On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi <use...@rudnyi.ru> wrote:
> On 15.08.2011 07:56 Jason Resch said the following:
> Can we accurately simulate physical laws or can't we? Before you
>> answer, take a few minutes to watch this amazing video, which
>> simulates the distribution of mass throughout the universe on the
>> largest scales:
>> point of light represents a galaxy, not a star)
> The answer on your question depends on what you mean by accurately and what
> by physical laws. I am working with finite elements (more specifically with
> ANSYS Multiphysics) and I can tell for sure that if you speak of simulation
> of the universe, then the current simulation technology does not scale.
> Nowadays one could solve a linear system reaching dimension of 1 billion but
> this will not help you. I would say that either contemporary numerical
> methods are deadly wrong, or simulated equations are not the right ones. In
> this respect, you may want to look how simulation is done for example in
> Second Life.
> Well, today numerical simulation is a good business (computer-aided
> engineering is about a billion per year) and it continues to grow. Yet, if
> you look in detail, then there are some areas when it could be employed
> nicely and some where it better to forget about simulation.
> I understand that you speak "in principle".
Yes, this is why in my first post, I said consider God's Turing machine
(free from our limitations). Then it is obvious that with the appropriate
tape, a physical system can be approximated to any desired level of accuracy
so long as it is predictable. Colin said such models of physics or
chemistry are impossible, so I hope he elaborates on what makes these
> Yet, I am not sure if extrapolation too far away from the current knowledge
> makes sense, as eventually we are coming to "philosophical controversies".
We're already simulating peices of brain tissue on the order of fruit fly
brains (10,000 neurons). Computers double in power/price every year, so 6
years later we could simulate mouse brains, another 6 we can simulate cat
brains, and in another 6 we can simulate human brains. (By 2030)
But all of this is an aside from point that I was making regarding the power
and versatility of Turing machines. Those who think Artificial Intelligence
is not possible with computers must show what about the brain is
unpredictable or unmodelable.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at