# Everything can be broken down to a digital signal.

If we take a segment of length, we can divide it in half. We can take one of the remaining halves, and we can divide it in half again. We naturally assume that this can go on forever. We assume that no matter how small a length we end up dealing with, we can always - at least conceptually - divide any remainder in half. It turns out that this is not true. There is a length known as the Planck length, 10-33 centimeters, that is indivisible.

At that point is loses locality.. so its either there or not.. so to speak it becomes a 1 or a none if you will.

A digital signal is a 1 or a 0...

So is it completely wrong to say all matter is digital?

Related General Discussion News on Phys.org
Evo
Mentor
If we take a segment of length, we can divide it in half. We can take one of the remaining halves, and we can divide it in half again. We naturally assume that this can go on forever. We assume that no matter how small a length we end up dealing with, we can always - at least conceptually - divide any remainder in half. It turns out that this is not true. There is a length known as the Planck length, 10-33 centimeters, that is indivisible.

At that point is loses locality.. so its either there or not.. so to speak it becomes a 1 or a none if you will.

A digital signal is a 1 or a 0...

So is it completely wrong to say all matter is digital?
Of course it's wrong.

You're logic is like this scene from Monty Python.

There is a simple way to figure out if she is a witch or not.

Witches burn, and what else burns?

Wood!

Yes, and wood floats. What else floats?

... A duck?

Yes! So if this woman weighs as much as a duck, then she is a witch!

ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
If we take a segment of length, we can divide it in half. We can take one of the remaining halves, and we can divide it in half again. We naturally assume that this can go on forever. We assume that no matter how small a length we end up dealing with, we can always - at least conceptually - divide any remainder in half. It turns out that this is not true. There is a length known as the Planck length, 10-33 centimeters, that is indivisible.

At that point is loses locality.. so its either there or not.. so to speak it becomes a 1 or a none if you will.

A digital signal is a 1 or a 0...

So is it completely wrong to say all matter is digital?
You are contradicting yourself. If something loses locality, it means that its position is spread out over that spatial location, meaning it is here AND there. So it isn't simply there or not there (1 or 0), but rather there AND not there (1 AND 0). This is similar to the quantum qubits, where in a bipartite system, you do not just have 1 or 0, but also a state of 1 AND 0.

So yes, it is completely wrong to say that all matter is digital.

Zz.

Fantastic, Evo! (you were in no position to retrieve that scene and yet you memorized the script exactly) and thanks for the link, Robert. Copying that link shamelessly for using it somewhere else.

Last edited:
If we take a segment of length, we can divide it in half. We can take one of the remaining halves, and we can divide it in half again. We naturally assume that this can go on forever. We assume that no matter how small a length we end up dealing with, we can always - at least conceptually - divide any remainder in half. It turns out that this is not true. There is a length known as the Planck length, 10-33 centimeters, that is indivisible.
At that point is loses locality.. so its either there or not.. so to speak it becomes a 1 or a none if you will.

A digital signal is a 1 or a 0...

So is it completely wrong to say all matter is digital?
10-33 centimeters ---divide that by Pi-----what do you get?