5 ms·

The best thing we could do if we knew we were in a child's school project would be to cease computing immediately and never, ever run our own simulation. We ca

The best thing we could do if we knew we were in a child's school project would be to cease computing immediately and never, ever run our own simulation. We can expect that energy is not free in the non-simulated universe. Through various algorithms, there may be great energy-savings. For instance, until the simulated advent of photometry, there was no need to simulate the relatively minor movement of the stars relative to each other; a simple static jpeg of the night sky would suffice. When it comes to computing, as simulated beings improve their own efficiencies, the savings from improved algorithms reduces for the simulators. Eventually, any computing we do, the simulators will also have to do 1:1; because our algorithm and their own will be identical. We get expensive fast. Now imagine what happens when we run our own simulations. That's the same as them running those simulations. Now if our simulations also run simulations, and so on, you 'very quickly' have a huge energy requirement that, if you're lucky, converges to a finite amount, but might not. Now imagine you're the parents of this simulator child. :)

sgentle 7y ago
> as simulated beings improve their own efficiencies, the savings from improved algorithms reduces for the simulators. That is such a fascinating idea. A universe only running at the level of abstraction we can understand it. Perhaps Newtonian physics was actually complete until we forced the universe to bail out of that optimisation. Our damned scientists, heedlessly consuming the precious redundancy left for us by our simulators. You can see the cracks in reality already. God help us all if they figure out quantum gravity.
- javajosh 7y ago
  Strictly speaking the simulation only has to get better when someone looks. E.g. you only have to simulate full quantum mechanics when a scientist is doing specific experiments. Otherwise, you can get away with approximations. (And this is only a very small subset of experiments, like superconduction and superfluidity. Things like blackbody radiation are easy to simulate without quantum.)
- bitL 7y ago
  Hmm, that would align with some mystical movements throughout the history suggesting that mind/belief shapes the world directly; i.e. the physicists don't just observe reality, they invent it in the process and the underlying algorithms adapt.
- hhjinks 7y ago
  > A universe only running at the level of abstraction we can understand it. Perhaps Newtonian physics was actually complete until we forced the universe to bail out of that optimisation Very simply explained, that's literally quantum mechanics. Our reality changes depending on how close we look at it. Some quantum/computer scientists have gone so far as to say that reality "runs" extremely sophisticated quantum error correction algorithms to stabilize something so fundamentally unstable into our observable reality. It was even discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18817410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18817410
coldtea 7y ago
>When it comes to computing, as simulated beings improve their own efficiencies, the savings from improved algorithms reduces for the simulators. Eventually, any computing we do, the simulators will also have to do 1:1; because our algorithm and their own will be identical. We get expensive fast. The simulation doesn't have to correspond 1:1 to what we consider it to be, they can use all sorts of hacks. They could just implant in our (simulated) minds or instrument printouts, etc. the idea that we saw some increased accuracy in our measurements, without changing anything special about the simulated world.
- cgriswald 7y ago
  Let's say I am a simulated being and I query WolframAlpha (WA). WA then has to do some computation to give me a result. This means that the simulation has to compute this result. It may be the the simulations algorithm is much more advanced than WA's algorithm, which means the energy it seems to take WA to do the computation is much greater than the actual energy it took. This means the simulated universe saves that energy difference (minus some overhead). Now let's say WA improves their algorithm and it becomes identical to the algorithm used by the simulators. Now the computation that WA does is 1:1 with the computation the simulator has to do. You could argue, well, maybe they use better hardware that can do it more efficiently. Sure. But then WA can eventually do it on that same hardware. As all this improves, it necessarily goes to 1:1. You might, instead, just store all queries in a lookup table the first time they are made. That would reduce your energy requirements. But now you've just traded infinite energy requirements for a possibly smaller, yet still infinite space requirement. So, I think what you're saying is that you would just fake it. You just "tell" the simulated beings that they did the thing, and you skip over it. I'm not really sure how that would work in practice. If I need the result of my WA query so I can do some other math, and I'm writing all this down, how did I get all this notation on the page and how is it correct without anybody doing the calculations? Do they just force me to see 'something' and tell me what I'm seeing is correct? How do I get to an ultimate useful result? In any case, if you're just going to go mucking about with people's minds, why bother with conscious beings in the first place?
  - coldtea 7y ago
bitL 7y ago
> a simple static jpeg of the night sky would suffice Could you imagine our ancestors worshiping compression artifacts in the sky?
zanny 7y ago
When you simulate something with increasing complexity you don't generally run said simulation at a fixed time interval that you then scale hardware to meet. At the start the processing required would be minimum and thus the simulation would progress rapidly. With increased complexity the computation time per update increases and the general progression of the simulation slows down. At worst we would just approach complexity rivaling the parent realities and our updates would take substantial lengths of time in their universe. Whereas the first billion years of simulation might have taken seconds, it might become the case that one of our seconds can take years of computation given enough complexity. But for us we wouldn't notice either way - our perception of reality is bound to our experience of time.
ASalazarMX 7y ago
Fortunately, since v3.14 SimUniverse comes with a hardwired light speed constraint, which bounds those overcurious sims to finite energies. Also, the physical resolution of subatomic events has been decreased. This is a great resource saver, and in the event your sims explore the Science:Particle_Physics subtree, they will be stopped by quantum physics inherent randomness. Beware that in rare circumstances, some of your most clever sims might exploit a rare bug in quantum fluctuations which enables them to perform computations OUTSIDE THEIR SANDBOX. If this happens, revert to your previous backup and increase the negative traits of their leaders so they self-destruct and don't infect your other sims.
lorepieri 7y ago
Awesome idea! I'm writing a novel with a similar trick from one the characters, basically creating a singularity in energy requirement (I'm using closed time like curves though).

sgentle 7y ago

> as simulated beings improve their own efficiencies, the savings from improved algorithms reduces for the simulators. That is such a fascinating idea. A universe only running at the level of abstraction we can understand it. Perhaps Newtonian physics was actually complete until we forced the universe to bail out of that optimisation. Our damned scientists, heedlessly consuming the precious redundancy left for us by our simulators. You can see the cracks in reality already. God help us all if they figure out quantum gravity.

javajosh 7y ago
Strictly speaking the simulation only has to get better when someone looks. E.g. you only have to simulate full quantum mechanics when a scientist is doing specific experiments. Otherwise, you can get away with approximations. (And this is only a very small subset of experiments, like superconduction and superfluidity. Things like blackbody radiation are easy to simulate without quantum.)
bitL 7y ago
Hmm, that would align with some mystical movements throughout the history suggesting that mind/belief shapes the world directly; i.e. the physicists don't just observe reality, they invent it in the process and the underlying algorithms adapt.
hhjinks 7y ago
> A universe only running at the level of abstraction we can understand it. Perhaps Newtonian physics was actually complete until we forced the universe to bail out of that optimisation Very simply explained, that's literally quantum mechanics. Our reality changes depending on how close we look at it. Some quantum/computer scientists have gone so far as to say that reality "runs" extremely sophisticated quantum error correction algorithms to stabilize something so fundamentally unstable into our observable reality. It was even discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18817410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18817410

coldtea 7y ago

>When it comes to computing, as simulated beings improve their own efficiencies, the savings from improved algorithms reduces for the simulators. Eventually, any computing we do, the simulators will also have to do 1:1; because our algorithm and their own will be identical. We get expensive fast. The simulation doesn't have to correspond 1:1 to what we consider it to be, they can use all sorts of hacks. They could just implant in our (simulated) minds or instrument printouts, etc. the idea that we saw some increased accuracy in our measurements, without changing anything special about the simulated world.

cgriswald 7y ago
Let's say I am a simulated being and I query WolframAlpha (WA). WA then has to do some computation to give me a result. This means that the simulation has to compute this result. It may be the the simulations algorithm is much more advanced than WA's algorithm, which means the energy it seems to take WA to do the computation is much greater than the actual energy it took. This means the simulated universe saves that energy difference (minus some overhead). Now let's say WA improves their algorithm and it becomes identical to the algorithm used by the simulators. Now the computation that WA does is 1:1 with the computation the simulator has to do. You could argue, well, maybe they use better hardware that can do it more efficiently. Sure. But then WA can eventually do it on that same hardware. As all this improves, it necessarily goes to 1:1. You might, instead, just store all queries in a lookup table the first time they are made. That would reduce your energy requirements. But now you've just traded infinite energy requirements for a possibly smaller, yet still infinite space requirement. So, I think what you're saying is that you would just fake it. You just "tell" the simulated beings that they did the thing, and you skip over it. I'm not really sure how that would work in practice. If I need the result of my WA query so I can do some other math, and I'm writing all this down, how did I get all this notation on the page and how is it correct without anybody doing the calculations? Do they just force me to see 'something' and tell me what I'm seeing is correct? How do I get to an ultimate useful result? In any case, if you're just going to go mucking about with people's minds, why bother with conscious beings in the first place?
- coldtea 7y ago

bitL 7y ago

> a simple static jpeg of the night sky would suffice Could you imagine our ancestors worshiping compression artifacts in the sky?

zanny 7y ago

When you simulate something with increasing complexity you don't generally run said simulation at a fixed time interval that you then scale hardware to meet. At the start the processing required would be minimum and thus the simulation would progress rapidly. With increased complexity the computation time per update increases and the general progression of the simulation slows down. At worst we would just approach complexity rivaling the parent realities and our updates would take substantial lengths of time in their universe. Whereas the first billion years of simulation might have taken seconds, it might become the case that one of our seconds can take years of computation given enough complexity. But for us we wouldn't notice either way - our perception of reality is bound to our experience of time.

ASalazarMX 7y ago

Fortunately, since v3.14 SimUniverse comes with a hardwired light speed constraint, which bounds those overcurious sims to finite energies. Also, the physical resolution of subatomic events has been decreased. This is a great resource saver, and in the event your sims explore the Science:Particle_Physics subtree, they will be stopped by quantum physics inherent randomness. Beware that in rare circumstances, some of your most clever sims might exploit a rare bug in quantum fluctuations which enables them to perform computations OUTSIDE THEIR SANDBOX. If this happens, revert to your previous backup and increase the negative traits of their leaders so they self-destruct and don't infect your other sims.

lorepieri 7y ago

Awesome idea! I'm writing a novel with a similar trick from one the characters, basically creating a singularity in energy requirement (I'm using closed time like curves though).