3 ms·
It could also be a complete opposite of the executing environment, which is actually used to demonstrate the viability of 'another way to run a universe'. But b
by harel 6y ago
It could also be a complete opposite of the executing environment, which is actually used to demonstrate the viability of 'another way to run a universe'. But because someone THOUGHT of this universe to simulate it, it's a "known" environment. If I try to break it down like a programmer, perhaps all it is, is a few physics rules programmed in, then the big bang on the enter key to execute the binary (I bet it's written in Rust - it's all the hype now). We could be done with a full universal simulation within maybe 1 hour of run time, but for us that 1 hour is like a trillion years.
- mcculley 6y agoWhy do you assume someone thought of the simulated universe? As I said, it could be an accident, a side-effect of something else. Just as people inadvertently invent Turing machines when designing languages, our universe could be the side-effect of something built for an entirely different purpose.
- mcculley 6y agoThe time scale could also be the other way around: An hour in the simulated universe could take a trillion years to execute in the host environment.