3 ms·
Would relativity then be a necessary component in a simulation, with an effort put into implementing the correct mechanics? Or could relativity be a side effect
by martinkallstrom 16y ago
Would relativity then be a necessary component in a simulation, with an effort put into implementing the correct mechanics? Or could relativity be a side effect of an underlying representation you chose in order to achieve something else, like the massive parallellism needed to compute the next discreet step in the simulation?
- iwwr 16y agoA graph structure is the most generic discrete topology I can think of.
- ars 16y agoIf you have e=mc2 then relativity happens mostly automatically (Because energy is mass, it makes objects heavier when they go fast, and since they are heavier it takes even more energy to accelerate them, take that to the limit and c becomes the fastest you can go.) And once you have that you realize that energy is relative (because speed is relative, otherwise you can easily get free energy by having two slow object who's speed adds up to c), and the rest of the coding falls out from there. I'm not sure if relativity is necessary for the coding, and you do it in reverse. I think e=mc2 was first and everything followed from there.
- martinkallstrom 16y agoThank you for following up my chain of thought.. you are clearly the go-to guy for universe simulation implementations. Let me know when you are available to put in a couple of man-centuries of development. I'll provide funding, food and not too alien coworkers.