[Paper Review] Time generated by intrinsic observers

Karl Svozil|ArXiv.org|Apr 15, 2009

Cellular Automata and Applications6 references3 citations

TL;DR

This paper explores how intrinsic observers—entities embedded within a physical system and unable to access an external 'God's eye' view—can generate their own notions of time and space through operational conventions, such as synchronization using sound waves in a cellular automaton model. Despite the underlying system being deterministic, intrinsic observers experience complementarity and inertial frames, and the paper speculates that time paradoxes from superluminal travel may stem from flawed space-time constructions rather than physical impossibility.

ABSTRACT

We shortly review the construction of knowledge by intrinsic observers. Intrinsic observers are embedded in a system and are inseparable parts thereof. The intrinsic viewpoint has to be contrasted with an extrinsic, "God's eye" viewpoint, from which the system can be observed externally without in any way changing it. This epistemological distinction has concrete, formalizable consequences. One consequence is the emergence of "complementarity" for intrinsic observers, even if the underlying system is totally deterministic (computable). Another consequence is the appearence of time and inertial frames for intrinsic observers. The necessary operational techniques are developed in the context of Cellular Automata. We finish with a somewhat speculative question. Given space-time frames generated by clocks which use sound waves for synchronization; why could supersonic travel not cause time paradoxes?

Motivation & Objective

• To investigate how intrinsic observers—embedded within a system and unable to access an external perspective—can construct a coherent notion of time and space.
• To contrast the intrinsic observer's operational framework with the extrinsic 'God's eye' viewpoint, highlighting epistemological differences.
• To demonstrate that even in a fully deterministic system, intrinsic observers experience complementarity and inertial frames due to operational constraints.
• To explore whether time paradoxes from superluminal travel are artifacts of flawed space-time construction rather than physical impossibilities.
• To examine the role of synchronization methods (e.g., sound waves) in generating inertial frames and temporal order for embedded observers.

Proposed method

• The paper uses cellular automata as a formal model to simulate the operational procedures of intrinsic observers, encoding physical operations such as synchronization and measurement as state transition rules.
• It defines synchronization procedures based on wave propagation (e.g., sound waves) to establish simultaneity and time intervals, analogous to Einstein's synchronization using light.
• Transformation rules for a CA-based light clock are explicitly defined, modeling the behavior of clocks and signals in different inertial frames.
• The model incorporates a hierarchy of descriptions: a 'shell' theory (e.g., smoron physics based on sound) emerges from a deeper, more fundamental theory (e.g., electromagnetism), resembling Anderson's concept of emergent laws.
• It applies Bridgman's operationalism, asserting that theoretical concepts must be grounded in measurable, physical operations rather than abstract metaphysical postulates.
• The paper uses Lorentz transformations and diagonalization techniques to model backward-in-time signaling and time paradoxes, drawing parallels with Gödel’s and Turing’s undecidability proofs.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How can intrinsic observers, confined within a system, generate a consistent notion of time and space without access to an external reference frame?
• RQ2 Why do intrinsic observers in a deterministic system still experience complementarity, even when the underlying dynamics are fully computable?
• RQ3 Can inertial frames and temporal order emerge from operational synchronization procedures based on wave propagation (e.g., sound) rather than electromagnetic signals?
• RQ4 To what extent do time paradoxes in relativistic scenarios arise from flawed space-time constructions rather than physical impossibilities?
• RQ5 Why might superluminal travel not lead to time paradoxes if the observer's synchronization mechanism is based on a slower wave (e.g., sound) rather than light?

Key findings

• Intrinsic observers in a deterministic system can still experience complementarity due to operational constraints, even without any inherent indeterminism in the underlying dynamics.
• The construction of time and space is not absolute but depends on operational conventions—such as wave-based synchronization—used by the observer, leading to frame-dependent inertial structures.
• Time paradoxes arising from backward-in-time signaling are not necessarily physical impossibilities but may stem from unfaithful or inconsistent constructions of space-time by the observer.
• Observers using sound-based synchronization (e.g., 'smorons') cannot operationalize diagonalization-based time paradoxes because their physics is constrained by hidden, unobservable degrees of freedom in the underlying theory.
• The model suggests that space-time is not a metaphysical given but a theoretical construct built from operational procedures, and inconsistencies in this construction may explain apparent paradoxes.
• The paper implies that the impossibility of superluminal travel may be a consequence of the observer’s synchronization framework rather than a fundamental law, if that framework is based on slower signals like sound.