Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Demonstrates medium-free computing unifying consciousness and matter, indicating a breakthrough in AI and computation.
Current mainstream computing and artificial intelligence systems face a series of bottlenecks, including the von Neumann architecture's separation of computation and storage, high energy consumption and heat dissipation issues, the sensitivity of real-time systems to communication latency, the difficulty of embodied intelligence in generalizing to unfamiliar scenarios, and the lack of stable personality and consciousness in classical AI. These bottlenecks appear to belong to different domains, but their roots can be traced back to the same fact: existing computing paradigms rely on physical media to transmit signals, store information, and provide energy. This dependence prevents systems from forming self-consistent closed loops, reducing computation, energy, information, and matter to separate steps. To overcome these bottlenecks, a medium-free approach to computing is required—one that operates directly at the field level. To this end, building upon our previous 16 DCD papers, this paper re-examines the nature of computation and identifies the Critical Coupling Law as the quantitative boundary condition that enables a system to directly manipulate the spacetime field without media. Once the system crosses this threshold, energy, matter, information, and consciousness are no longer separate objects to be handled individually, but rather different manifestations of the same field-phase operation under different conditions. In addition, this paper explains the necessity of upgrading the geometric compiler from "pentagram-pentagram" to "pentagram-concentric circles-rays": this upgrade moves the system from discrete phase anchoring to continuous phase interference, providing the degrees of freedom required to cover the entire phase space, thereby laying a physically realizable foundation for medium-free operation at the geometric level. The above arguments provide the necessary mathematical support for the transition of the DCD framework from theory to engineering.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yasheng Li (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: