[extropy-chat] Analyzing the simulation argument

[Dirk Bruere]

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>Secondly, the whole concept of 'brain in a vat' or 'body in a pod'
>participants is similarly infantile, but is all too common among SA
>critics. This is the Matrix concept, that our reality is merely a set
>of data streaming into minds that have a real existence in the root
>universe that spawned this one. This is a rather peruile way of
>conceiving such a simulated universe that falls significantly short of
>the mark of the kind of technology required to simulate a universe such
>as ours.
>
>Rather the sort of universe at a level of complexity that ours is
>requires one of two possible methods of simulation: quantum computation
>in pocket universes, aor quantum computation through matter ballistic
>conversion in gravitational singularities. There may be other methods
>to achieve this end, but it is certain that the computational needs of
>a universe like ours to exist are far greater than can be done by the
>sort of computational technology we are used to conceiving.
>
>  
>
It could be done by a superficial sim at the molecular level for only 
the parts of the universe that we can observe at the molecular level.
That would require very little in the way of computational requirements 
compared to a Planck level sim of an entire universe.

-- 
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.2.0 - Release Date: 21/02/2005