Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 178 posts

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#31

Post by aswanson »

4ad wrote: post #22
astrodust wrote: post #16

Keep in mind that if you wanted to create a simulated universe you can ensure nobody ever finds out. If someone does find out, you can simply fix the problem and revert to a point in time just before the data leading to the discovery was captured. Speaking academically, you might be playing with fire if you probe the outer limits of the universe and we are in a simulation run by some entity concerned with keeping tha…

> you can simply fix the problem and revert to a point in time just before the data leading to the discovery was captured. Only with classical computers, not quantum computers.

Who's to say "real" computing, or "reality" at all, has to adhere to the laws we observe within the simulation? That's like Luigi in Super Mario Brothers saying you can't kick a turtle into a brick in the our world and not expect a gold coin to pop up in front of our faces.

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#32

Post by Justsignedup »

45h34jh53k4j wrote: post #29

Sigh. Why would you dedicate your life to proving this? You will either find you cannot prove it, in which case you have wasted your entire life on falsehood, or you prove it true in which you undo your dilute your existence and everyone you have ever known and loved. Kinda like religion I guess...

though, if we are a simulation... maybe we can exploit bugs in it and give ourselves advantages! After all, the only bug-free program is one that was never started.

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#33

Post by kornork »

smrtinsert wrote: post #7

What sort of moral issues result from creating a simulation universe that gives rise to sentient beings? I feel creeped out and reminded of Source Code with Jake Gyllenhaal for some reason.

As creator, are you responsible for the well being of the sentient beings?

Are you morally prohibited from turning them off?

Can you reset to a save point, possibly undoing the creation of some of the sentient beings?

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#34

Post by GavinMcG »

astrodust wrote: post #20
kornork wrote: post #5

If we're living in a simulation, the question of whether AIs can have consciousness is solved.

What if the simulation is actually being "run" inside an entity or organism that was the natural product of its environment?

Still, human intelligence would be simulated within that, presumably. So the platform might not be the obvious one, but the software would still be theoretically possible.

That, or there's some interface to that platform that provides a source of intelligence. Maybe we're nothing more than Docker containers running on God's hardware.

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#35

Post by zzleeper »

45h34jh53k4j wrote: post #29

Sigh. Why would you dedicate your life to proving this? You will either find you cannot prove it, in which case you have wasted your entire life on falsehood, or you prove it true in which you undo your dilute your existence and everyone you have ever known and loved. Kinda like religion I guess...

You don't want to show that it's true. You want to find out whether it's true or not.

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#36

Post by pklausler »

SCAQTony wrote: post #4
CuriouslyC wrote: post #3

It kind of irks me that they basically assume a cubic lattice. Nature does not form cubic lattices, when nature forms a lattice (for example, in a foam) it tends to form roughly dodecahedral cells (with coordination number 12). Given this property, a space-time lattice would be very nearly isotropic.

Would a dodecahedral lattice explain why the universe stays symmetrical while expanding?

Does it?

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#37

Post by nofinator »

astrodust wrote: post #16

Keep in mind that if you wanted to create a simulated universe you can ensure nobody ever finds out. If someone does find out, you can simply fix the problem and revert to a point in time just before the data leading to the discovery was captured. Speaking academically, you might be playing with fire if you probe the outer limits of the universe and we are in a simulation run by some entity concerned with keeping tha…

"There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

There is another theory which states that this has already happened."

― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#38

Post by tonmoy »

mentos wrote: post #21

What is interesting is if we are the result of an unfathomable number of transistor gates, the consciousness that arises from it would never be able to understand the 'platform' (hardware) that it sits on.. would it? The idea being that you are creating a new dimension that cannot see the dimension that gave rise to it. I feel like no matter what we are in a 'simulation' where another dimension gave rise to ours whet…

Nobody said the simulation is being done with transistors. Even if it was why wouldn't it be possible? I don't see any constraints. One day humans will fully understand neurons. One day we will make an AI using transistors who will be able to "understand" transistors

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#39

Post by Razengan »

mentos wrote: post #21

What is interesting is if we are the result of an unfathomable number of transistor gates, the consciousness that arises from it would never be able to understand the 'platform' (hardware) that it sits on.. would it? The idea being that you are creating a new dimension that cannot see the dimension that gave rise to it. I feel like no matter what we are in a 'simulation' where another dimension gave rise to ours whet…

Indeed, just like how a computer program will never detect the exact positions of all the electrons in the computer it's running on.

Not even if it tried to get that information from an external observer.

Re: Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation (2012)

#40

Post by slackware_linux »

Justsignedup wrote: post #32
45h34jh53k4j wrote: post #29

Sigh. Why would you dedicate your life to proving this? You will either find you cannot prove it, in which case you have wasted your entire life on falsehood, or you prove it true in which you undo your dilute your existence and everyone you have ever known and loved. Kinda like religion I guess...

though, if we are a simulation... maybe we can exploit bugs in it and give ourselves advantages! After all, the only bug-free program is one that was never started.

What are you trying to tell me? That I can dodge bullets?
Post reply on HN