Of course, these Nobel Bauble driven days, “quantum memories” sound like little more than search engine bawdlerised AdWords..
(for Xφ, I prefer to define it as relative to a given frame: φ holds the next time any of the frame variables change, which allows both continuous<->discrete translation and for Lamport's stuttering [to allow abstraction!])
Next up: GC via creation and annihilation operators? (in my algebraic view of informatics, one is often either structuring by cleaving two parts to make a whole, or destructuring by cleaving a whole into two parts)
EDIT: and by past-oriented I mean using "was ever" for "eventually" and in the past for "globally", as well as "since" for "until". multiply t by i^2.
Not sure when i’ll get there praying for a serendipitous intersection of cargoculting nonsssociativity and diagram spelunking (aided by your hints, half-remember’d)
Although… i confess to doing the trivial thing of drawing the “cayley graph” of {rock,paper,scissors} and observing that it looks like a loopfree 3-vertex term (1 outgoing)
Can we triage our ikigai such that I (sympathising with my machinery) take all your overly-associative structures and you (communing with the universe?) take all my insufficiently-associative structures?
(there are many in maths: eg topologies, being families of sets, can be represented by a particular magma)
Lagniappe: https://www.georgehart.com/triad.html
For instance, in the Boom Hierarchy* (sets,bags,lists,trees) we can represent the information carried by any of the structures by any of the others (exercise!) despite the fact that operations on that information may be made easier or more difficult by the presence or lack of laws (idempotency,commutativity,associativity) that are the linear delta-edges between those types-as-vertices themselves.
[IIRC, magmas would be mobiles, and I'd bet we can extend the above to them as well.]
* I know I repeat these often, but hey, I'm not alone: gopher-the-language was inspired by a "go" lemma-function in someone's sol'n to samefringe.
I'd been at peace if you mentioned the triples, but it's too late now..
Of course, absent those restrictions, it's doing way more work than it can possibly handle.
But not the references inside apple boxen
(shouldn't all messages be in \pi sooner or [much, much...] later?)
[does the def'n of "message" include finite length?]
>Sagan's friend physicist Kip Thorne gave Sagan ideas on the nature of wormholes when Sagan was developing the outline of the novel.
Not sure that prediction holds up (although streaming dbs in the cloud seem awfully "tape-like" to me?), but I did attempt to quickly redo his "5 minute rule" calculations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42125052
If I did the math right, there's no point to swap or paging anymore, as the break-even point I got was evict after 1 week* (instead of 5 min) for random access patterns, and evict after 5 hours for sequential access patterns.
These days maybe those breakeven calculations would be more useful for deciding how long to keep something in a register and when it'd be better to recalculate or spill to main memory?
* of course, if you keep everything in main memory and forget nothing, we're close to what in 1998 was one of McCarthy's pipe dreams: Elephant2000 http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/elephant/elephant.html ; I guess if I were to attempt something like Elephant2038, it'd wind up looking like a bunch of past-oriented LTL formulae?
(the "speech acts" were probably Winograd's influence?)