From Metric to Vector

Authors

  • Jaba Tkemaladze Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.65649/4nw8wh34

Keywords:

Discrete Spacetime, Foundational Physics, Information Theor, Quantum Gravity, Causal Sets, Predictive Coding

Abstract

The geometric-differential paradigm of spacetime, while foundational to modern physics, faces intrinsic challenges in quantum gravity and provides a limited framework for understanding state evolution as a computational process. This article proposes a shift in ontological foundations, presenting Ze, a discrete computational framework that implements the dynamics of a fundamental state vector Ψ. We argue that Ze is not merely an algorithm but a model of physical becoming, where space and time are not pre-existing coordinates but emerge as anti-parallel channels for the redistribution of information flow. Within Ze, the state vector is represented by a global configuration of statistical counters, and its evolution is driven by a process of passive learning through the minimization of prediction error. The framework naturally maps key physical entities: the temporal component corresponds to the sequential, irreversible flow of events and counter growth, while the spatial component corresponds to the synchronous, correlational structure of the internal model. This anti-parallelism is formalized in a discrete Ze-Lagrangian, a variational principle balancing structural stabilization against predictive error. We demonstrate how this setup allows for the emergence of relativistic invariants, a statistical and vector-based causality akin to causal sets, and quantum phenomena such as quantization (from discrete accounting) and interference (from superposition of predictive contexts). The theory reframes the observer as a self-norm-preserving system and suggests that Special and General Relativity are limiting descriptions of stable regimes in the Ze dynamics. The work offers a unified, vector-based ontology that derives physics from first principles of information processing.

References

Barbour, J. (2012). Shape dynamics. An introduction. Quantum Field Theory and Gravity, 257-297.

Brukner, Č. (2017). On the quantum measurement problem. In Quantum [Un]Speakables II (pp. 95-117). Springer, Cham.

Brukner, Č., & Zeilinger, A. (2009). Information invariance and quantum probabilities. Foundations of Physics, 39(7), 677-689.

Busemeyer, J. R., & Bruza, P. D. (2012). Quantum models of cognition and decision. Cambridge University Press.

Chialvo, D. R. (2010). Emergent complex neural dynamics. Nature Physics, 6(10), 744-750.

Chiribella, G., D’Ariano, G. M., & Perinotti, P. (2011). Informational derivation of quantum theory. Physical Review A, 84(1), 012311.

Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 181-204.

D’Ariano, G. M. (2017). Physics without physics: the power of information-theoretical principles. International Journal of Quantum Information, 15(08), 1740008.

Deutsch, D. (2013). Constructor theory. Synthese, 190(18), 4331-4359.

Dowker, F. (2006). Causal sets as discrete spacetime. Contemporary Physics, 47(1), 1-9.

Friston, K. (2010). The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(2), 127-138.

Friston, K. (2018). Am I self-conscious? (Or does self-organization entail self-consciousness?). Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 579.

Friston, K. (2019). A free energy principle for a particular physics. Entropy, 21(10), 943.

Fuchs, C. A., & Peres, A. (2000). Quantum theory needs no ‘interpretation’. Physics Today, 53(3), 70-71.

Goldstein, H. (1980). Classical mechanics (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley.

Henson, J. (2009). The causal set approach to quantum gravity. In D. Oriti (Ed.), Approaches to quantum gravity (pp. 393-413). Cambridge University Press.

Jaba, T. (2022). Dasatinib and quercetin: short-term simultaneous administration yields senolytic effect in humans. Issues and Developments in Medicine and Medical Research Vol. 2, 22-31.

Knill, D. C., & Pouget, A. (2004). The Bayesian brain: the role of uncertainty in neural coding and computation. Trends in Neurosciences, 27(12), 712-719.

Lloyd, S. (2002). Computational capacity of the universe. Physical Review Letters, 88(23), 237901.

Lloyd, S. (2006). Programming the universe: A quantum computer scientist takes on the cosmos. Knopf.

Lloyd, S. (2013). The universe as quantum computer. A computable universe: Understanding and exploring Nature as computation, 567-581.

Markopoulou, F. (2009). New directions in background independent quantum gravity. In Approaches to quantum gravity (pp. 129-149). Cambridge University Press.

Oriti, D. (2021). The complex timbre of reality: The prospects for an emergent spacetime. Foundations of Physics, 51(2), 1-22.

Pearl, J. (2009). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Pearle, P. (1999). Collapse models. In Open systems and measurement in relativistic quantum theory (pp. 195-234). Springer.

Rideout, D. P., & Sorkin, R. D. (2000). A classical sequential growth dynamics for causal sets. Physical Review D, 61(2), 024002.

Rovelli, C. (1996). Relational quantum mechanics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 35(8), 1637-1678.

Rovelli, C. (2011). Forget time. Foundations of Physics, 41(9), 1475-1490.

Rovelli, C. (2019). The physics and philosophy of time. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 70(2), 661-666.

Rovelli, C. (2021). The relational interpretation of quantum physics. In Beyond the dynamical universe (pp. 1-24). Oxford University Press.

Schreiber, T. (2000). Measuring information transfer. Physical Review Letters, 85(2), 461.

Sengupta, B., Stockburger, J., & Ananth, S. (2016). A path-integral approach to the dynamics of a neural system. The European Physical Journal Special Topics, 225(6-7), 1241-1260.

Smolin, L. (2006). The case for background independence. In The Structural Foundations of Quantum Gravity (pp. 196-239). Oxford University Press.

Surya, S. (2019). The causal set approach to quantum gravity. Living Reviews in Relativity, 22(1), 5.

Swingle, B. (2012). Entanglement renormalization and holography. Physical Review D, 86(6), 065007.

Tkemaladze, J. (2023). Reduction, proliferation, and differentiation defects of stem cells over time: a consequence of selective accumulation of old centrioles in the stem cells?. Molecular Biology Reports, 50(3), 2751-2761. DOI : https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36583780/

Tkemaladze, J. (2024). Editorial: Molecular mechanism of ageing and therapeutic advances through targeting glycative and oxidative stress. Front Pharmacol. 2024 Mar 6;14:1324446. DOI : 10.3389/fphar.2023.1324446. PMID: 38510429; PMCID: PMC10953819.

Tkemaladze, J. (2026). Old Centrioles Make Old Bodies. Annals of Rejuvenation Science, 1(1). DOI : https://doi.org/10.65649/yx9sn772

Tkemaladze, J. (2026). Visions of the Future. Longevity Horizon, 2(1). DOI : https://doi.org/10.65649/8be27s21

Van Raamsdonk, M. (2010). Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement. General Relativity and Gravitation, 42(10), 2323-2329.

Verlinde, E. (2011). On the origin of gravity and the laws of Newton. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2011(4), 29.

Wheeler, J. A. (1990). Information, physics, quantum: The search for links. In Complexity, entropy, and the physics of information (pp. 3-28). CRC Press.

Wolfram, S. (2002). A new kind of science. Wolfram Media.

Zeh, H. D. (2007). The physical basis of the direction of time. Springer Science & Business Media.

Downloads

Published

2026-02-07

Issue

Section

Theoretical Frameworks

How to Cite

Tkemaladze, J. (2026). From Metric to Vector. Longevity Horizon, 2(4). DOI : https://doi.org/10.65649/4nw8wh34

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > >> 

Similar Articles

11-20 of 38

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.