Digital Philosophy allows us to think about the most microscopic things and events of our world from a new perspective. At the bottom DP offers nothing but digital information where the only way the digital information can change is as a consequence of a digital process. A good DM model requires that the digital processes at the heart of Digital Philosophy must have certain basic properties corresponding to laws of physics. E. g. the laws that govern the evolution of state of a DM model must have CPT symmetry. Of course; physics has CPT symmetry. However in the DM model, it is crystal clear that CPT symmetry implies a very strong kind of Conservation of Information. In ordinary physics, conservation of information is not something that has the same absolute character as Conservation of Momentum. If DP makes sense, then that would means that in the real world information could never be lost and as a consequence we might conclude that information would be conserved, absolutely, as momentum is conserved. Currently, we know of no experimental result that supports the conclusion that sometimes, information is not conserved. This leads to the question “Could physics have a strong law of conservation of information?” If so, we would have to rethink particle disintegrations, inelastic collisions and Quantum Mechanics to better understand what is happening to the information. The appearance of a single truly random event is absolutely incompatible with a strong law of conservation of information. A great deal of information is obviously associated with the trajectory of every particle and that information must be conserved. This is a big issue in DP yet such issues are seldom considered in conventional physics.
Conservation of information and the idea that the laws of physics must be computationally universal, arise from thinking about Digital Philosophy. With regard to computational universality there is a way to experimentally verify whether it is true of physics. In automata theory, we prove that a system is computationally universal by demonstrating the possibility of constructing a universal machine within that system. If, in our world, we can build and operate even one Universal Computer, then that is hard experimental evidence that physics must be computationally universal. This experiment has already been done and verified. [1] To prove the converse, we would have had to demonstrate the impossibility of constructing a universal computer.
Digital Philosophy further assumes that a program running in an ordinary computer can be an exact model of the digital representations and digital processes underlying how various real world systems work. Digital Philosophy supports the beliefs that at different levels, information is often best thought of as digital and processes can often be best understood as digital processes. Thus anything in the world of Digital Philosophy that is changing or moving does so in a manner similar to how things are made to change or move in the memory of a computer.
The discreteness of DP time and space implies that there must be some kind of atom of motion. We use our heuristic principle of simplicity to ask “What is the very simplest kind of digital motion that conserves information and that is reversible?” A possible atom of motion that comes to mind is that 2 nearest spatial neighbors swap places. In DP, all ordinary motion is a consequence of multitudes of some such kinds of atomic motions. The spin of a DP particle is a consequence of an orbital component to all motion, and the orbital component is 3 lattice steps (looking at one bit which is swapped 3 times) per cycle which in a Cartesian lattice is the minimum size and complexity possible for such an orbital component. As will be explained, it is easy to use a basic operation as simple as a swap to build systems that are universal and reversible and that model many aspects of physics in a natural manner.