[extropy-chat] Analyzing the simulation argument

[Dirk Bruere]

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>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.
>>    
>>
>
>The entanglement problem doesn't let you work that way. You have to sim
>it all. Inertia alone is proof of that, being caused by the
>gravitational influence of all the other matter in the universe going
>forward in time then back to the moment you push on a mass... If it
>were merely some code faking inertia, there would be servere
>repercussions in our astronomical observations.
>
>  
>
Not at all.
Faking all the astronomical observation we are presently making could be 
done now using existing computer tech.
It's not an elegant soln, but it certainly cuts computational 
requirements by tens of orders of magnitude.

-- 
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