Concerning
Seth relies on electromagnetism in his derivation [of the
characterization of the finite structure constant]
I agree, but this fact does not prevent a non-electromagnetic derivation of the value of the finite structure constant. For example, the number pi is defined in geometry as the area of the circle of radius 1, but it is possible to find all the approximations of this number without involving circles by using the following program (exercise):
SquareFreePi[n_]:= Sqrt[6/N[#]]&[Mean[Boole[SquareFreeQ[#]]&/@Range[n]]]
For example, SquareFreePi[1000000] is approximately 3.1416 (good approximation).
Seth uses Coulomb interaction law between electrons. If he picked
other carriers for information (say, neutrons), the constant would be
different.
Nevertheless, the characterization
the time it takes to perform [a quantum logic operation] divided by
the amount of time it takes to send a signal at the speed of light
between the bits [...] is a universal constant [pi divided by (2 times
the finite structure constant)]
does not involve any particle.
Thanks for the link of your spinor model. I looked though it, but I am
not sure I can see how exactly it maps onto regular spinors.
Here is S. Wolfram's quotation related to my toy model of spinors (nevertheless, I do not see any need for spinors concerning the information-theoretic finite structure constant):
In the limit of sufficiently large hypergraphs, this shouldn’t make
much difference, although it seems as if including directedness
information may let us look at the analog of spinors, while the
undirected case corresponds to ordinary vectors, which are what we’re
more familiar with in terms of measuring distances.
Finally,
it would be nice to ensure that the structures you are getting in WM
resemble regular particles (which are fermions), and fields (or
bosons).
I would prefer pure information-theoretic bosons and fermions, rather than something resembling the actual particles, just to guarantee that the Wolfram Model will be a revolution in physics, rather than just evolution. For example, quantum mechanics is a revolution, it not the result of an evolution of Newtonian mechanics. Also, information-theoretic bosons and fermions could be useful for applications to computer science and social science (e.g., social laser).