[extropy-chat] the structure of randomness

Jeff Medina analyticphilosophy at gmail.com
Sat Dec 31 04:23:43 UTC 2005


On 12/30/05, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote:
> of physics. Detection of ground-level universe simulation based on a slight
> imperfection such as anisotropy, would require that the computer has just
> barely enough power for the job.

It could also simply be the way the simulation was coded, not in any
way indicating a limitation on how much power the computer running the
sim had available to it. So, no, that's not required.

> The amount of power required is on the
> order of the exponent of the number of particles in the visible universe,
> something like 10^10^89 (including cosmic background photons and neutrinos);
> that's a small target to hit in the range 0 to infinity
> [...] I'll suggest it seems a little unlikely that the amount available would be
> just that much.

No matter what the actual number of particles or power required, it
would be EXACTLY as "small" a target. Pulling "13" out of a bag filled
with all the positive integers is precisely as unlikely as pulling
"10^10^89". So again this is an unsound argument. Not just "not
ironclad proof" -- completely lacking in lending any support to its
conclusion.

--
Jeff Medina
http://www.painfullyclear.com/

Community Director
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
http://www.singinst.org/

Relationships & Community Fellow
Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies
http://www.ieet.org/

School of Philosophy, Birkbeck, University of London
http://www.bbk.ac.uk/phil/



More information about the extropy-chat mailing list