Universe A Matrix Computer Game Designed By Aliens, Say NASA

a reply to: Arrestme

That doesn't change the fact that as soon as Pi needs to be truly expressed, it would load and then crash the "server".

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

That's our interpretation. Computers get used to keep finding more and more digits of these numbers. Aren't we talking about a potential unending sequence, not necessarily storing that sequence.

I return to the diagram of a circle with a line as the diameter. Clearly exists even though the ratio is not simply the ratio of two integers. Is the infinite universe required to draw that figure on a small piece of paper.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: Arrestme

That doesn't change the fact that as soon as Pi needs to be truly expressed, it would load and then crash the "server".

To a sigh of disappointment and slight relief from the geek squad.

"why did we waste years of research for this again?"

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

That's our interpretation. Computers get used to keep finding more and more digits of these numbers. Aren't we talking about a potential unending sequence, not necessarily storing that sequence.

I return to the diagram of a circle with a line as the diameter. Clearly exists even though the ratio is not simply the ratio of two integers. Is the infinite universe required to draw that figure on a small piece of paper.

Isnt this the exact reason we created fractions?

We need to know how many 3's are in 10, but its an endless line of 3's so how about we just say "third" instead and not waste a million years of cpu time.

a reply to: Biigs
Actually it means it isn't a fraction.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

That's our interpretation. Computers get used to keep finding more and more digits of these numbers. Aren't we talking about a potential unending sequence, not necessarily storing that sequence.

I return to the diagram of a circle with a line as the diameter. Clearly exists even though the ratio is not simply the ratio of two integers. Is the infinite universe required to draw that figure on a small piece of paper.

No the infinite universe is not required to draw that on a piece of paper. But to express it mathematically would take an infinite amount of space. And when you get down to it, if we're all simulated we're all just math and algorithms, and so is the universe. So in order for Pi to exist, it need first to be expressed mathematically.

originally posted by: wildespace
Can self-awareness exist inside a computer simulation or a hologram? I doubt that.

Just because you believe you are self aware doesn't make it so.

What about when someone falls asleep during the night they lose all self awareness.

Do we remember where we came from before birth?

Self-awareness is temporarily subjective.

Allow me to inject a little "fantasy" into this, but do people not want their children to see fairies, elves, unicorns, and dragons? Do you not want to go back into the past and see Dracula, Death Dealers and Lycans? Do people not want to travel to other planets, and see X-Men and extremely beautiful angelic beings, instead of being stuck on this degenerating planet, whilst we colonize planets as a hobby?

Since this is a simulation, then all things are possible and limited only by the Simulator's imagination.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

While this is still technically an unknown, mathematicians theorize that pi contains every possible number combination in the universe.

As it turns out, mathematicians do not yet know whether the digits of pi contains every single finite sequence of numbers. That being said, many mathematicians suspect that this is the case, which would imply not only that the digits of pi contain any number that you can think of, but also that they contains a binary representation of britney spears’ DNA, as well as a jpeg encoded image of you making out with a polar bear.

Though, even if pi doesn't have this property, it is possible to invent such a number.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

That to me says it could be flawed in a natural universe. Since in cannot be expressed simply then maybe it is an approximation used in a simulation. We may never know the truth.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Your argument is rather odd. We can't store any irrational number(1/9 for example), doesn't mean we actually have to store them.

i see this idea being championed around here ever so often. its really stupid. say you were going to build a model of just one atom. say a plastic model that didnt actually work, or simulate anything. all it did was structurally resemble an atom at a macroscopic scale. it would take billions of billions of atoms, arranged into molecules and so forth. the point is that the model would be much larger than the object it was modeled after.

we have computers in this reality. a single transistor of which is made of billions of atoms. these atoms can be imaged with atomic force microscopes. we know theyre actually there. to simulate the state of a single one of those atoms would require a processor, ram, wires between them so they can talk to each other etc. this is how things work. you cant make them smaller than an atom. even if it took 2 atoms to store the state of one atom then a computer that simulated the universe would be 2x as large as the universe.

its like saying we wanted to build a matrix prison to force bricks to live in, and we built the prison out of more bricks.

its hilariously stupid.

a reply to: np6888

But it's obvious Pi exists in our Universe. Therefore the number must exist in our universe. If the universe is simulated, the number would need to be stored somewhere. But since it's an infinitely long number, it physically (nor digitally) cannot be stored. Logic would then dictate we are real.

What I find ' hilariously stupid' is the ego and shot sightedness of the human race.

originally posted by: roadgravel
What I find ' hilariously stupid' is the ego and shot sightedness of the human race.

I find it egotistical to think someone cares enough about us to simulate us, and maintain the equipment that simulates us.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

So instead of wondering how such a number could possibly exist, you turn it around and say it's not evidence of creation.

I don't think that it's a simulation either. But I can't resist using models from computer science to try and describe processes from other disciplines.

If we are going to use the model from computing to understand the human condition then it should reflect our state of the art.

It wouldn't be be a single server, it would be a widely distributed system of compute resources.

And there would be an LVM.

And what about LXC (Linux Containers).

*shrug*

a reply to: roadgravel

lol, okay brother. at least reply to my post if youre going to reference something i said.

the thing is, "the ego and short sightedness of the human race" doesnt actually mean anything in context to this conversation, its an appeal that could apply to either position.

originally posted by: np6888
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

So instead of wondering how such a number could possibly exist, you turn it around and say it's not evidence of creation.

I say it's not evidence of simulated universe, I say nothing about creation.

originally posted by: snarfbot
i see this idea being championed around here ever so often. its really stupid. say you were going to build a model of just one atom. say a plastic model that didnt actually work, or simulate anything. all it did was structurally resemble an atom at a macroscopic scale. it would take billions of billions of atoms, arranged into molecules and so forth. the point is that the model would be much larger than the object it was modeled after.

we have computers in this reality. a single transistor of which is made of billions of atoms. these atoms can be imaged with atomic force microscopes. we know theyre actually there. to simulate the state of a single one of those atoms would require a processor, ram, wires between them so they can talk to each other etc. this is how things work. you cant make them smaller than an atom. even if it took 2 atoms to store the state of one atom then a computer that simulated the universe would be 2x as large as the universe.

its like saying we wanted to build a matrix prison to force bricks to live in, and we built the prison out of more bricks.

its hilariously stupid.

Except world of Warcraft is like 500 miles across and yet my computer is only a square foot..... Not seeing your point migo..