> if the "friend" is a human-level artificial intelligence running in a massive quantum computer. Well, there's your problem right there. No AI can run on a quantum computer. Intelligence is inherently a classical phenomenon because it requires copying information, and quantum states cannot be copied, only classical states can be copied. The classical world "emerges" from the quantum world when you take a quantum sys…
> No AI can run on a quantum computer Each quantum calculation can be collapsed to a state, and that state could then be fed to the next quantum calculation etc. etc. Would you call a series of such quantum calculations a quantum computer, or not?
Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
91–100 of 158 posts
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#92The original Wigner's friend paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner%27s_friend The paradox seems to rest on magical thinking about consciousness, and if one simply accepts that a conscious observer can be in a superposition like any other piece of matter, the paradox is resolved. And, from the article: For Wigner, this was an absurd conclusion. Instead, he believed that once the consciousness of an observer be…
We're veering away from physics here, but isn't consciousness actually quite "magical". It's beyond remarkable to me that stimulating nervous tissue, composed of quite mundane things like protons and electrons, yields a subjective experience. I know many people reject the hard problem of consciousness, but to those who don't, the implications of thought experiments like Wigner's friend, like superpositions or entangl…
Nervous system evolved from ability to respond to external stimuli to centralized control of various processes to evaluation of risks/benefits of actions and finally to predictive modeling of external processes. Rudimentary concept of “self” and understanding of surrounding environment exists in various animals, so why is it strange that an animal with most complex brain has the most sophisticated concept of “self” and it’s placement in the ultimate surrounding environment - the universe?
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if one simply accepts that a conscious observer can be in a superposition like any other piece of matter, the paradox is resolved. It’s not so simple. Suppose you’re in a box and observe a quantum experiment, and then I open the box and observe you. Then before I open the box you’re in a superposed state |x> + |y>, corresponding to the two possible outcomes x and y. Fine, no problem so far. But what is your own sub…
Either you believe in collapse, so there are two of you, who each observed different things, and one of those will at some point cease to exist, or you embrace the Everett interpretation, and so there are two of you who each observe different things and go on to live their separate lives.
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#94The original Wigner's friend paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner%27s_friend The paradox seems to rest on magical thinking about consciousness, and if one simply accepts that a conscious observer can be in a superposition like any other piece of matter, the paradox is resolved. And, from the article: For Wigner, this was an absurd conclusion. Instead, he believed that once the consciousness of an observer be…
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
No principal investigator of a clinical trial has perfect knowledge of the current state of reality, nor the means to calculate subsequent states. Therefore statistics are very useful.
They may or may not have perfect knowledge, but if they don't have free will or any ability to randomly choose participants, then there is no reason to trust that the patients they choose are not correlated to the medicine they are testing, such that all of the patients they chose will have the maximum response possible to the medicine, with the least amount of side effects.
At least as I was using the term, no one has perfect knowledge.
> ability to randomly choose participants
Here, pseudorandom is good enough, and I think all we have.
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#96Whenever I hear about weird shit from the realm of quantum physics (this theory, double-slit, etc..) I can't help but think: Why would I hardcode values for imperceptible objects, that would take an enormous about of ram and cpu time to constantly update values in the off chance it's needed. Much more efficient to optimize for what the _player_ can see at their perspective. Oh and I should probably code in some error…
disagree on the junior dev part and on the god part. what you’re describing is called “simulation theory” and it has been proposed and discussed at length i think lazy evaluation makes sense in that context. i also think that having a few basic rules and after that applying them consistently across your simulation space make sense. if your basic space unit of reality is way smaller than the sims in it can perceive an…
Good lord, some people here are definitely on the spectrum. FYI that was an attempt at humor. In case you want to mimic human social behavior in the future: you don't _disagree_ with a joke, you either find it funny or you don't.
> what you’re describing is called “simulation theory” and it has been proposed and discussed at length
I'm aware of the theory, just like everyone else whose seen the matrix or read Elon's Twitter feed. For the record, I was merely illustrating a point; both our universe and the code we write share certain optimizations that would seem to be too coincidental to be random.
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're veering away from physics here, but isn't consciousness actually quite "magical". It's beyond remarkable to me that stimulating nervous tissue, composed of quite mundane things like protons and electrons, yields a subjective experience. I know many people reject the hard problem of consciousness, but to those who don't, the implications of thought experiments like Wigner's friend, like superpositions or entangl…
Pretty sure I’m dunnig-krugering this, but is consciousness really that magical? Nervous system evolved from ability to respond to external stimuli to centralized control of various processes to evaluation of risks/benefits of actions and finally to predictive modeling of external processes. Rudimentary concept of “self” and understanding of surrounding environment exists in various animals, so why is it strange that…
But this understand of the surroundings and capability to react to stimuli comes with a subjective experience, which is what is actually meant with "consciousness". This is the hard problem of consciousness[0].
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#98Whenever I hear about weird shit from the realm of quantum physics (this theory, double-slit, etc..) I can't help but think: Why would I hardcode values for imperceptible objects, that would take an enormous about of ram and cpu time to constantly update values in the off chance it's needed. Much more efficient to optimize for what the _player_ can see at their perspective. Oh and I should probably code in some error…
One problem with this view is that “unobserved” particles still take up a large (possibly larger?) amount of computation. Rather than being in one position, it acts like a wave, being a little bit in every possible allowable position. These probability waves also interact with each other (which is what the double slit experiment demonstrates). That being said if it was demonstrated that un collapsed wave functions ar…
Well said. I can certainly imagine a few functions that may prove to be more efficient at generating waves than fixed known positions + velocity for every subatomic particle in the universe.
Here's the part that really takes us off the rails, if we assume for a minute that we are in a simulation and that the parent world has godlike resources compared to our own and they likely have similar hardware concepts (ram, cpu, gpus, maybe even ASICS) then what functions are more efficient would depend on which hardware they have less of.
If ram is plentiful why not have fixed known values for every particle? Store it in memory and let the gpu detect collisions.
If gpus are plentiful (my guess) and we're bound by ram limitations, best to only store positions of things that are visible and clear the rest out of ram for more important calculations.
Imagine how inefficient it would be to render and simulate black holes colliding on the other side of the universe if the players will never even notice. Just queue up the function and run it on off-peak hours. Save the extra server resources for other simulations running in parallel.
If I'm right - a big if - we're likely an anomaly or early prototype among the simulations, one in which the dev team never imagined a race would evolve and progress enough to measure the bounds of their container. If I'm right again on this last point, we're likely being monitored closely to decide if subsequent patches require more resources to simulate completely and avoid player's realizing they're in a simulation or accept it as a remote possibility and move on.
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty sure I’m dunnig-krugering this, but is consciousness really that magical? Nervous system evolved from ability to respond to external stimuli to centralized control of various processes to evaluation of risks/benefits of actions and finally to predictive modeling of external processes. Rudimentary concept of “self” and understanding of surrounding environment exists in various animals, so why is it strange that…
Of course, apart from how the actual implementation works I don't think many people have a problem with that. And if it was just that, Wigner's friend wouldn't be nearly as interesting, it would suffice to say that if quantum mechanical effects really keep working all the way up to the macroscopic level (which again is anything but obvious), that his friend's body and brain would simply be in a superposition of both…
I don’t think I understand the problem enough to understand why it’s a problem.
Re: Physicists found a new quantum paradox that casts doubt on a pillar of reality
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think MWI actually predicts continuous branching. The prescription for MWI is just to run the Schrodinger equation forwards in time. So the branching would look like one blob of probability gradually becoming bimodal, and then splitting into two components with less and less overlap. (There might also be 3-or-more-way branches, not just binary splits.)
Tell me about the 'superworld' that hosts the many worlds.