>>What you seem to be suggesting is that you could write the program for a handful of relative frames, and then another program can use those results to produce something like an absolute frame.
>
>I'm suggesting it's feasible - provided someone (a physicist?) would come up with a set of functions to use for the metric tensors.
>
>>That's cool, especially because it can be computed on a grid to maximize chaos.
>>
>>
>>But in order to do that you need to come up with multiple sets of initial conditions, one for each observer. The point of this excersize is to over come that, to build a universe with a single set of inital conditions and a single set of rules that progress them.
>
>You definitely want to read Greg Egan.

I have read some. Orphanogensis was very important to how I think about consciousness... which is very important to this conversation.

I think in order ot solve the problem I'm proposing, one needs to change the mathematical models offered by physics from relationships between what is observed, to a model that contains internal observers.

If that's the case we could:

1. make a single system of matter moving in absolute space and time
2. get the simulated matter to form a mind, a neurological computer capable of observation
3. learn about the observations of the modeled observer


So even if our mathematical model had a rigid rod with a specific length, we can get a relativistic measurement of the rod's length in the model by finding the observation encoded somewhere in the mind of an observer.