> For complex objects such as computers to exist in our universe, many other objects had to form first, such as stars, heavy elements, life, tools, technology and the abstraction of computing. All this takes time and is path-dependent due to the casual contingency of each innovation that is made.
So... a universal tech tree?
So, time is not a cube?
Slightly more seriously though, It's hard for me to tell if this is a serious theory, or timecube level stuff?
For those who find the color of the text unbearable:
let elements = document.querySelectorAll('span');
for (el of elements) { el.style.color = 'black'; }
One of the most difficult aspects of doing research involving causality is consistently avoiding the "casual" misspelling.
i have heard Cronin on podcast … imo he has serious theories but makes some elliptic claims wrt the nature of time
best recent listen for me was Sean Carroll Mindscape on the emergence of time
i guess that the truth is some combination of both
Theory previously discussed on HN, eg:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35827189
(A New Theory for the Assembly of Life in the Universe; 135 points, 69 comments)