[betty boop]

It occurred to me that anyone who knew enough where everything was at a given moment and the laws of the universe could unravel the whole past and the whole future. One only needed to completely understand one slice of time to know it all.

Well, VR, for what's it's worth, I think this is a valuable insight, that you were really onto something. I am especially intrigued by your insight regarding time. The account, however, seems to leave a couple of things at loose ends. For instance, (1) what is the possibility that one ever knows enough to give a complete description of "where everything was at a given moment?" and (2) how did the laws of the universe come about?

I'm really not trying to be a smartass here, VR. it's just these are the questions that come to mind, that's all. And I do agree with you, that if one could "completely understand one slice of time," one would "know it all" -- meaning all of time, I gather.

As to how the hypothesis could be experimentally tested, I wouldn't have a clue. But to me, that doesn't necessarily mean that there's no truth to the insight.

Thank you so very much for writing, VadeRetro!

[VadeRetro]

I never thought the idea was very practical, of course. I wasn't thinking very much in computer terms at the time, but I'd now say you'd never get all the input data and no computer would ever crunch the numbers.

And I do agree with you, that if one could "completely understand one slice of time," one would "know it all" -- meaning all of time, I gather.

That's indeed my idea, but it seems to be wrong. At least, modern physics puts limits both on how much one can "passively" observe and even upon how deterministically things will behave.

[VadeRetro]

Where the laws of the universe come from is of course outside the scope of the theory. ;)

To describe the formation of the laws of the universe, you need some kind of meta-laws and where do they come from?