From: Walter Watts (wlwatts@cox.net)
Date: Sun Jun 22 2003 - 16:20:57 MDT
The following post from Eric Boyd is almost 3 years old. 10/2000 was the
original post. It's still a beaut.
Hey Eric, say Hi once in a while.......
Walter
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Church of Virus,
Thought I'd pass along a little thought project that I acquired in Palo
Alto, from none other than Marvin Minsky...
Do we live in a simulated universe?
If we did, what should we expect to see? Are there any tell tale signs
that might give its simulated nature away?
Well, for one, a simulated universe should have limits to the precision
that the calculations contain; i.e. there should be a least significant
digit. There should also be a biggest number, where the chosen variable
type maxes out... Finally, to save CPU cycles, there should be shortcuts
and optimizations -- the programmers don't want to have to sim
everything (that's expensive), only the necessary things.
Now here's the scary part... doesn't Heisenberg's uncertainty principle
and quantization in general look an awful lot like a least significant
digit -- a "truncation error" in the math of the universe? And doesn't
special relativity's limit on the speed of light look specifically
designed to avoid overflow errors? (you can't reach the biggest number
because the closer you get the harder it becomes to get closer...) And
the cincher -- the whole issue of Schrodinger's Cat, and the
indeterminacy of quantum events, looks suspiciously like a shortcut
-- why sim the cat when you can just wait and then evaluate a simple
probability function when somebody looks? In short, the laws of physics
as we know them seem to have certain features which would make the
simulation of our universe a lot easier than one might a-priori
expect...
It's not proof, of course, but it does get you thinking... if we are
simulated, what do you suppose the purpose of the simulation is?
Here's an interesting idea that I got from an astrophysics friend of
mine -- we could test if our universe is simulated by simulating a
universe ourselves. Basically, whatever hardware it is that does the
simulating at the top level has to be limited -- and if we can break
that limit, our own universe will either have "brown outs" -- which we
could observe -- or we'd simply crash (that being very bad). To prevent
this, I'm betting that the sys admins would simply prevent our simulated
universe from actually running; so our inability to sim our universe
despite the fact that it seems to be doable would be evidence that we
are ourselves simulations.
Here's an interesting thought: we might conceivably reach the CPU limit
even without a project so bold as a universe simulation. Any bets on how
many humans and/or computers would be required to give The Machine a run
for it's money? Maybe we should limit human numbers to avoid stressing
the hardware of the universe... <laughs>
----- Eric Boyd
eric@javien.com
http://www.lucifer.com/~eboyd/
When we take things for granted, we take them away from *ourselves*
-- Walter Watts Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc. "Reminding you to help control the human population. Have your sexual partner spayed or neutered." --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 22 2003 - 16:24:27 MDT