The Simulation Argument.

Discussion in 'Science' started by iAWESOME, Jun 19, 2011.

  1. iAWESOME

    iAWESOME New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    5,327
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ahhh my favorite scientific theory. In 50 years its speculated that computers will have the computing power of a human brain. In 500 years who is to say computers can't simulate entire Universes? Considering we're on the brink of being able to do this, who is to say this isn't happening now? Why couldn't it be happening now? If humans can refrain from killing each other between now and 1000 years from now (which is unlikely), we WILL be able to simulate entire Universes, so rather its happening now or not is irrelevant, because it will happen then. So, its entirely possible that 1000 years from now, humans figure out that backwards time travel is impossible, so they simulate the past, build computer replicas of their brains, insert their computers into a simulation, and now live 1000 years in the past in the year 2011.
     
  2. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    cool thinking dood.

    the reason so much has slowed in the 'computing' growth is the building as referenced in 'morse's law'. It is that the binary MO is about over. likewise, the brain is not an 'electrical system' of binary (and/or gates) either.

    the flavor to observe is of light

    and that is the new scope of not only understanding (how mass/energy works) but also how the brain operates.

    As an analogy; think of mass retaining a specific wavelength and then be recalled. So if i make a crystal that holds yellow, then another that hold red, then another that hold blue.............. how many variations can i make of colors. Then with them colors how many pictures can i create on convass.

    So each canvass is a new memory and there of, how many pictures can i hold in (upon mass) memory (crystaline structures; glial) (now go look up polaritonics)

    Forget so much the time reversal and predictability, return to the benchmarks of how mass, energy within time operate, then go back to the drawing board.

    ie.... take a picture of today, and see it tomorrow. Then draw what you wish to see of tomorrow and build it. (like blue prints)

    but how to do that is the process, you and i (our future generations) need to be working on first.

    And we can combine that understanding with 'words' so they can do what the previous generations could not

    the reason for the deadlock in computing power is that the old paradigm is about over and the new model needs programing to use the amount of variables.

    You are on the ground floor of using light (ie.... everyone has a cell phone; how does it exchange with the towers?... that is where to focus on; the light and how it works)
     
  3. Anarcho-Technocrat

    Anarcho-Technocrat New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's Moore's Law and it has nothing to do with the end of binary yet that computing power doubles every two years. While the human brain isn't a system of (and/or/xor/cnot..etc) gates future computers wont use conventional logic with crisp sets and sharp boundaries, rather future computers will use more advanced logic otherwise known as Fuzzy Logic which was designed to mimic human reasoning. Accordingly, with the rise of Quantum Computing I believe it is possible that in 50 or so years computers will be close in processing power. The human brain is the most complex system in the observable universe, we won't be able to simulate it anytime soon. As in computing power I mean all capabilities of human thought, idk what the OP suggests but with that comes NLU (Natural Language Understanding), etc.
     
  4. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    20,861
    Likes Received:
    254
    Trophy Points:
    83
    it seems the computer cannot create memory but light can create blue prints of tomorrow
     
  5. los2rec

    los2rec New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Simulations may have an engineering value, but they are worthless in the scientific sense. Scientifically, the problem with simulations is that you can cook one up for anything that you observe experimentally. In other words, simulations never help understand a problem. Even randomized simulations, such as the Monte Carlo method, are useful only to predict the behavior of known systems in a new applications.
    :date:
    :sun:
     
  6. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i know... and make such mistakes all the time.

    the pattern is about costs to power

    and the binary concept was meant that electrical processing is about over

    the logic is not what is important, even as you are trying to sound intelligent

    the PROCESSING will be of light, instead of electric charge of oooooooo and 111111111111 (on off) (gates)

    i must sound childish sometime as it is weird to be corrected by someone who really has little intent of integrity anyways


    Look at how many threads i have opened regarding this issue within this one section of the forum.

    why not go into them and share some of your fuzzy logic regarding the new methods of maintaining 'memories' (upon mass)?
     
  7. Anarcho-Technocrat

    Anarcho-Technocrat New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Optical Quantum Computing is harder to maintain that Superconductive Quantum Computing. OPC won't be practical for quite some time however SQC is already being implemented by D-Wave.
     
  8. Anarcho-Technocrat

    Anarcho-Technocrat New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'll post a link to the research paper when I am done. The 1st introductory paper should be done in a few days. The paper regarding the core concepts, equations, and algorithms won't be done until the end of this year.
     
  9. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0


    what does this june 20 publication share

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110620094900.htm

    "Self-Assembling Electronic Nano-Components"


    kind of like borrowing from what 'living' organisms do
     
  10. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    wipe the make up off your face.....

    as just by reading your posts, i could care less what your 'paper' is on as i can already READ what you represent and it is already obsolete (antiquated_
     
  11. Anarcho-Technocrat

    Anarcho-Technocrat New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So says the person who belongs to a dozen plus forums posting incoherent drivel and getting banned from half of them. At least I'm actually contributing to the scientific community.
     
  12. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If that is what your paper does then I would love to read but like I have said all over this forum, what you post is old school complacent crap.

    Not to mention you post in threads and rather than address the science, the threads or any inquiries posted you post about your paper and contributions but not as of yet have mentioned what it will do for mankind.

    You are writing because it is required for your degree not because it will assist mankind.

    Butttttttt..... Open a thread and let this little forum read what you are so proud of. No need to await the publication. Write or provide the abstract (and the conclusions) so we all can measure.

    Expose yourself so others can see what you got!

    Ie.... Get off this thread with your crap..
     
  13. Anarcho-Technocrat

    Anarcho-Technocrat New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Maybe if you had basic reading comprehension and 3rd grade grammar skills you could write a paper too. However, academia isn't for everyone but posting on forums sure is!
     
  14. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i write all day long

    you cant even read a thread title and address it.

    why is that?

    why is it, i have threads addressing what is new in the scientific world and you dont address them threads either?

    why not call up them scientist and tell them about your paper

    when academia requires complacency you can see why.

    we both know life abuses entropy but you dont have the moxy to put it into print, either academically or on a forum

    you are just lying to yourself and we both know it
     
  15. Anarcho-Technocrat

    Anarcho-Technocrat New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm just wondering if you any clue, even the slightest idea of what a paragraph is? So, do you?
     
  16. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    nice inquiry

    i must apologize to you for my peanut gallery ruining your thread
     
  17. oldjar07

    oldjar07 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Who cares? This is a science forum, not a grammar forum.
     
  18. Anarcho-Technocrat

    Anarcho-Technocrat New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LOL, you have to articulate yourself in a manner which is coherent and concise of which Bishadi fails to. I can't understand anything he says because he's all over the place. No structure to how he communicates...
     
  19. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    cuz i err tupid


    ummm darrrr........ what do idiots walk the planck?

    dont dey nnowk that it be da short step and ignut?

    all dem smaught doods and dudettes and i tink it must eeder tupidity, selfishyness or juts the moooorons imposing daar belifs versus integrity to science that has sooooo many drownin'

    how can 'we the people' shut the fricken clowns up and let the evidence do da talkin'?
     
  20. oldjar07

    oldjar07 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bad grammar isn't the grammar. The reason you and I can not understand him is he spews (*)(*)(*)(*) out and doesn't know what he is talking about.
     

Share This Page