Following this conversation with interest. I think, the complexity of life, as we know it, cannot be explained by P alone. The stronger contention might be that P and NP must both be present at all times. If we could satisfy this contention for "simulation", then logic indicates both NP-Hard and NP-Complete have to exist within the context of this "Simulation".
Is it relevant whether we experience reality as a simulation, or not? How would we even know if it was a simulation, unless we could find a window in the simulation to climb through and look at it from the outside? That is the problem of scalable deabstraction, which is also 100% resident within the context of reducing NP to P. Is it heuristic enough to flow through boundaries as if they do not exist? Rob ________________________________ From: Jim Bromer via AGI <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 09 July 2018 10:54 AM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox Effective world knowledge is based on practical advancements and most practical advancements cannot be made in pure simulations (like those that can overtake the advancements in the real world). Something like a triple abstraction principle in mathematics including the transformational algorithms that would go with them could be gained in simulations, so a n=np algorithm, if one is feasible, might be found in a simulation like this. And it might go unnoticed by the human operators of the simulation. Jim Bromer On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Stefan Reich via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > Where's the relation there? > > Maybe our simulation is run on supercomputers of NP power. > > On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 at 07:52, Shashank Yadav <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> If we are living in a simulation, then P equals NP, I think. >> >> - >> Shashank >> >> >> ---- On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 08:53:31 +0530 Mark Nuzz via AGI >> <[email protected]> wrote ---- >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Matt Mahoney via AGI >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Recursive self improvement in a closed environment is not possible because >> intelligence depends on knowledge and computing power. These can only come >> from outside the simulation. >> >> >> I generally agree with this. But let's go into the esoteric world for a >> moment and consider: Suppose we ourselves are living in a simulation, then >> what implications does this have? >> Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + >> participants + delivery options Permalink >> >> >> > > > -- > Stefan Reich > BotCompany.de // Java-based operating systems > Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + participants > + delivery options Permalink ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-Maf930aa1c204df8be1bd4d66 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups
