@The Propertarian Institute “You would have to define the means of causality of parallel processing.”
Considering the means of “force across empty space” has never been addressed by scientists, yu0r request for a causality laundry-list from a random internet commenter seems just a bit overambitious to say the least.
I use the internet to run tests (king of the hill games), because my specialty, quite accidentally, is the logic of human ignorance, error, bias, fictionalism and deceit. Which is why I”m running the test against you folks. In your case (as I have said in the past) I’m testing your malinvestment. Because it’s similar to the Christian malinvestment: “If it turns out you’re half right, will you modify the half you’re wrong about?” The answer is almost always no in a gradient from those whose status depends upon it to those whose status is not. (Yours is and you’re reacting to my ‘sciencing’ of your cult as a threat to your status and self-image. This is the same effect as the addiction response. Or rather the addiction response is an artificially induced version of this informational induced threat to your status.)
As for force across empty space, (a) there is no such thing as empty space since space is produced by the continuous emergence and collapse of the quantum field. The energy of the quantum field is tens of orders of magnitude above any other energy density. (b) we have the math and evidence of how information is transmitted across that field (c) we have a full description of the hierarchy that can emerge from the quantum field and as others have said somewhat elegantly, ‘there is no room for any other information to exist or pass – so all ‘woo woo’ claims of magical information transmission have been permanently falsified.
You might want to interject that we don’t know the origin of the quantum field, but that is not true – the dipole effects are the only method of release (creating space time) of an organization of information under pressure. We just do not know if it’s possible to have existence be a meaningful term in the absence of that field. That said, a few lost generations of physicists due to mathematical pseudoscience aside (string theorists), we were ‘done’ with the overall story of the structure of the universe in 1991.
Like I said. If you can’t explain it operationally you don’t understand it. If contronted with operational explanations you evade it and do not reform, we are left only with that you have a motive to lie even if you lack the means.
And for unaccomplished young men cheap status by fictional claims of the pretense of knowledge has a long history back into shamanism. Or as we prefer: hucksterism. Or more simply ‘bulshitters’.