It looks like you're asking two different questions here. I'll answer the first one. Nothing in the universe can simulate the universe, because it would then be able to simulate itself simulating the universe, ad infinatum. Only an highly imperfect simulation of the universe, or a perfect simulation of a much smaller universe, could be performed however.

A perfect simulation is possible only in mathematical de-coring. Nothing else will work until we finish matmatical de-coding and apply it in the simulation pattern. I have generated some fundamental calculation, but not able to integrate into leanear scale. This may be seems to be stupid some times, but I hope if you able to convert into universal magnitude, we can win over the match.

If you had a perfect simulation of a current state, you still couldn't evaluate a subsequent state because QM interactions involve a random aspect. All simulations can only be accurate at a statistical level.

George Dishman

Thanks for the answer. In my opinion, however, this is only true if we accept the Copenhagen interpretation or other non-deterministic interpretations as correct. If deterministic interactions (e.g. Bohmian mechanics) were assumed, this would probably not be a fundamental problem, but of course others would arise instead.

I think experiments on quantum entanglement and violation of Bell's Inequalities, first done by Alain Aspect but since improved on by many others, have confidently excluded the existence of hidden variables and that probably necessitates non-determinism. However that doesn't select any particular interpretation, only the broad class.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-bohm/

"It is the simplest example of what is often called a hidden variables interpretation of quantum mechanics."

Aleš Kralj

Dear Ales, do you think that the above assumption of a mass effect by information should not be further considered? Or to put it another way: Is it conceivable that stored information itself has a mass value?

AK: Experiments on Bell inequalities have been done only on highly local experimental setups (to my knowledge merely couple hundred kilometers).

As long as the time between the measurements is less than the light travel time between the locations, that's enough.

AK: As long as one may assume that universe unfolds some sort of "cosmic wide Schrödinger equation" where all waves interlace, one can not be certain there are no internal "hidden variables", as randomness might be apparent.

If the measurements are determined by hidden variables carrying a random decision made at the time of creation of the entanglement, the statistics would be different from those for a random decision made at the time of measurement. That was the remarkable originality of Aspects experiments and all the tests have favoured the latter to the point where I think it has been accepted that hidden variables are comprehensively ruled out.

Whether that exclusively implies non-determinism is a more complex topic and perhaps more dependent on your preferred interpretation. I'm not fully convinced yet but it looks that way.

AK: We can not hope to design an Universe-wide experiment ...

That is certainly true, we should not forget the limitation imposed by our cosmological event horizon. We can only ever be causally linked to a tiny subset of the whole.

Following.

Thank you very much for the profitable comments.

But I want to get back to the core of the question. If we can describe the presence of information with a term linked to gravitational mass, does the formation of an Insight Horizon based on that mass appear to you to be an unusable analogy, or something that deserves further attention?

In fact, I didn't see any deeper meaning in it either. But when I saw in an ecological model that the approximation to a real state by a test model is asymptotic in nature with every additional factor, I immediately thought of the asymptotic external effect when an object approaches a black hole and is shifted into infinite red (for the observer). It was simply an idea, based on the analogy between the mass of information and the mass of a black hole and the formation of horizons by mass in narrow space.

Thank you very much for your gainful comments.

The starting point of thermodynamic logic is: 1) opposing perpetual motion. 2) The irreversibility of dynamics. Let's look at how to get Carnot efficiency = 1-T1/T2.

1.1 There are many kinds of type 2 perpetual motors, each of which is a natural phenomenon.

A) Machine A: against the irreversibility of thermodynamics (diffusion, heat conduction, friction, etc) - dynamics;

B) Machine B: Utilizing the Difference of Carnot Efficiency (Reversible Thermodynamics) - Thermodynamics

1.2 A and B belong to different disciplines. There is a parallel relationship between them and there is no logical mutual inevitability.

1.3. Logic of the Second Law of Thermodynamics:

Experience induction, deny that A machine==> B machine can not be manufactured==> All material Kano efficiency: 1-T1/T2.

1.4 The logic of the second law of thermodynamics violates the physical logic that A and B cannot be inferred from each other.

1.5 The second law of thermodynamics elevates the "irreversibility", which is in fact only a kinetic experience.

📷 Detailed discussion can be found in the following figure.