#k-computing

X= (A,B,C)

X1= (A,∅,B,∅,C,∅)

Change in entropy, A, becomes 'impossible'

X2 =(∅,∅,B,∅,C,∅)

If this is true, then we need a way that ∅ entropy points collapse! Else All dead universes have 'N' ∅ entropy points, which means we have an amount of ∅ points which, counted without discrimination, mean that after KP, with ∅ points, end not with one possibility, '∅', but 'N'∅ possibilities, which would make the death of a universe entropically indistinguishable from KP. The only way to distinguish KP from K∅ is their cardinality. If this is true

Which means entropically, without a ∅ collapse rule, KP = K∅.

So, we had the idea that every material point is either placed, positioned or in orbit, and all that. This means there can be rules to the order of points, rather than just their cardinality; Transfinite rules; we also have Trans-ordinal rules.

Since, we have a log of A, we can tell that the FIRST 'N', A, became ∅ in the next iteration.

X1 =(A,∅,B,∅,C,∅)

X2 = (∅,∅,B,∅,C,∅)

The order did not change, but the cardinality did.

Again, entropically, X1=X2,

So we establish a rule, that any ∅ which then follows another ∅ collapse.

X3= (∅,B,∅,C,∅)

Why? Well...Hrrrm...if not, then every universe is entropically the same. They are infinitely impossible on their death S = (∅,∅,∅...). I'd say it's more neat that nothing collapses when next to nothing...The materiality is the difference...but...either entropy is a force...or no measure of entropy can differ from KP once a universe starts to die...making KP insertion uncertain, we could Inject ourselves in any point in time...including the one where every possibility is dead...we want to avoid that...

Anyways, this would also mean that we can distinguish an aborted universe [∅] from a dead one [∅,∅,∅...], also from an immaterial one [], a birthed one [A], and a K one [A,B,C...N], KP no longer exists since it is equivalent to K∅.

We can use Trans-ordinal rules to demonstrate an asymmetry of entropy.

Y= (∅,A,∅ B,∅,C,∅)

Z= (A,∅,B,∅,C,∅,D)

Tree thing:

(A,∅,B,∅,C,∅,D)

(A,∅,B,∅,C)

(B,∅,C)

(∅,C)

(C).

Vs

(∅)

(∅,A)

(∅,A,∅)

(∅,A,∅,B,∅)

(∅,A,∅,B,∅,C,∅)...

But, this also means there can be symmetry from the order of the set.

(∅,A)

(∅,B)

OR

(B,∅)

(A,∅)

...

Problems aside...the recognition of ∅ points can give a kind of mosaic effect, where KP is now [∅,A,∅,B,∅,C,∅...] Rather than [A,B,C,D...] Doubling our countable/uncountable base...and adding another layer of security. Then, the death of a universe is seen in the collapsing of possibilities into ∅, and with the Trans-ordinal rule, Make them collapse into a singleton, and showing the decay of entropy, until it Reaches [∅] However...this means entropically, a dead universe is also an aborted universe...(???)

Buuut.

What about meta-entropy?

We have multiple ∅ universes next to each other...no?

S= [A(∅),B(∅)...N(∅)]

Although the entropic measure of ∅ is 1 for a K-bit, we have the rule of collapse...would these dead universes on a K-curve collapse as well? If so, then all K-curves share the same end...differing only in the permutations that lead to it. In other words, the best place to build a sanctuary is where both meta, and classical entropy dies, that way, if anyone does an 'oopsie' the worst that can happen is that the bartender at the end of all universes ribs you. Thanks Douglas Adams.

Meh, why not third thing?

G=[A,∅,()]

So we have points which are neither possible nor impossible...but is still a possibility...entropically we would think this;

G ≈ [1(1),1(0),0]

The maximal value of {1(1)} is the KP of N^KP...and the maximal value of {1(0)} is N^{1(0)}...the ∅ singleton of both meta-entropy, and Closed-entropy. While 0...is...well...NULL, an open K-gate...by definition, any value in there is NOT entropic, else it would be either 1(0), or 1(1)...This is how we fetch our identifiers through Non-Linear K-Gates.

Materiality is countability?...No, it's more that anything material clearly has a countable limit of KP...

*FLIPS TABLE*" THE RESTAURANT PRINCIPLE!"

"The...restaurant principle?"

" Basically, the material arrangements and permutations of every universe from N→KP, to KP→∅ are all a transistor for computing. From the fact that in possibility A the fork in that restaurant is blue, and that in possibility B, it is green, then it represents a computational gate that is Unique to the N-th degree. Like a mixed quantum packet logged by entropy...maybe?

Anyways...

Logging All dimensional switches from KP→∅.

Assume generalised dimensional protocols based on entropic difference between scales. The law which makes it that billions or more of quantum states seem well ordered to an observer at scale A. We affirm that entropy is not disorder.

E.G: Moment where Sub-atomic events are no longer sensitive to scale.

Moment where atomic events are no longer sensitive to scale

Moment where molecular events are no longer sensitive to scale.

Moment where classical events are no longer sensitive to scale.

Moment where Solar system events are no longer sensitive to scale.

Etc etc.

Definition: A sub-atomic event to scale will be sensitive to any other localized sub atomic event.

There is a moment where a sub-atomic event will breach scale, and cause sensitivity in the closest open scalar system.

This can be shown in the way that classical events are sums of N-Countable mixed quantum states. Yet, someone that is in a classical scale can differentiate the state of the sum of quantum states from it's well-ordered phenomena. The quantum entropy of a system is not significantly sensitive to a classical order of things. To push an object in the classical scale of that system of quantum states won't break the limits of sensitivity at a classical scale, even if that push exponentially disturbed the quantum entropy of those states, usually higher scales can affect lower scales, but lower scales need to 'breach' into higher scales. The higher the energy, the higher the entropic limit of breaching. Like how a free quark a long time ago would affect something alone, but Current bound quarks need to function in QCD to breach into atomic scales.

Problem: Electrons, photons, probably gravitons too.

Solution:Re-affirming 'top down' an event that has enough can breach many scales, but should therefore be sensitive in different ways to those scales.

How we can use electricity (Classical). 'Ionize'(Molecular)...charge(Atomic)...'Spin'(Sub-atomic)...

This logic implies a black hole is just a scaled graviton...

In any case...Planck Star; A quantum star; the maximal quantum state until it breaches into sub-atomic phenomena, as a well ordered object, but an entropic anomaly at log scale.

What for? We find it cool, we would associate with quark stars, right? But there is an even smaller instance of time that is even more insane than quark physics...Planck physics! We can't imagine the kind of power it has... Yet be so fucking tiny, even from a sub-atomic perspective.