Binary code – Synchronicity is the Source of Consciousness

December 13, 2025December 13, 2025

Time Innovation: China leads in the manufacture of Ternary computer chips

Pursuing ternary (three-state: -1, 0, +1) computing, which could theoretically offer higher density and energy efficiency over binary system is aggressively used in China. They have advanced ternary logic chips in 2025, achieving breakthroughs in carbon-based designs, patents, and even mass production announcements.

This positions China as a leader in non-binary AI hardware, potentially circumventing the U.S. export controls on advanced binary chips.

Key Comparison

xAI’s Ambition and China’s Developments
**Status**

Early-stage planning for custom binary AI chips (e.g., inference chip code named X1 on 3nm process). No ternary focus; reliant on NVIDIA GPU’s for now. | Active prototypes, patents, and mass production. World’s first carbon-based ternary AI chip operational; Huawei patent for balanced ternary logic in AI processors.

**Technology**

Binary logic with advanced nodes (e.g., TSMC 3nm). Emphasis on scaling GPU clusters (e.g., 100K+ Nvidia H100/H200). | Ternary logic using carbon nanotube for efficiency supports neural networks and high-performance circuits. Non-silicon materials enable faster AI tasks with lower power.

**Timeline**

Job postings in mid-2025 for silicon co-design; mass production speculated for 2026+. No ternary roadmaps. | Prototypes in early 2025; mass production of non-binary AI chips announced June 2025. Huawei’s ternary patent filed September 2025.

**Drivers/Motivation**

Reduce dependency on NVIDIA amid shortages; optimize for Grok AI training. Elon Musk has joked about Ternary (2023) but no follow-through. | Bypass binary chip sanctions; boost AI sovereignty. Focus on energy-efficient, high-density computing for edge AI and data centers.

**Potential Impact**

Could accelerate xAI’s supercomputing (e.g., 500K+ GPUs by late 2025) but limited by binary constraints like heat and power. | Redefines AI efficiency; ternary could process data 30-50% faster with less energy, challenging global leaders in sustainable computing.

Analysis
xAI’s chip strategy prioritizes rapid deployment of binary hardware to fuel AI model training, aligning with Musk’s “brute force” scaling approach—evident in deals like NVIDIA’s $2B investment in xAI.

However, this leaves xAI vulnerable to binary’s limitations (e.g., exponential power demands). China’s ternary push, driven by state-backed research and firms like Huawei, represents a bolder pivot toward post-silicon paradigms, potentially giving it an edge in long-term AI hardware innovation. If xAI were to explore ternary, it might draw from Musk’s past quips, but as of December 2025, that’s speculative. China’s advancements could inspire global shifts, though scalability challenges (e.g., integrating ternary with binary systems) remain for both.

December 10, 2025December 11, 2025

Protected: Time Innovation: A.I. Binary Code computer processing might cause minds to default to a kind of “digital dualism”…

December 10, 2025December 11, 2025

Protected: Time Innovation: Epigenetics-How would switching to ternary code for all computation change our bodymind perception?

December 6, 2025December 15, 2025

Protected: Daily Oracle for Saturday,12/6/25 Part 2. Idea…

November 19, 2025

Time Innovation: Quantum Computing also uses Binary Code-Freebie

From GROK

Quantum computing does use binary code at its core, but with a crucial twist that makes it fundamentally different from classical computing.

1. Binary in Classical Computing

All data and instructions are ultimately represented in binary code.
Classical computers store and process information in bits.
Each bit is either 0 or 1 (binary).

2. Binary in Quantum Computing

Quantum computers use qubits (quantum bits) instead of classical bits.
A qubit can be in state |0⟩, |1⟩, or a superposition of both (e.g., α|0⟩ + β|1⟩, where |α|² + |β|² = 1).
Yes — the basis states are still labeled 0 and 1, just like binary.
So quantum computing is built on a binary framework (two basis states), but extends it with quantum properties.

3. Key Differences

Feature	Classical Bit	Qubit
States	0 or 1	0, 1, or superposition
Measurement	Always 0 or 1	Collapses to 0 or 1 probabilistically
Parallelism	None	Superposition enables massive parallelism
Entanglement	N/A	Qubits can be entangled

4. Programming Quantum Computers

You still write algorithms using binary logic gates (like NOT, AND, etc.), but they are replaced with quantum gates (e.g., Hadamard, CNOT).
Input and output are binary strings (e.g., 10110), but during computation, the system explores all possible binary combinations simultaneously via superposition.

Summary

Yes, quantum computing uses binary code — qubits have two basis states (0 and 1), and all data is ultimately binary.
But it transcends binary logic through superposition, entanglement, and interference, enabling exponential computational power for certain problems.

Think of it like this:

Classical = black or white
Quantum = all shades of gray at once (until measured)

The symbol β (lowercase Greek letter beta) in the expression:

α|0⟩ + β|1⟩

represents beta — not omega.

Quick Clarification:

Symbol	Name	Used For
α	alpha	Coefficient of
β	beta	**Coefficient of
ω	omega	Not used here (often for angular frequency or other variables)

So yes — β is beta.

**No — quantum computing does *not* use the Greek letter ω (omega) in the standard description of a qubit’s state. **

Standard Qubit State (Dirac Notation):

A single qubit is written as:

|ψ⟩ = α|0⟩ + β|1⟩

α (alpha) → complex coefficient for |0⟩
β (beta) → complex coefficient for |1⟩
Must satisfy: |α|² + |β|² = 1 (normalization)

Only α and β are used.
ω is not part of this.

Where ω Might Appear (Rarely & Not Standard):

Context	Use of ω?	Meaning
Multi-qubit systems	Sometimes	Rarely used as a third coefficient in non-standard or pedagogical examples (e.g., for 3-level qutrits), but not for qubits
Quantum optics / harmonic oscillators	Yes	ω = angular frequency of light or oscillator
Phase estimation algorithms	Yes	ω may represent a phase or eigenvalue
General quantum states	Possible	In arbitrary notation, someone could use ω, but it’s non-standard and confusing

Official Standard (Textbooks, IBM, Google, etc.):

Single qubit: α|0⟩ + β|1⟩
Two qubits: α|00⟩ + β|01⟩ + γ|10⟩ + δ|11⟩ (now using γ, δ — still no ω)
Never ω for basis state coefficients in qubits

Summary Table:

Symbol	Used in Standard Qubit State?	Purpose
α	Yes	Coeff of
β	Yes	Coeff of
ω	No	Not used

Bottom line:
Quantum computing uses α and β for qubits — never ω.
ω appears elsewhere in physics, but not in the binary-like state of a qubit.

October 23, 2024November 21, 2025

Time Innovation: Understanding Binary Code: Beyond Digital Logic (Freebie)

This is a problem for humans because we, nor life on earth, are digital. We are evolving organic, DNA. So, our tools, tech, and computers are not symbiotic with us. O’s and 1’s aren’t cutting it.

Binary Code has its source in using I Ching hexagrams. These hexagrams represented DNA to the Chinese. Leibniz aimed to use 0’s and 1’s as a source code for computers, which are electronic, not organic. In my opinion, he left the humanity of the ancient Chinese system in the dust. The goal was to confine evolving DNA into a digital box and to eventually turn humans into machines. At the very least, force us to choose what kind of world we want. We are at that choice now.

In short, I hate binary code. It’s horse and buggy to me and very prolix. In addition, it’s missing the triplet that leads to base 5. Then it leads to base 10 and 20. This is Maya vigesimal, exponential math based on how the universe works.

Here is GROK explaining the issue, pretty well.

“While binary code itself doesn’t “explain” everything in a philosophical or comprehensive sense, it serves as a crucial analogy. The principles behind binary code can be metaphorically extended to explain how digital systems work at their most fundamental level. These systems underpin much of modern technology. Here’s how binary can be seen as a foundational concept in explaining various phenomena”-

### 1. **Digital Representation of Information**– **Basic Building Blocks:** Everything in a digital system, from text, images, to complex software, is represented using combinations of zeros and ones. This binary system can represent any number, character, or operation through different encoding schemes (like ASCII for text or RGB for colors in images).

### 2. **Logic and Decision Making**
– **Binary Logic:** Computers use binary in logic gates (AND, OR, NOT, etc.), where 0 and 1 can represent false and true, respectively. This binary logic can explain how computers make decisions through algorithms, which are ultimately sequences of logical operations.

### 3. **Complexity from Simplicity**
– **Emergent Complexity:** Just as complex life forms arise from simple cellular mechanisms, incredibly complex software and systems arise from the simple on/off states of binary. (Not exactly at all because digital has no evolving RNA. Get over yourself.-L.T.) This principle can explain how simple rules or states can lead to complex behaviors or systems, akin to cellular automata or even neural networks. (No, it’s not.)

### 4. **Data Storage and Memory**
– **Memory States:** The concept of binary can explain how data is stored. Each bit (a zero or one) represents the smallest unit of data. From this, you can explain how larger data structures, like bytes, words, and beyond, are formed.

### 5. **Communication and Information Theory**
– **Signal Transmission:** Binary can illustrate basic concepts in information theory, where a message’s simplest form (a bit) can either be received correctly or not (1 or 0). This binary nature helps explain concepts like signal-to-noise ratio, data compression, and error correction.

### 6. **Quantum Computing Analogy**
– **Qubits:** While traditional binary uses bits, quantum computing uses qubits, which can be in a superposition of states, not just 0 or 1. However, the classical binary system lays the groundwork for understanding the binary logic that quantum operations simplify or expand upon.

### 7. **Philosophical and Conceptual Insights**
– **Dualism and Dichotomy:** Philosophically, the binary system reflects a fundamental duality (yes/no, true/false, existence/non-existence), which can be metaphorically used to discuss concepts in various fields like ethics (right/wrong), existence (being/non-being), or even in dialectics (thesis/antithesis).

– **Reductionism:** Binary code embodies the reductionist approach in science, where complex phenomena are broken down into simpler, fundamental parts. This can be a metaphor for how understanding the smallest units can lead to understanding the whole.

### 8. **Universal Computing**
**Turing Machines:** The concept of a Turing machine, which operates on binary logic, proposes that anything that can be computed can be computed with sequences of binary operations. This idea supports the Church-Turing thesis, suggesting that binary logic can simulate the logic of any computer algorithm, thereby explaining the universality of computation.

### Conclusion
While binary code directly explains digital computing, its principles can metaphorically or conceptually extend to various domains:

– **Simplicity to Complexity:** Like life itself, where simple molecules lead to complex organisms, binary leads to complex digital life.
– **Foundation of Digital Universe:** Much like atoms in physics, bits are the fundamental particles of the digital universe, explaining how digital “reality” is constructed.

However, while binary can illustrate many concepts, it doesn’t explain human emotions. It doesn’t cover philosophical truths beyond logic or the essence of consciousness. Neither does it explain the universe’s physical laws outside of computing. But within the realm of information, data, and digital technology, it’s crucial for understanding digital systems. It explains how they operate and interact.

I suppose this can be useful to humans. But for those who hate themselves and humanity, it poses an existential risk. They have to be controlled.

July 7, 2024

Leibniz on Binary. Was He Wrong?

He paid no attention to or did not understand the Chinese interpretation of the six lines of the hexagram in the Yijing Oracle. He saw two lines; the broken one and the solid one. Then he called them 0 and 1 based on his perception of the Bible. That’s not what the Chinese meant.

This applies to my work on this blog because the IChing hexagrams overarch every 4 kin harmonic. The Chinese were one of the first to add the details that they were aware of into AN ARCHETYPE that could illuminate who we are and how we got here.

Every culture took up the challenge, but the Maya did to the nth degree. In my opinion, the culturalist views (not racist) of the day caused the error of interpretation. It was 350 years ago.

This is Page 21 of the book “Leibniz on Binary” by Lloyd Strickland and Harry Lewis, footnote 37. This is part of the introduction to the book.

37. An alternative view, that Leibniz’ work was largely irrelevant to the development of the modern binary computer, has been asserted forcefully by Bernhardt Dotsler. Here it is.

Structurally, the back projection of computer binarism onto the dyadic is almost the same story as the former identification of the system of binary numbers with Yijing. Since it’s hexagrams are made up of only two elements, the whole and the broken line, they can formally be described as a binary system. However, this former interpretation is as wrong in terms of content as the updated one in functional terms. (Dotzler, 2010, 29)
“So one could say that with dyadics (2), esotericism was once again set against esotericism. The esotericism of the dyadic (2) penetration of creation against the esotericism of the Yijing interpretation has been declared false. To remember this, of course, I can not aim at bringing the associated metaphysics back into play. it’s only a matter of keeping in focus this formally different purpose of the binary number system: namely esoteric, and not cybernetics. Before it was seized by the binarism of information technology, the dyadic was an ontological instrument of understanding. Accordingly, it characterizes a functionality that may differ only minimally from the binary of the computer but one, which is fundamentally different.” (Dotzler 2010, 31)
“With this, however, the dyadic stands for a paradox, which then counteracts the myth of its anticipatory conspiracy with the binary computer, with cybernetics and digital arithmetic. The formal does not correspond to a functional correspondence, and that means: The equation of the binarism of today with the dyadic of yore is actually—-fiction.” (Dotzler 2010, 33)

However, it is clear from the timeline of Leibniz’s extensive algorithmic writings on binary arithmetic and his design sketches for two kinds of binary calculator that he saw the binary system as far more than an “ontological instrument” and that he did so well before he was made aware of the Yijing hexagrams. The assertion by Merzbach and Boyer (2011, 388) that Leibniz’s “noting of the binary system of numeration” was one of his “relatively minor contributions” can perhaps best be reconciled with its influence as an acknowledgment of the extraordinary breadth and range of Leibniz’s other work.

This is a lot of gobblety gook patriarchal cleverness, I know, but Leibniz has plenty of detractors from my read. How did he get away with this?

Men in High Places. Cronyism Politics and the Christian Religion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_Augustus,_Duke_of_Braunschweig-Wolfenb%C3%BCttel

“Duke Rudolph of Brunswick and Luneburg, who (so the story goes) saw therein an analogy with the Christian doctrine of creation ex nihilo, according to which all things were created from nothing by the one God. Excited by its theological potential (or political spin), in 1697, Leibniz began sending details of the binary system to Christian missionaries in China, hoping that the theological analogy would assist them in converting the Chinese. One such missionary, Joachim Bouvet, was struck by a parallel between binary notation and the hexagrams of the ancient Chinese divinatory system, the Yijing.”
Leibniz on Binary page 1

There are 12 more pages where the Duke figures prominently in being solicited for acquiesce to Leibniz’s binary flights of math delusion. He eventually gets a gold lettered commendation from the Duke even though the whole disingenuous hatch was taken from the ancient Chinese YiChing and made straight (not twisted like the double helix) to fit linear ideals of Christianity.

I find it ironic that to this day MIT and all manner of physicists and engineers who are either atheist, agnostic, or nihilist dystopian apocalyptic cleave to binary code like an AI teddy bear. “You can’t change that!” My christian mother even said that to me.

Well, I might not succeed but I can try to line it up with what the Maya meant. The fact is, the Chinese IChing lines up directly with the MAYA, not the bible and not christianity. You’d think the scientists would be a little bit supportive of that. The Maya are considered by everyone to be the most phenomenal time keepers on earth and I’ve studied them for 35 years.

May 30, 2024July 7, 2024