Simulation and comp
Hi Bruno Marchal Not all simulations that work in Platonia can work down here in Contingia. For example, time in principle can flow backward up there but it can not flow backward down here.That's why theories have to be tested. Simulation would not always actually work. This does not seem to bode well for comp. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/12/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-11, 11:08:04 Subject: Re: Universe on a Chip On 10 Oct 2012, at 20:22, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:14:44 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Oct 2012, at 19:03, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:04:51 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 08 Oct 2012, at 22:38, Craig Weinberg wrote: If the universe were a simulation, would the constant speed of light correspond to the clock speed driving the simulation? In other words, the ?PU speed?? As we are ?nside? the simulation, all attempts to measure the speed of the simulation appear as a constant value. Light ?xecutes? (what we call ?ovement?) at one instruction per cycle. Any device we built to attempt to measure the speed of light is also inside the simulation, so even though the ?utside? CPU clock could be changing speed, we will always see it as the same constant value. A ?ycle? is how long it takes all the information in the universe to update itself relative to each other. That is all the speed of light really is. The speed of information updating in the universe? (more here http://www.quora.com/Physics/If-the-universe-were-a-simulation-would-the-constant-speed-of-light-correspond-to-the-clock-speed-driving-the-simulation-In-other-words-the-CPU-speed?) I can make the leap from CPU clock frequency to the speed of light in a vacuum if I view light as an experienced event or energy state which occurs local to matter rather than literally traveling through space. With this view, the correlation between distance and latency is an organizational one, governing sequence and priority of processing rather than the presumed literal existence of racing light bodies (photons). This would be consistent with your model of Matrix-universe on a meta-universal CPU in that light speed is simply the frequency at which the computer processes raw bits. The change of light speed when propagating through matter or gravitational fields etc wouldn? be especially consistent with this model?hy would the ghost of a supernova slow down the cosmic computer in one area of memory, etc? The model that I have been developing suggests however that the CPU model would not lead to realism or significance though, and could only generate unconscious data manipulations. In order to have symbol grounding in genuine awareness, I think that instead of a CPU cranking away rendering the entire cosmos over and over as a bulwark against nothingness, I think that the cosmos must be rooted in stasis. Silence. Solitude. This is not nothingness however, it is everythingness. A universal inertial frame which loses nothing but rather continuously expands within itself by taking no action at all. The universe doesn? need to be racing to mechanically redraw the cosmos over and over because what it has drawn already has no place to disappear to. It can only seem to disappear through? ? ? ? latency. The universe as we know it then arises out of nested latencies. A meta-diffraction of symmetrically juxtaposed latency-generating methodologies. Size, scale, distance, mass, and density on the public side, richness, depth, significance, and complexity on the private side. Through these complications, the cosmic CPU is cast as a theoretical shadow, when the deeper reality is that rather than zillions of cycles per second, the real mainframe is the slowest possible computer. It can never complete even one cycle. How can it, when it has all of these subroutines that need to complete their cycles first? ? If the universe is a simulation (which it can't, by comp, but let us say), then if the computer clock is changed, the internal creatures will not see any difference. Indeed it is a way to understand that such a time does not need to be actualized. Like in COMP and GR. I'm not sure how that relates to what I was saying about the universe arising before even the first tick of the clock is finished, but we can talk about this instead if you like. What you are saying, like what my friend up there was saying about the CPU clock being invisible to the Sims, I have no problem with. That's why I was saying it's like a computer game. You can stop the game, debug the program, start it back up where you left off, and if there was a Sim person actually experiencing that, they would not experience any interruption. Fine. The problem is the meanwhile
Re: Simulation and comp
On the contrary Roger, Feynman had to allow time to flow backwards for some particles in order to complete his Quantum ElectroDynamics QED theory. On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Not all simulations that work in Platonia can work down here in Contingia. For example, time in principle can flow backward up there but it can not flow backward down here.That's why theories have to be tested. Simulation would not always actually work. This does not seem to bode well for comp. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/12/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-11, 11:08:04 Subject: Re: Universe on a Chip On 10 Oct 2012, at 20:22, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:14:44 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Oct 2012, at 19:03, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:04:51 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 08 Oct 2012, at 22:38, Craig Weinberg wrote: If the universe were a simulation, would the constant speed of light correspond to the clock speed driving the simulation? In other words, the ?PU speed?? As we are ?nside? the simulation, all attempts to measure the speed of the simulation appear as a constant value. Light ?xecutes? (what we call ?ovement?) at one instruction per cycle. Any device we built to attempt to measure the speed of light is also inside the simulation, so even though the ?utside? CPU clock could be changing speed, we will always see it as the same constant value. A ?ycle? is how long it takes all the information in the universe to update itself relative to each other. That is all the speed of light really is. The speed of information updating in the universe? (more here http://www.quora.com/Physics/If-the-universe-were-a-simulation-would-the-constant-speed-of-light-correspond-to-the-clock-speed-driving-the-simulation-In-other-words-the-CPU-speed?) I can make the leap from CPU clock frequency to the speed of light in a vacuum if I view light as an experienced event or energy state which occurs local to matter rather than literally traveling through space. With this view, the correlation between distance and latency is an organizational one, governing sequence and priority of processing rather than the presumed literal existence of racing light bodies (photons). This would be consistent with your model of Matrix-universe on a meta-universal CPU in that light speed is simply the frequency at which the computer processes raw bits. The change of light speed when propagating through matter or gravitational fields etc wouldn? be especially consistent with this model?hy would the ghost of a supernova slow down the cosmic computer in one area of memory, etc? The model that I have been developing suggests however that the CPU model would not lead to realism or significance though, and could only generate unconscious data manipulations. In order to have symbol grounding in genuine awareness, I think that instead of a CPU cranking away rendering the entire cosmos over and over as a bulwark against nothingness, I think that the cosmos must be rooted in stasis. Silence. Solitude. This is not nothingness however, it is everythingness. A universal inertial frame which loses nothing but rather continuously expands within itself by taking no action at all. The universe doesn? need to be racing to mechanically redraw the cosmos over and over because what it has drawn already has no place to disappear to. It can only seem to disappear through? ? ? ? latency. The universe as we know it then arises out of nested latencies. A meta-diffraction of symmetrically juxtaposed latency-generating methodologies. Size, scale, distance, mass, and density on the public side, richness, depth, significance, and complexity on the private side. Through these complications, the cosmic CPU is cast as a theoretical shadow, when the deeper reality is that rather than zillions of cycles per second, the real mainframe is the slowest possible computer. It can never complete even one cycle. How can it, when it has all of these subroutines that need to complete their cycles first? ? If the universe is a simulation (which it can't, by comp, but let us say), then if the computer clock is changed, the internal creatures will not see any difference. Indeed it is a way to understand that such a time does not need to be actualized. Like in COMP and GR. I'm not sure how that relates to what I was saying about the universe arising before even the first tick of the clock is finished, but we can talk about this instead if you like. What you are saying, like what my friend up there was saying about the CPU clock being invisible to the Sims, I have no problem with. That's why I
Re: Re: Simulation and comp
Hi Richard Ruquist OK. If Feynman said it, it's got to be right. Now I recall that theoretically it has to be that time can locally flow backwards, for growing life has to reverse entropy into energy to produce cellular structure. So Brian Greene was wrong, time in some special cases can locally flow backwards. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/12/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-12, 07:45:19 Subject: Re: Simulation and comp On the contrary Roger, Feynman had to allow time to flow backwards for some particles in order to complete his Quantum ElectroDynamics QED theory. On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Not all simulations that work in Platonia can work down here in Contingia. For example, time in principle can flow backward up there but it can not flow backward down here.That's why theories have to be tested. Simulation would not always actually work. This does not seem to bode well for comp. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/12/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-11, 11:08:04 Subject: Re: Universe on a Chip On 10 Oct 2012, at 20:22, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:14:44 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Oct 2012, at 19:03, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:04:51 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 08 Oct 2012, at 22:38, Craig Weinberg wrote: If the universe were a simulation, would the constant speed of light correspond to the clock speed driving the simulation? In other words, the ?PU speed?? As we are ?nside? the simulation, all attempts to measure the speed of the simulation appear as a constant value. Light ?xecutes? (what we call ?ovement?) at one instruction per cycle. Any device we built to attempt to measure the speed of light is also inside the simulation, so even though the ?utside? CPU clock could be changing speed, we will always see it as the same constant value. A ?ycle? is how long it takes all the information in the universe to update itself relative to each other. That is all the speed of light really is. The speed of information updating in the universe? (more here http://www.quora.com/Physics/If-the-universe-were-a-simulation-would-the-constant-speed-of-light-correspond-to-the-clock-speed-driving-the-simulation-In-other-words-the-CPU-speed?) I can make the leap from CPU clock frequency to the speed of light in a vacuum if I view light as an experienced event or energy state which occurs local to matter rather than literally traveling through space. With this view, the correlation between distance and latency is an organizational one, governing sequence and priority of processing rather than the presumed literal existence of racing light bodies (photons). This would be consistent with your model of Matrix-universe on a meta-universal CPU in that light speed is simply the frequency at which the computer processes raw bits. The change of light speed when propagating through matter or gravitational fields etc wouldn? be especially consistent with this model?hy would the ghost of a supernova slow down the cosmic computer in one area of memory, etc? The model that I have been developing suggests however that the CPU model would not lead to realism or significance though, and could only generate unconscious data manipulations. In order to have symbol grounding in genuine awareness, I think that instead of a CPU cranking away rendering the entire cosmos over and over as a bulwark against nothingness, I think that the cosmos must be rooted in stasis. Silence. Solitude. This is not nothingness however, it is everythingness. A universal inertial frame which loses nothing but rather continuously expands within itself by taking no action at all. The universe doesn? need to be racing to mechanically redraw the cosmos over and over because what it has drawn already has no place to disappear to. It can only seem to disappear through? ? ? ? latency. The universe as we know it then arises out of nested latencies. A meta-diffraction of symmetrically juxtaposed latency-generating methodologies. Size, scale, distance, mass, and density on the public side, richness, depth, significance, and complexity on the private side. Through these complications, the cosmic CPU is cast as a theoretical shadow, when the deeper reality is that rather than zillions of cycles per second, the real mainframe is the slowest possible computer. It can never complete even one cycle. How can it, when it has all of these subroutines that need
Re: Simulation and comp
Hi Roger Clough, On 12 Oct 2012, at 13:39, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Not all simulations that work in Platonia can work down here in Contingia. I doubt this. For example, time in principle can flow backward up there but it can not flow backward down here. I have never seen a physical law which does not imply reversibility (except the infamous wave packet collapse, which does not make sense for me). Even black holes evaporate, and you can retrieve information which felt in it (that is plausible, not yet proved to be sure). That's why theories have to be tested. All theories must be tested. OK. Simulation would not always actually work. This does not seem to bode well for comp. You fail to convince me on this. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/12/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-11, 11:08:04 Subject: Re: Universe on a Chip On 10 Oct 2012, at 20:22, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:14:44 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Oct 2012, at 19:03, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:04:51 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 08 Oct 2012, at 22:38, Craig Weinberg wrote: If the universe were a simulation, would the constant speed of light correspond to the clock speed driving the simulation? In other words, the ?PU speed?? As we are ?nside? the simulation, all attempts to measure the speed of the simulation appear as a constant value. Light ?xecutes? (what we call ?ovement?) at one instruction per cycle. Any device we built to attempt to measure the speed of light is also inside the simulation, so even though the ?utside? CPU clock could be changing speed, we will always see it as the same constant value. A ?ycle? is how long it takes all the information in the universe to update itself relative to each other. That is all the speed of light really is. The speed of information updating in the universe? (more here http://www.quora.com/Physics/If-the-universe-were-a-simulation-would-the-constant-speed-of-light-correspond-to-the-clock-speed-driving-the-simulation-In-other-words-the-CPU-speed?) I can make the leap from CPU clock frequency to the speed of light in a vacuum if I view light as an experienced event or energy state which occurs local to matter rather than literally traveling through space. With this view, the correlation between distance and latency is an organizational one, governing sequence and priority of processing rather than the presumed literal existence of racing light bodies (photons). This would be consistent with your model of Matrix-universe on a meta-universal CPU in that light speed is simply the frequency at which the computer processes raw bits. The change of light speed when propagating through matter or gravitational fields etc wouldn? be especially consistent with this model?hy would the ghost of a supernova slow down the cosmic computer in one area of memory, etc? The model that I have been developing suggests however that the CPU model would not lead to realism or significance though, and could only generate unconscious data manipulations. In order to have symbol grounding in genuine awareness, I think that instead of a CPU cranking away rendering the entire cosmos over and over as a bulwark against nothingness, I think that the cosmos must be rooted in stasis. Silence. Solitude. This is not nothingness however, it is everythingness. A universal inertial frame which loses nothing but rather continuously expands within itself by taking no action at all. The universe doesn? need to be racing to mechanically redraw the cosmos over and over because what it has drawn already has no place to disappear to. It can only seem to disappear through? ? ? ? latency. The universe as we know it then arises out of nested latencies. A meta-diffraction of symmetrically juxtaposed latency-generating methodologies. Size, scale, distance, mass, and density on the public side, richness, depth, significance, and complexity on the private side. Through these complications, the cosmic CPU is cast as a theoretical shadow, when the deeper reality is that rather than zillions of cycles per second, the real mainframe is the slowest possible computer. It can never complete even one cycle. How can it, when it has all of these subroutines that need to complete their cycles first? ? If the universe is a simulation (which it can't, by comp, but let us say), then if the computer clock is changed, the internal creatures will not see any difference. Indeed it is a way to understand that such a time does not need to be actualized. Like in COMP and GR. I'm not sure how that relates to what I was saying about the universe arising before even the first tick of the clock is
Re: Re: Simulation and comp
Roger, Brian for sure knows and understands Feynman's QED. He could not get that wrong. You probably misunderstood him. Richard On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist OK. If Feynman said it, it's got to be right. Now I recall that theoretically it has to be that time can locally flow backwards, for growing life has to reverse entropy into energy to produce cellular structure. So Brian Greene was wrong, time in some special cases can locally flow backwards. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/12/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-12, 07:45:19 Subject: Re: Simulation and comp On the contrary Roger, Feynman had to allow time to flow backwards for some particles in order to complete his Quantum ElectroDynamics QED theory. On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Not all simulations that work in Platonia can work down here in Contingia. For example, time in principle can flow backward up there but it can not flow backward down here.That's why theories have to be tested. Simulation would not always actually work. This does not seem to bode well for comp. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/12/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-11, 11:08:04 Subject: Re: Universe on a Chip On 10 Oct 2012, at 20:22, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:14:44 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Oct 2012, at 19:03, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:04:51 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 08 Oct 2012, at 22:38, Craig Weinberg wrote: If the universe were a simulation, would the constant speed of light correspond to the clock speed driving the simulation? In other words, the ?PU speed?? As we are ?nside? the simulation, all attempts to measure the speed of the simulation appear as a constant value. Light ?xecutes? (what we call ?ovement?) at one instruction per cycle. Any device we built to attempt to measure the speed of light is also inside the simulation, so even though the ?utside? CPU clock could be changing speed, we will always see it as the same constant value. A ?ycle? is how long it takes all the information in the universe to update itself relative to each other. That is all the speed of light really is. The speed of information updating in the universe? (more here http://www.quora.com/Physics/If-the-universe-were-a-simulation-would-the-constant-speed-of-light-correspond-to-the-clock-speed-driving-the-simulation-In-other-words-the-CPU-speed?) I can make the leap from CPU clock frequency to the speed of light in a vacuum if I view light as an experienced event or energy state which occurs local to matter rather than literally traveling through space. With this view, the correlation between distance and latency is an organizational one, governing sequence and priority of processing rather than the presumed literal existence of racing light bodies (photons). This would be consistent with your model of Matrix-universe on a meta-universal CPU in that light speed is simply the frequency at which the computer processes raw bits. The change of light speed when propagating through matter or gravitational fields etc wouldn? be especially consistent with this model?hy would the ghost of a supernova slow down the cosmic computer in one area of memory, etc? The model that I have been developing suggests however that the CPU model would not lead to realism or significance though, and could only generate unconscious data manipulations. In order to have symbol grounding in genuine awareness, I think that instead of a CPU cranking away rendering the entire cosmos over and over as a bulwark against nothingness, I think that the cosmos must be rooted in stasis. Silence. Solitude. This is not nothingness however, it is everythingness. A universal inertial frame which loses nothing but rather continuously expands within itself by taking no action at all. The universe doesn? need to be racing to mechanically redraw the cosmos over and over because what it has drawn already has no place to disappear to. It can only seem to disappear through? ? ? ? latency. The universe as we know it then arises out of nested latencies. A meta-diffraction of symmetrically juxtaposed latency-generating methodologies. Size, scale, distance, mass, and density on the public side, richness, depth, significance, and complexity on the private side. Through these complications, the cosmic CPU is cast as a theoretical shadow, when the deeper reality is that rather than zillions of cycles per second, the real mainframe
Re: Re: Simulation and comp
ROGER: Hi Bruno Marchal Not all simulations that work in Platonia can work down here in Contingia. BRUNO: I doubt this. ROGER: Things do not change in Platonia but they do on earth. (previously) For example, time in principle can flow backward up there but it can not flow backward down here. BRUNO: I have never seen a physical law which does not imply reversibility (except the infamous wave packet collapse, which does not make sense for me). Even black holes evaporate, and you can retrieve information which felt in it (that is plausible, not yet proved to be sure). ROGER: I think time is reversible in most physical theories. But a baseball does not return to the bat after a home run is hit. That's why theories have to be tested. All theories must be tested. OK. Simulation would not always actually work. This does not seem to bode well for comp. You fail to convince me on this. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/12/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-11, 11:08:04 Subject: Re: Universe on a Chip On 10 Oct 2012, at 20:22, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:14:44 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Oct 2012, at 19:03, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:04:51 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 08 Oct 2012, at 22:38, Craig Weinberg wrote: If the universe were a simulation, would the constant speed of light correspond to the clock speed driving the simulation? In other words, the ?PU speed?? As we are ?nside? the simulation, all attempts to measure the speed of the simulation appear as a constant value. Light ?xecutes? (what we call ?ovement?) at one instruction per cycle. Any device we built to attempt to measure the speed of light is also inside the simulation, so even though the ?utside? CPU clock could be changing speed, we will always see it as the same constant value. A ?ycle? is how long it takes all the information in the universe to update itself relative to each other. That is all the speed of light really is. The speed of information updating in the universe? (more here http://www.quora.com/Physics/If-the-universe-were-a-simulation-would-the-constant-speed-of-light-correspond-to-the-clock-speed-driving-the-simulation-In-other-words-the-CPU-speed?) I can make the leap from CPU clock frequency to the speed of light in a vacuum if I view light as an experienced event or energy state which occurs local to matter rather than literally traveling through space. With this view, the correlation between distance and latency is an organizational one, governing sequence and priority of processing rather than the presumed literal existence of racing light bodies (photons). This would be consistent with your model of Matrix-universe on a meta-universal CPU in that light speed is simply the frequency at which the computer processes raw bits. The change of light speed when propagating through matter or gravitational fields etc wouldn? be especially consistent with this model?hy would the ghost of a supernova slow down the cosmic computer in one area of memory, etc? The model that I have been developing suggests however that the CPU model would not lead to realism or significance though, and could only generate unconscious data manipulations. In order to have symbol grounding in genuine awareness, I think that instead of a CPU cranking away rendering the entire cosmos over and over as a bulwark against nothingness, I think that the cosmos must be rooted in stasis. Silence. Solitude. This is not nothingness however, it is everythingness. A universal inertial frame which loses nothing but rather continuously expands within itself by taking no action at all. The universe doesn? need to be racing to mechanically redraw the cosmos over and over because what it has drawn already has no place to disappear to. It can only seem to disappear through? ? ? ? latency. The universe as we know it then arises out of nested latencies. A meta-diffraction of symmetrically juxtaposed latency-generating methodologies. Size, scale, distance, mass, and density on the public side, richness, depth, significance, and complexity on the private side. Through these complications, the cosmic CPU is cast as a theoretical shadow, when the deeper reality is that rather than zillions of cycles per second, the real mainframe is the slowest possible computer. It can never complete even one cycle. How can it, when it has all of these subroutines that need to complete their cycles first? ? If the universe is a simulation (which it can't, by comp, but let us say), then if the computer
