intagliated particle: An intagliated particle is a subatomic particle which contains more metadata than the universe-defined natural parameter set (position, momentum, mass, charge, spin, color, etc.). Such metadata can be strictly passive; can interact with other entities via the mechanisms of natural or artificial laws; or can be internally active. While simple intagliation can be carried out using a peeker-poker or particle graver, this last state is typically achieved by “infecting” the particle with a species of active femtotechnology.
For example, muon stabilization is achieved by a primitive femtomachine which attaches itself to the muon. In the most simplistic and metaphorical terms imaginable – and my editor has assured me, gentle reader, that he stands ready to intercept the letters from outraged physicists that will no doubt ensue – this femtomachine executes a script which is triggered when the muon enters a pre-decay state, and “reboots” the muon back to its initial parameters.
– sidebar, A Young Engineer’s First Book of Ontophysics
So is that how the Rolkifier works?
Alas, probably not. It’s particle-level, whereas the rolkifier has some notion of what a conceptual object is, which doesn’t fit any of the physical theories considered current there.
It’s just weird.
Does the Rolkifier have a notion of what a conceptual object is, or is it just borrowing its wielder’s notion of what a conceptual object is?
That is a very good question which will probably be answered once they figure out how to calibrate test subjects without contaminating their notions of what conceptual objects are.
(It also raises interesting questions of how it knows who set the clockwork device and then went on holiday in another system.)
Maybe it took the concept from the last understandable (to it) mind that got close enough?
How I might test it is to have two people who disagree on whether a thing is one object or two objects, and see what happens when either rolkify the thing.