[extropy-chat] mathimatical model for the singularity

ps udoname ps.udoname at gmail.com
Sat Dec 9 18:20:29 UTC 2006

On 07/12/06, Robert Bradbury <robert.bradbury at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you mean asymtote.

Yes, I do need to spellcheak my posts.

>  But at least among people who understand
> this problem well one clearly ends up with S curves.  You can't exceed
> the speed of light, you can't get smaller than some of the volumes of
> space that Anders or Lloyd have dealt with in papers,

Is this the planck volume?

there is a
> finite number of atoms in the universe and it requires significantly
> more energy than is currently available (or likely ever will be) to
> collect them all into one place where one can dedicate them to
> something useful, etc.

There are extreamly speculative idears about omega point compution, alpha
point compution, reality engenering etc which would allow us to surpass your
limits. However if we limit ourselves to what we know is possible then I

 "The Singularity" cannot be represented by an
> equation such as you propose.

It can surly be approximated by equations to some extent?

 It is generally understood that its
> kind of a "virtual Singularity" that things start growing so fast that
> mere humans lose ability to grasp or contribute to it in any way --
> its a Class 10 rapid, no wait its a Class 100 rapid, nowtitsa
> Cls1000rpd...  But it *does* hit hard limits very shortly after it
> gets going that will slow it down.  At that point it turns into an S
> curve and your equation breaks.

My equation was just intended to be an improvement on e^kt which I have
oftern seen used as an exact model of human progress. It's based on an
exponential, but takes into account technology increacing intelligence, so
by basing it on an S-curve or a collection of S-curves I imagine I could get
an equation which has a section of near asptotic growth and then levels out.
Of course since it can be argued that any prediction about what hapens after
the singularity is speculative at best, perhaps the model shouldn't try to
predict anything after a certain point.

If however one takes progress into
> the virtual realm and one keeps changing the realm (in some ways like
> Second Life is doing now...) then one might have the appearence of a
> continuence of the singularity.  But you have to change the criteria
> being used to measure progress.

A singularity of artistic creativity?

I suspect the limits will be on how fast progress is will depend upon
> how fast entities in one realm are willing (or able) to create new
> realms which are interesting enough to cause significant numbers of
> entitites to give up their old realm(s).

Well, intead of entities giving up their own relm you could create new
entities, so I doubt this would be a limiting factor.

  You could compare it to
> bioinformatics or synthetic biology as well as things like Web 2.0,
> Web 3.0, Second Life, etc. -- those are examples of "realms" we are
> currently in the process of creating.
> Robert
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061209/d9fc7a53/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list