J. Random Universe

Geodesic Culture
Robert A. Hettinga ([email protected])
Seafeathers Bay, Anguilla
September 5, 2020, 2:37PM AST

I suppose the following may read like a bunch of gobbledegook to most people, 
but I suppose I can’t really care. It makes sense to me at the moment. Though I 
need a nap, now.

A frequent trope of the cypherpunk list in the middle 1990’s was the character 
J. Random Cypherpunk. 

The name is self-explanatory, but he had just as much cred there as a 
social/political variable as the cryptographic variables Alice, Bob, Carol, or 
Dave. Mrs. RAH and I had a cat named Alice and still have a dog named Dave. 
Heh. Never got around to using Randy before Mrs. RAH took away my nomenclature 
card, but we did get to Eve, Mallory, Rusty (Trusty, Trusted Entity, whatever, 
Trent was just too foppish, didn’t lend itself to a dog’s call name), all of 
whom are gone, now. Animals after them had sensible names, like Red, an aging 
black-mouthed bob-tailed red “heeler” who likes to sleep on my right foot like 
he owns it, particularly around suppertime.


Somehow this afternoon I’m thinking about the universe, the simulation thereof, 
the multiverse, and anthropism, and out pops J. Random Universe.

It’s all about randomness. It’s now obvious to me that you can’t study infinity 
without randomness. Any first semester calculus student knows that. I must have 
smoked a number on the way to class that day. Epsilons and deltas were boring, 
and it turns out that they were just tacked onto calculus after the fact to 
keep it nailed down so it didn’t blow away. 

Nonetheless, I argue this with the same lumpen-enthusiasm that I argue about 
the recent ‘discovery’ of mine that has been obvious to anyone else, like, say, 
my recent breathtaking intuition, after four of five decades of acquaintance 
with it, that Hegelianism is pure and simple moral relativism. In the same 
Hegelian vein, I suppose it’s safe to say that since history is the application 
of a human narrative to previous events, it is an art, and not a science to 
begin with. Another thing that everybody figured out long before I did, and 
completely agrees to Popper’s proof that Marxism is pseudoscience. You always 
know the end of a story before you can write it, or at least re-write it into 
actual coherence. Post hoc, etc.

I have a friend who’s a priest, more fun, a converted Mormon, who has said at 
least once in public that I’m going to end up a ‘towel-boy in purgatory’ 
because of my backslid-from-Unitarian-but-declared-anyway metaphysical 
naturalism. Since we’re talking about stuff that sends the average scientific, 
or at least mathematical, dogmatic atheist scurrying to the confessional, this 
should be entertaining. 


Right. Cosmology. Sorry. This is going to be one of those things for which a 
preamble is not really necessary. I needed to pad things out a bit.

Everybody knows by now that a single universe cannot contain all the 
unlikelihood that life exists in this one, much less   intelligence, for 
various values thereof. Gelertner, Berlinsky, and Meyer are all over this like 
a duck on a junebug. Heard it on a Hoover podcast with Peter Robinson last 
year. They point and laugh at a multiverse, especially the idea that some 
anthropic principal dictates it. I don’t agree. Not the first time I don’t 
agree with geniuses, I guess. It seems to me that anthropism in a multiverse is 
quite handy. If, like calculus, it hasn’t found it’s epsilons and deltas just 
yet, relying on infinity as a ‘no matter where you go, there you are’ in answer 
to ‘why are we here’, is as good a hack as any.

Which brings me to the idea of a universal simulation. Without following the 
turtles *all* the way down, I’d like to propose a cypherpunk’s solution. 

The universe is discovered, not calculated. God does, it seems, play dice, to 
the extent that a literary character, um, plays. Not only is the universe 
unknowable by sheer dint of processing power, any arbitrary community of 
humans, much less a single one, cannot process enough information to calculate 
the entire universe in the Newtonian sense, or the Misian sense, for that 
matter.  Nor can any machine or arbitrary community of machines do that. 
‘Community’ is fraught here, machine-wise, because it implies all kinds of 
things like emotion, the simulation of same, dominance hierarchies of emoting 
beings versus geodesics of processors, and all kinds of off the wall 
whoop-de-do, *gasping for air...* but also, the universe, at the quantum level 
is *random*. Incalculable, all the way up, all the way down. You can’t fool me 
Lord Russell.

If you were to simulate this universe, you would need to simulate randomness. 
At this point cypherpunks are waving their arms, semaphore, at the back of the 
room, while real cryptographers smirk in the front row. Pseudorandomness 
requires a seed. A key. And if you have a key, you can now *predict* the 
results of the simulation without having to run it to begin with. 

Heh.

Obviously this is wrong, full of amphiboly. But I’m too lazy to think about it 
now because it’s time for a nap.

Cheers,
RAH



 

Reply via email to