There are ideas out there, much hinges on discrete points and causal relationships. CST is one approach, hypergraphs is interesting and takes that idea further, preserves locality. There is a bright young researcher named Jonathan Gorard who has a good interview here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUV9Tla43G0
Login to reply
Replies (1)
You are deflecting away from the implications….If anything, CST and hypergraph models strengthen the point: they both quantize time. Once time is discrete, the entire ontology of quantum computation breaks. Discrete time means:
- no ∂ψ/∂t → Schrödinger’s equation fails
-no continuous unitary evolution → Hamiltonians can’t generate gates
-no coherence across ticks → superposition becomes impossible
-no substrate for phase evolution → Shor’s algorithm cannot run
CST and hypergraphs don’t rescue quantum computing, they expose the contradiction it depends on. Yet you stand with confidence that quantum computing (in its current form is inevitable)
If time is quantized, the mathematical and physical foundations of QC disappear. Bitcoin simply demonstrates this discretization in practice, which is why invoking CST or hypergraphs only reinforces my argument.
Bitcoin is the working instantiation of what CST and hypergraph theories are still trying to formalize. The irony is that Satoshi solved the hard part in 2009 and almost no one has realized it.