules of what software is in an act of wily defiance and non-deterministic trickery.

MANIFESTO: ARTIFICIAL LIFE
Artificial Life is dynamically stabilized instability. Artificial Life is a computational paradigm for biology
and a biological paradigm for software engineering. The bio-informatic professional might be qualified in areas
like immune system computing and genome programming. Self-replicating computer programs are said to be
alive, according to cybernetics historian N. Katherine Hayles, through the rhetoric of biological analogies
regarding complex behavior, diversity regulation mechanisms, and their abundance of interacting adaptive
agents. With Artificial Life, the goal is to evolve intelligence within the machine through pathways found
by the creatures themselves. (10) Life-based systems emphasize autonomous agents without a directing
layer, strange attractors, and the appearance of emergent behaviours. They have the features
of unpredictability, mutability, nonlinearity, rule diversity, fuzzy functionality, and chaotic
instability. They tend to operate in a state of non-equilibrium that is at the edge of chaos. Data storage
structures have non-discrete holistic forms and connections. Programming languages acquire self-modifying
capabilities. Computing systems coinciding with the third order of cybernetics have properties affiliated with
genetic algorithms, cellular automata, and neural networks. The hyper-dynamic software makes leaps to
new attractor structures that can in turn mutate into yet further configurations.

END: INCOMPLETE:
This is a stochastic method that draws heavily on the positive inferences of Gdels Incompleteness Theorems by
applying them to topological choice structures (i.e. Mbius structures). These inferences give rise to rich insight
regarding symmetry breaking and variable mutation probability theorems. There is also a coupling with these
inferences and purely mathematical skewing of certain basic paradigms skewing of mathematical bases and
alternate treatment of origin and infinity constructs.

NOTES
1 Alan N. Shapiro is a trans-disciplinary thinker who studied science-technology at MIT and philosophy-history-
literature at Cornell University. He is the author of Technologies of Disappearance and many published essays. He
is a practicing software developer, and a translator of works in new philosophy and new critical theory from
German and Italian into English. He loves baseball and casino gambling.
2 In the article abstract. This echoes the view of Humboldt University media theory professor Friedrich Kittler
who pointed out in his essay There is no Software that Turings computing machine is a reduction of the body of
real numbers extant in nature that we call chaos.
3 Rupert Sheldrake, The Sense Of Being Stared At. See: A New Science of Life: The Hypothesis of Formative
Causation (1981), The Presence of the Past. Morphic Resonance and the Habits of Nature (1988), and The Rebirth
of Nature: The Greening of Science and God (1991), all by Rupert Sheldrake.

4 Alexis Clancy is a young Irish artist, computer scientist, and mathematician with university degrees in
mathematics and physics. He has a special genius here, and his breakthroughs stem in part from his having
undertaken studies of comparative historical mathematical systems, such as Hebrew and Mayan mathematics, and
Bushido dynamics.
5 Artistic Director of Daghdha Dance Company.
6 In mathematics, a Metric Space is a set where a specific concept of distance between elements of the set is
defined and implemented. Three-dimensional Euclidean space a way of thinking about space that belongs to the
Western metaphysical construction of reality as it was originated by the Ancient Greek thinkers corresponds to
our intuitive understanding of space. Another example of Western metaphysics is the Aristotelian classifiying
logic of A is true or B is true, the limits of which as an intelligent system of logic are nowadays showing more
and more. The geometric properties of the Metric Space depend on the Metric chosen. By conceptualizing a
different Metric, interesting Non-Euclidean Geometries can be constructed, for example, those used in the
Einsteinian theory of general relativity. Metric Spaces are Topological Spaces, and there is a continuous function
between Metric Spaces (small changes in input result in small changes in output).
7. What is also nifty about the Aleph operator is that its effect on a frame (and a model being a dynamic series of
frames) renders it consistent with slices of a Riemann solid, and is therefore consistent with the geometry of both
the quanta and the cosmic. I am not a complete expert on Riemann geometry, but I know enough to know this.
8 [Cybernetic Epistemologist Gregory] Batesons .. ecology of mind .. assumed that noise generation was
creative. In Batesons reinterpretation, noise was playful and creative; it became looped back into the overall
system as part of the creation of new patterns. .. thus the presence of noise was by no means an error to be
overcome; rather, it was a source for future adaptation.
9 Purely mathematical objections: To model anything on a (0, ) interval can ultimately only give rise to serious
non-sequiturs due to the incompatibility of the concepts of zero and infinity with the set of real numbers.
Furthermore, the treatment of zero as a straightforward singularity to be (more or less) mathematically ignored
denies the model some of the subtleties that a dynamic of the origin can offer (specifically when it comes to
marshalling events and the dimensionality achieved therein).
10 N. Katherine Hayles, How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and
Informatics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999); p.239
PUBLISHED 2 JULY 09, CHOREOGRAPH.NET