|
|
Post by peanutfan on Jun 26, 2009 14:54:14 GMT -5
That being said, computer technology is advancing at an incredible rate. We already have better simulation technology than most people ever thought we'd have, and if we ever create artificial intelligence, it stands to reason that we'll eventually be able to create a simulated world so perfect that its inhabitants will think they are "real".
If that ever happens, wouldn't it follow that we'd have to reexamine our current conclusion that our universe came about purely by natural processes?
And yes, I know that this simply moves the "created or not" argument to a different venue (the "creator" universe), but I'm just presenting this for the sake of argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haseen on Jun 26, 2009 16:02:51 GMT -5
It would just bump the question out to "what created the creator", like you said. Anyways, there wouldn't be anything to act on if it was somehow true. I mean, the "creator", if it exists didn't exactly tell us what we should be doing. I see it as an implied "go on with your life." Except maybe pray there are no power outages in the creator world.
Also, see Star Ocean: Till the End of Time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on Jun 26, 2009 17:40:20 GMT -5
The problem simply gets shifted to being at one point, SOMETHING has to arise naturally. If it isn't this universe (as it is being simulated), then it must be the universe simulating us... but then if that universe is also simulated, etc. At some point, there will come a time where you will have to arise by natural means, and even then there is a limit to just how much computational power is available within a universe. Considering we will be limited by resources, power and also time and certainly disrupted should anything occur within the vicinity of the massive computer.
In the end, would we have enough power to simulate a whole universe in the detail required? Could we manage such a large computer with the necessary efficiency so to create a fine enough simulation that would resemble our reality in the eyes of the AI being set loose within that universe? And could that simulated universe recreate the necessary computational power in order to simulate a sub-universe? Nice thought game, but I don't really put much stock into it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Jun 26, 2009 20:34:17 GMT -5
I'd seen this put forth before, but in my opinion, beyond proof that it could be theoretically done, you also need evidence than it was ever done. Otherwise, true or not, it just doesn't matter.
If the universe behaves the same way if it's simulated than if it arose naturally, then the distinction is meaningless. And if we can explain everything without resorting to an arbitrarily large regression of simulations, then Ockham's razor says the explanation that we are in fact not simulated is preferable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jun 27, 2009 2:39:23 GMT -5
One thing, while computer technology has gone forward by leaps and bounds we have learned one very important thing.
True AI is really fucking hard.
Everyone thinks that AI is an inevitable result of advancing computers, but the thing is that computers can only do what we program them to do. They have a limited number of states and functions and variables. Without some kind of radical shift in our computing technology we will never be able to create a true AI. I have worked on both physical circuits and computer programming, computers can't think, they can only do what you tell them to do in advance. If the programmer didn't specifically think of this situation then the computer won't know what to do.
Secondly, if you aren't aware Brain matters hold a HUUUUUUUUUGEEEEEEE amount of information in it. There is a reason you don't encounter mice with human intelligence, their brains are too small. You can't have intelligence like ours without big and energy consuming masses of brainmatter or some equivalent. So in order to run a simulated universe you would first need a computer with enough computing hardware to simultaneously simulate the inner workings of the brain of every intelligent creature inside the simulation as well as handling all of the environments and non sentient life.
That is a huge computer. Like the size of a large moon maybe. The amount of power needed to run such a monstrosity would be horrendous.
EDIT: And that would probably be just the processing power needed. You would need another even larger moons worth of harddrives, enough RAM to encircle the planet.
How would you cool the damn thing? All those processors chugging away would generate so much heat that the damn thing would destroy itself within the first ten minutes without some kind of external cooling.
A lot of people don't realize it but Space is not actually cold. It's a vacuum and vacuum doesn't disperse heat. So the giant planet computer would be unable to dump heat anywhere and would just destroy itself. There is no way you would ever construct this thing on a planet, simply because it's way too fucking big.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Jun 27, 2009 3:06:33 GMT -5
Not at all, because we can only create with natural processes. The scenario you gave is natural, not supernatural.
|
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Jun 27, 2009 3:43:49 GMT -5
That being said, computer technology is advancing at an incredible rate. We already have better simulation technology than most people ever thought we'd have, and if we ever create artificial intelligence, it stands to reason that we'll eventually be able to create a simulated world so perfect that its inhabitants will think they are "real". If that ever happens, wouldn't it follow that we'd have to reexamine our current conclusion that our universe came about purely by natural processes? And yes, I know that this simply moves the "created or not" argument to a different venue (the "creator" universe), but I'm just presenting this for the sake of argument. If it did happen it would be interesting. As Vene pointed out it would still be through a natural process, just one that is created by a intelligence. |
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Jun 27, 2009 14:55:00 GMT -5
Secondly, if you aren't aware Brain matters hold a HUUUUUUUUUGEEEEEEE amount of information in it. There is a reason you don't encounter mice with human intelligence, their brains are too small. You can't have intelligence like ours without big and energy consuming masses of brainmatter or some equivalent. So in order to run a simulated universe you would first need a computer with enough computing hardware to simultaneously simulate the inner workings of the brain of every intelligent creature inside the simulation as well as handling all of the environments and non sentient life. That is a huge computer. Like the size of a large moon maybe. The amount of power needed to run such a monstrosity would be horrendous. Also, if we are a simulation, there's no need to assume the simulator universe is exactly the same as ours. Physics could work in a radically different way there. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jun 28, 2009 0:53:30 GMT -5
Secondly, if you aren't aware Brain matters hold a HUUUUUUUUUGEEEEEEE amount of information in it. There is a reason you don't encounter mice with human intelligence, their brains are too small. You can't have intelligence like ours without big and energy consuming masses of brainmatter or some equivalent. So in order to run a simulated universe you would first need a computer with enough computing hardware to simultaneously simulate the inner workings of the brain of every intelligent creature inside the simulation as well as handling all of the environments and non sentient life. That is a huge computer. Like the size of a large moon maybe. The amount of power needed to run such a monstrosity would be horrendous. Also, if we are a simulation, there's no need to assume the simulator universe is exactly the same as ours. Physics could work in a radically different way there. Mostly I was talking about the OP's assumption that such an undertaking would be possible in our universe. His entire premise is that we will one day have the technology to simulate a universe and I attempted to point out how ludicrous that notion was. Did you notice the part of that entry where it says constructing a Matrioshka brain would require "Disassembling the star system for building materials"?! You would have to somehow strip mine a dozen planets right down to the core just for enough metal to construct the damn thing. |
|
|
|
Post by xaria on Jun 28, 2009 12:53:22 GMT -5
i came up with a script idea which had the world as a giant computer game, then i found out about the theory that says we're all simulated lol
|
|
|
|
Post by The_L on Jun 28, 2009 19:30:52 GMT -5
If the universe behaves the same way if it's simulated than if it arose naturally, then the distinction is meaningless. And if we can explain everything without resorting to an arbitrarily large regression of simulations, then Ockham's razor says the explanation that we are in fact not simulated is preferable. Not to mention that without this premise, the films The Matrix and Total Recall would have fallen extremely flat. Thank you, Occam's razor!  |
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Jun 29, 2009 1:50:57 GMT -5
One thing, while computer technology has gone forward by leaps and bounds we have learned one very important thing. True AI is really fucking hard. Everyone thinks that AI is an inevitable result of advancing computers, but the thing is that computers can only do what we program them to do. They have a limited number of states and functions and variables. Without some kind of radical shift in our computing technology we will never be able to create a true AI. I have worked on both physical circuits and computer programming, computers can't think, they can only do what you tell them to do in advance. If the programmer didn't specifically think of this situation then the computer won't know what to do. Secondly, if you aren't aware Brain matters hold a HUUUUUUUUUGEEEEEEE amount of information in it. There is a reason you don't encounter mice with human intelligence, their brains are too small. You can't have intelligence like ours without big and energy consuming masses of brainmatter or some equivalent. So in order to run a simulated universe you would first need a computer with enough computing hardware to simultaneously simulate the inner workings of the brain of every intelligent creature inside the simulation as well as handling all of the environments and non sentient life. That is a huge computer. Like the size of a large moon maybe. The amount of power needed to run such a monstrosity would be horrendous. EDIT: And that would probably be just the processing power needed. You would need another even larger moons worth of harddrives, enough RAM to encircle the planet. How would you cool the damn thing? All those processors chugging away would generate so much heat that the damn thing would destroy itself within the first ten minutes without some kind of external cooling. A lot of people don't realize it but Space is not actually cold. It's a vacuum and vacuum doesn't disperse heat. So the giant planet computer would be unable to dump heat anywhere and would just destroy itself. There is no way you would ever construct this thing on a planet, simply because it's way too fucking big. That's assuming that the creator's universe is like ours. There's no reason why it couldn't be so different we could hardly imagine. We aren't limited to programing things that are like our reality, why would hypothetical creators be? I don't actually buy into this argument mind you. I'm just throwing it out there. |
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Jun 29, 2009 15:28:33 GMT -5
Did you notice the part of that entry where it says constructing a Matrioshka brain would require "Disassembling the star system for building materials"?! You would have to somehow strip mine a dozen planets right down to the core just for enough metal to construct the damn thing. Yes, I did notice that. Never said it would be easy, just that it is theoretically possible. Yes, we are very far from the point where we can build a Matrioshka brain or similar-scale computer, but we have a lot of time ahead of us. |
|
|
|
Post by Rat Of Steel on Jun 29, 2009 15:43:58 GMT -5
Did you notice the part of that entry where it says constructing a Matrioshka brain would require "Disassembling the star system for building materials"?! You would have to somehow strip mine a dozen planets right down to the core just for enough metal to construct the damn thing. Yes, I did notice that. Never said it would be easy, just that it is theoretically possible. Yes, we are very far from the point where we can build a Matrioshka brain or similar-scale computer, but we have a lot of time ahead of us. A lot of time, indeed. I don't really mind waiting for a true human-like AI; I'll just settle for a Ghost In The Shell-type artificial body in the meantime.  |
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Jul 14, 2009 18:35:46 GMT -5
J. Richard Gott once (maybe still does) posited a hypothesis that our universe is itself the originating "external" universe of our universe. As I recall, the idea was that the beginning of our universe was basically a time loop splitting off from our own universe at some undefined point. It sounds crazy, but it makes sense in context perhaps. I lack the requisite background in the relevant sciences to say for sure, but it at least *seemed* to make sense.
|
|
