h a l f b a k e r yOutside the bag the box came in.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Computer games can sometimes stutter or slow when
system resources are not, for whatever reason, up to the
task. If the universe we experience is a simulation it may
be possible to force such a slow-down, and the change
may
be measurable.
This laboratory would be set up in a large city. Since
the
human mind is the most data-processing-intensive thing
we
have, it's what we'll use to measure any processing delay
in
the universe. Fluctuations in city population would be
measured against an atomic clock and an extremely high
resolution ruler. If the size of the universe or time
change
against each-other in a way that correlates with the
city's
population, it can be reasoned the universe experiences
some local slow-down with more local processing
requirements.This would be especially true if any
correlations go back to normal shortly after the
population
change. That would represent re-allocation of system
resources to other places.
well, we know it's not this
http://news.science...e-universe-hologram
[zeno, Dec 15 2015]
Physicists find we’re not living in a computer simulation
https://cosmosmagaz...computer-simulation
[Voice, Oct 02 2017]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
this be like the cat in the Matrix? |
|
| |
with what, intend you, the ruler, to measure? |
|
| |
If the universe is running in a cosmic virtual machine, there is no way to know such fluctuations. Anyway I don't care, this OS is well designed, even comfortable sometimes. |
|
| |
Aw, how adorable, this little dude on the screen (not that one, next to him) thinks he can context switch the kernel enough times to induce lag. |
|
| |
Time's flow is usually measured in terms of "changing
events". I've noticed something of a monkey wrench in
the works. This is related to something from General
Relativity, that time passes more slowly inside a
gravitational field. |
|
| |
One way to interpret that statement is to rephrase it as
"Compared to the exterior of a gravitational field,
fewer change-events-per-second happen, inside the
field." --and that leads to a sort-of loophole. |
|
| |
In terms of Quantum Mechanics, all events involve
particles interacting. Each interaction takes time to
happen. Some interactions might be called "higher
priority" than others. More on that in a moment. For
now, consider that if time is quantized, then theorists
compute that the fundamental unit of time's passage is
so small that there are something like 10-to-the-33
units in one second. |
|
| |
Particles are constantly interacting with other particles,
such as virtual photons of electromagnetic fields, virtual
gravitons in gravitational fields, and so on. At the
Earth's surface a given particle needs to interact with
virtual gravitons at some particular rate to experience
1G of force. At the "surface" of the Sun a rather higher
rate of interaction is needed, so that the particle could
experience about 27Gs of force. |
|
| |
Well, if each one of those interaction-events requires
some number of time-quanta per second, then the
more gravitational interactions per second (such as
occurs in stronger gravitational fields), the fewer time-
quanta per second are left over for OTHER interactions
to happen. It is precisely those OTHER interactions that
we observe, when we measure changing events, as an
indicator of time's flow. The net effect is that time
appears to pass more slowly in an intense gravitational
field. Even though, overall, there are always the same
total number of time-quanta per second! |
|
| |
You may assume this phenomenon will seriously
interfere with the Idea in the main text here. |
|
| |
The point is that even the "real" spacetime that we
think we know about is effectively running a
simulation. The only reason things obey physical
laws is because of the underlying computational
capacity of the universe. |
|
| |
This is why quantum stuff is weird. Spacetime
lacks the computational power to micromanage
things down at that level, so it uses
approximations and averages. The weirdness
arises when you ask spacetime for a precise answer
about one particular particle, and it has to
improvise and come up with something on the spur
of the moment, without any apparent cause. |
|
| |
So, adding complexity beyond some point will
indeed slow everything down, but it will do so in a
universe as "real" as we imagine this one to be.
The real universe _is_ simulated. |
|
| |
I disagree, a simulation steps through a magic mirror of definition. The computation hardware gives the laws, the programmed definition can disobey those laws. The real universe, although we can't yet see the logical interactions, I believe, must obey a physical process. |
|
| |
...unless, the universe can randomly come up with its own definition/program . But this program would again be locked to the hardware's intrinsic structure. |
|
| |
//The real universe, although we can't yet see the
logical interactions, I believe, must obey a physical
process.// |
|
| |
Yes, it does. However, fundamentally computation
still has to take place. Otherwise the particles,
photons and whatnot just wouldn't know what to
do. That's why mathematics is so good at
describing the universe. |
|
| |
Just because spacetime computes, it doesn't mean
you can arbitrarily change the software. That's
why physical laws hold. |
|
| |
If it computes it can be hacked. |
|
| |
There's computing as in gears on gears and there's computing simulation/virtualisation where 1010101110011010011(random) means the pointiness of the elf ears. |
|
| |
// it doesn't mean you can arbitrarily change the software. That's why physical laws hold. // |
|
| |
That's the sort of statement that makes Q laugh like a drain ... then start tinkering with Planck's constant and the value of G ... |
|
| |
Being a topology of the universe's fabric, anything is possible. |
|
| |
Improbability may be common but impossibility is
impossible. |
|
| |
If there are an infinite number of universes in one of them
everyone has always happened to fly when they tried, and
therefore people believe in telekinesis. Which makes me
wonder if any phenomena we witness is merely the product
of extremely improbable happenstances. |
|
| |
That's my best guess so far. |
|
| |
If there are an infinite number of universes, we are a very very shallow thing. |
|
| |
//infinite number of universes// |
|
| |
Now there's an interesting (if extreme) thought experiment
that might prove that to be true (or not) called the
Quantum Suicide experiment. It's essentially a twist on
Schrodinger's Cat where you get to play the cat. If there
are infinitely many universes, and if the probability of you
existing is not zero, then it holds that there are infinitely
many 'yous' out there who are currently indistinguishable
from the 'you' that is reading this. If you all climb into some
quantum triggered apparatus that will, based on some
quantum business, give you a 50-50 chance of survival vs
instant death, and cheerfully pull the lever - two outcomes
are possible - a) you are instantly vaporised and the
technicians in the lab start wondering how exactly they're
going to write this one up, or b) you emerge, smiling,
having cheated death. Since there are an infinite number
of yous, despite having halved them in one go, there are
still infinitely many left. Repeat this experiment say, 10000
times, and any surviving yous will be safe in the knowledge
that the infinitely many worlds theory is, probably, very
likely, within a measurably tiny fraction of error,
publishably correct - at least in the remaining universes
your yous continue to inhabit. To the rest of the worlds
where you didn't make it, it's still anyone's guess. |
|
| |
The problem with the idea is that if Super Mario gets
paused mid jump, he's unable to sense anything, including
the passage of time. So as soon as he is unpaused, he
continues in the same trajectory- from his perspective
nothing has changed. Similarly if the simulated universe
slows down, we as simulated entities within that universe
will also slow our physically simulated perceptions and be
none the wiser. If between reading X and a little bit
later Y, the universe had been on pause for a million billion
zillion years, we'd have absolutely zero perception of that.
I suppose there might be some glitch ing and memory loss
since it'd be difficult to keep backups for that long without
some degradation but that's splitting hairs. |
|
| |
We don't need God, but if I don't miss my guess, he/she/it needs us to understand itself. |
|
| |
What else could we be here for if not for our perception? It's what we do, we perceive, we feel, we create, on whatever our scale might be. |
|
| |
We are... therefore we think. |
|
| |
//The problem with the idea...//
...is that it's hard enough to organise half a dozen people in your immediate circle of friends to go on a night out, let alone try to organise thousands of yous across multiple universes to simultaneously commit suicide for the sake of scientific interest. It flies in the face of practical reality. Happily, this also proves that there are not an infinite number of universes because if there were, then everything would be possible & we know that this feat of organisation is not possible. QED. |
|
| |
A bit like the ufo spotter system by observing
disturbances in the Force, sorry, in the gps
satellites' signal. |
|
| |
Turns out the clocks get rejiggered every once
in a while, so no useful data is ever kept. |
|
| |
NB I wonder if the borg version of the matrix
manage to balance the perpetual bugbear of if
it's a long shot, sure the steamroller looks
great, but the cat is too small to see, whereas
a close up.. |
|
| |
Maybe the everything state did have infinite universes with the one proviso that there was no communication between universes until one little universe broke that law and collapsed the whole lot. |
|
| |
Why collapsed? Why not bridged? |
|
| |
Possible, but the Universes would have to be very different, for a bridge, to create large energetic flows between. Not just a shadow of the previous to the next. |
|
| |
[Ian], is that just a crafty attempt to get out of paying your electricity bill for the last quarter? |
|
| |
//Quantum Suicide experiment// |
|
| |
If I'm under an age where I perceive others to be commonly dying of old age, it seems much less likely that I'm living in such circumstances. If I were 300 years old and somehow still alive while everyone else is either dead or much younger that would provide strong evidence. |
|
| |
Can code wreck bare metal? Theoretically, that would mean a specific action or actions, if found, could tear the fabric of the universe. |
|
| |