Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: Simulations/matrix and the speed of light

  1. Top | #1
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    705
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,591
    Rep Power
    73

    Simulations/matrix and the speed of light

    For people who think there is no way we are in a simulation, maybe you could think hypothetically...

    I think I read somewhere that the speed of light would make there be a limit to how CPU intensive the simulation is...

    Also time and space being relatively discrete (rather than infinite precision) means it can theoretically be simulated on a computer.

    Apparently time slows down due to gravity (related to how crowded things are) - which would also reduce the CPU usage.

    BTW the type of simulation I believe in uses "level of detail" rather than always explicitly simulating every particle in the universe.

  2. Top | #2
    Elder Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    10,176
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    28,082
    Rep Power
    74
    What we perceive computers to be may not relate to what a super-civilization, should one exist, uses to run a simulated universe.

  3. Top | #3
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    705
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,591
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    What we perceive computers to be may not relate to what a super-civilization, should one exist, uses to run a simulated universe.
    I think that maybe a simulation would involve some "machine learning" like Flight Simulator 2020 I think any kind of computer would have issues with things like infinite precision (for space and time) and infinite speeds.... (maybe)

  4. Top | #4
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    705
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,591
    Rep Power
    73
    BTW something related is that there is a "law" about the conservation of information.... for some reason information can't be destroyed. That has a strong connection to the simulation idea I think.

  5. Top | #5
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    705
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,591
    Rep Power
    73
    About space being discrete:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...s-not-discrete

    There is the Planck scale but according to that article empty space is completely continuous... (if I understood it correctly)

  6. Top | #6
    Contributor skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    5,529
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    18,505
    Rep Power
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    About space being discrete:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...s-not-discrete

    There is the Planck scale but according to that article empty space is completely continuous... (if I understood it correctly)
    There is nothing to say that a Planck length is a true physical granularity. A Planck length is only the smallest distance that any meaningful statements can be made about using our current physics models... the same for Planck time.

  7. Top | #7
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    705
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,591
    Rep Power
    73
    @skepticalbip

    Hi what do you think of the speed of light thoughts? Does it make some sense?

  8. Top | #8
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    705
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,591
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    There is nothing to say that a Planck length is a true physical granularity. A Planck length is only the smallest distance that any meaningful statements can be made about using our current physics models... the same for Planck time.
    I guess the reason why is complicated?

  9. Top | #9
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    12,784
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    30,997
    Rep Power
    57
    I have nothing to contribute beyond put up a more representative population model of participants.

  10. Top | #10
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    4,699
    Archived
    6,261
    Total Posts
    10,960
    Rep Power
    72
    As this is a "pseudoscience" forum, I suppose I don't have to take it so seriously...

    In a simulation, there is usually some part of the world the simulator is interested in. For example, weather simulations don't care about solar system models or animal husbandry. They simulate part of reality and half-ass the rest.

    Are we in a part that is the purpose of the simulation? Or are we in a part that's half-assed? We don't know. It could be that the entire point of the simulation is to see how black holes evolve over a trillion years, and we're just some simulation artifact that happens sometimes when starting conditions are right, and could be skew the results if not wiped out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •