Correct me if I'm wrong, and excuse me for any arrogance that may come across by saying this but, I think that I may be the leading expert in this particular subject... at the very least, on these forums.
I can't tell you how excited I was when I saw the title of this thread in new content.
The reason I say that is because I know the computational aspect and have gotten more in depth with it than any other person has, as I have witnessed at least.
If I do happen to get into it from a programmatical perspective, then please understand how hard it actually is to write something like that out with a cellphone.
This post is complete moot! If you knew anything about a point of interest, you would know that it's completely quantum when it's received. A classical computer could very well be operating quantum mechanically at this very moment! The one you have, right now, before your eyes! Explain how our computers can access ONE UNIT in a list (a list that can have "infinite paper") instantaneously. I've witnessed it. There's nothing more astounding to me than how efficient this particular part of the generative algorithm is. I'd absolutely love to see the rest of this discussion. Citation please
The list that I call knowledge IS, NECESSARILY, quantum. I cannot sway from that argument for any known or predictable reason.
Points of interest prompt units of knowledge instantaneously (upon recognition), and, computationally, can only be parametrized statistically with no arbitrary component.
When you start getting into time, it's, IMO, best suited as a tuple, which means that it does "smear", but because of the "smear" it's being considered classical. I believe that time is prompted and that you will have no recollection of no occurrences.