On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:27, LizR wrote:
On 28 December 2013 17:23, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net> wrote:
You might be able to theoretically simulate it but certainly not
compute it in real time which is what reality actually does which is
"In real time" ?! In comp (and many TOEs) time is emergent.
Physical times and subjective time emerge. OK. But let us be honest,
comp assumes already a sort of time, through the natural order: à, 1,
2, 3, ...
Then you have all UD-time step of the computations emulated by the UD:
phi_444(6) first step
phi_444(6) second step
... ... (meaning greater delay in
the UD-time steps).
ph_444(6) third step
... ... ...
ph_444(6) fourth step
.... .... ... ...
ph_444(6) fifth step
To take a parallel example that should be close to your heart,
suppose you're an AI living in the matrix and it's simulating
reality for you. You aren't aware of this but believe yourself to be
say a human writer who is participating in an online discussion.
Suppose it takes a million years to simulate one second of your
experience. How would you know? You can only compare your experience
of time with in-matrix clocks, which all run at the speed you'd
It's the same for any theory which tries to compute reality.
But the physical time is not Turing emulable, and perhaps is not even
existing, like in Dewitt-Wheeler equation: H = 0.
if it exist, it depends on all computations "instantaneously", by the
delay invariance of the FPI.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.