8 ms·

It’s an atheist’s most religious dream to think of becoming one’s own creator. It’s nonsense, of course, but it definitely blew my mind reading it as a child. W

It’s an atheist’s most religious dream to think of becoming one’s own creator. It’s nonsense, of course, but it definitely blew my mind reading it as a child. What set the parameters that the ultimate computer must work within? The ultimate computer can reverse entropy, but it can’t make its own reality. There are limits to the power of knowledge.

throwaway892238 4y ago
Creator in what sense though? Evolution is slow enough that there was never one point at which we suddenly came into being. First we were energy, then we were energy forming into chemicals, then we were chemicals forming into chemicals with rigid structures, then we were chemicals with rigid structures forming more complex structures, etc, until we got to here. Each iteration creates the next iteration, constantly, always. We are always giving birth to ourselves with a teeny tiny change. There is no distinction between a human being and a gas cloud except a couple billion years of iteration. Since we are always creating ourselves, and whatever created the universe also created us, then we probably created the universe, and are the universe, and are creating it still. We are the creator and the created. It's mobius bagels all the way down.
- hoseja 4y ago
  Well perhaps if you become omni(scient/present/potent) enough, you can subtly influence that process to your desired goal. Evolution is very random in the end.
  - shlurpy 4y ago
    Goedels incompleteness seems to me to disprove such omni, and if you are stuck thinking by our best models of thinking, its annoying exponential. Basically, to think about a universe enough to predict outcomes, you have to simulate it. To figure out which universe leads to a desired outcone, it seems like you would have to simulate most of the ones that do not as well. So if we presuppose the existance of a creator, maybe we are one of the failed universe thought experiments as she tries to make her intended universe?
- bsenftner 4y ago
  > It's mobius bagels all the way down. Now that's a fun phrase!
- fsflover 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design
BeetleB 4y ago
You must be fun at parties.
- technothrasher 4y ago
  Wait, you're complaining that earthboundkid is sucking the fun out of an Isaac Asimov story by dissecting the ideas held within it? I think you may find you have accidentally arrived at the wrong party.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - BeetleB 4y ago
    > I think you may find you have accidentally arrived at the wrong party. Definitely - I thought I was at the SF party, not the Skeptics party. I mean, of course the story defies physics. As do over 90% of Asimov's stories. As do most SF stories. Talking about these things is like going to a party to watch the soccer World Cup final and pontificating over how much better soccer would be if you could use your hands to hold the ball and run.
    - technothrasher 4y ago
      > thought I was at the SF party, not the Skeptics party. Lol. Asimov was a founding member of CSICOP, the organization that literally started the modern Skeptical movement.
      - BeetleB 4y ago
        And he clearly had the wisdom not to apply it to his fiction writing.
evanb 4y ago
The rabbi recently on the Lex Fridman podcast told a joke that went (roughly) like Scientists come to God and say "OK God, we've had a lot of progress lately in synthetic biology, genetics, engineering, etc. and we're pretty sure we know how you did it." God says "Oh really?". "Yes. We'll create living creatures out of dirt to show that we can do just as you did with Adam." God says "Wow, fantastic!" So the scientists go outside with a shovel to collect some dirt. And as they're about to dig their spades in, God says "No no no, get your own dirt!"
- burrows 4y ago
  Right, God and his talking dirt.
  - Thorrez 4y ago
    The point isn't about the dirt's abilities. The point is how did the dirt come to be in the first place (or really, the atoms, subatomic particles, and mass itself)?
    - TuringTest 4y ago
      Yeah but the missing point in the reasoning leading to that joke (and theological arguments) is, who created God? If you make the argument that a deity is its own creator and cause, that idea could be applied to the existing physical universe directly.
      - mcv 4y ago
        Which is kinda the idea behind the big bang.
        Thorrez 4y ago
        Can you elaborate? Related: the idea of the Big Bang was first thought of by the Catholic priest Monsignor Georges Lemaître. Many scientists at the time dismissed the Big Bang, saying it was an attempt to bring religious concepts into physics. Another tangent: Msgr. Lemaître was quite interested in computer programming, as computers started to be invented toward the end of his life.
ciphol 4y ago
I think the issue is that Asimov uses "hyperspace" as a get-out-of-jail-free card for anything that seems to contradict physics. Faster than light travel? Possible through hyperspace. Infinitely powerful computers? Can exist in hyperspace.
- TuringTest 4y ago
  Quite true, but that's not something unique to Asimov. Applied Phlebotinum [1] is a common device in Science Fiction whenever the science can't support a plot device required by the fiction (SF narratives are stories in the first place, after all). There's even a trope specifically for how hyperspace and subspace are used in that way.[2] [1] https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Applied_Phlebotinum https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Applied_Phlebotinu... [2] https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Subspace_or_Hyperspace https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Subspace_or_Hyperspace
  - thesuitonym 4y ago
    Why would you link the the super ad-ridden and obnoxious fandom copy of a TV Tropes article?
    - TuringTest 4y ago
      Because TV Tropes has severe licensing problems[1] - most of its content originally was submitted by its editors under a CC BY-SA license, but then the site maintainer relicensed (without permission) all its database under the incompatible CC BY-NC-SA, creating a situation where its content can't be legally redistributed. I use adblocking so I didn't notice the ads; if you prefer, you may check it[1] at AllTheTropes,[2] the initial fork that kept the content under its original legal license. Though as far as I understand it, that project migrated to Tropedia and it is no longer maintained, which is why I linked there instead. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Tropes#Licensing_and_content_forks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Tropes#Licensing_and_conten... [2] https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Category:Applied_Phlebotinum https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Category:Applied_Phlebotinum [3] https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Main_Page https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Main_Page
thrwyoilarticle 4y ago
There's the concept of the AI effect, where the goalposts for what is considered AI are continuously moved so that they no longer encapsulate what today's AI can do. I wonder if the same thing applies to godhood. For thousands of years, humans have shifted the evolutionary path of other species. We create humans outside of the human body every day. We manipulate fundamental forces and create particles. For fun, we interact with virtual worlds full of creatures we made. We've even put life on other worlds. Maybe our universe is just some greaterverse being's homework.

throwaway892238 4y ago

Creator in what sense though? Evolution is slow enough that there was never one point at which we suddenly came into being. First we were energy, then we were energy forming into chemicals, then we were chemicals forming into chemicals with rigid structures, then we were chemicals with rigid structures forming more complex structures, etc, until we got to here. Each iteration creates the next iteration, constantly, always. We are always giving birth to ourselves with a teeny tiny change. There is no distinction between a human being and a gas cloud except a couple billion years of iteration. Since we are always creating ourselves, and whatever created the universe also created us, then we probably created the universe, and are the universe, and are creating it still. We are the creator and the created. It's mobius bagels all the way down.

hoseja 4y ago
Well perhaps if you become omni(scient/present/potent) enough, you can subtly influence that process to your desired goal. Evolution is very random in the end.
- shlurpy 4y ago
  Goedels incompleteness seems to me to disprove such omni, and if you are stuck thinking by our best models of thinking, its annoying exponential. Basically, to think about a universe enough to predict outcomes, you have to simulate it. To figure out which universe leads to a desired outcone, it seems like you would have to simulate most of the ones that do not as well. So if we presuppose the existance of a creator, maybe we are one of the failed universe thought experiments as she tries to make her intended universe?
bsenftner 4y ago
> It's mobius bagels all the way down. Now that's a fun phrase!
fsflover 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

BeetleB 4y ago

You must be fun at parties.

technothrasher 4y ago
Wait, you're complaining that earthboundkid is sucking the fun out of an Isaac Asimov story by dissecting the ideas held within it? I think you may find you have accidentally arrived at the wrong party.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- BeetleB 4y ago
  > I think you may find you have accidentally arrived at the wrong party. Definitely - I thought I was at the SF party, not the Skeptics party. I mean, of course the story defies physics. As do over 90% of Asimov's stories. As do most SF stories. Talking about these things is like going to a party to watch the soccer World Cup final and pontificating over how much better soccer would be if you could use your hands to hold the ball and run.
  - technothrasher 4y ago
    > thought I was at the SF party, not the Skeptics party. Lol. Asimov was a founding member of CSICOP, the organization that literally started the modern Skeptical movement.
    - BeetleB 4y ago
      And he clearly had the wisdom not to apply it to his fiction writing.

evanb 4y ago

The rabbi recently on the Lex Fridman podcast told a joke that went (roughly) like Scientists come to God and say "OK God, we've had a lot of progress lately in synthetic biology, genetics, engineering, etc. and we're pretty sure we know how you did it." God says "Oh really?". "Yes. We'll create living creatures out of dirt to show that we can do just as you did with Adam." God says "Wow, fantastic!" So the scientists go outside with a shovel to collect some dirt. And as they're about to dig their spades in, God says "No no no, get your own dirt!"

burrows 4y ago
Right, God and his talking dirt.
- Thorrez 4y ago
  The point isn't about the dirt's abilities. The point is how did the dirt come to be in the first place (or really, the atoms, subatomic particles, and mass itself)?
  - TuringTest 4y ago
    Yeah but the missing point in the reasoning leading to that joke (and theological arguments) is, who created God? If you make the argument that a deity is its own creator and cause, that idea could be applied to the existing physical universe directly.
    - mcv 4y ago
      Which is kinda the idea behind the big bang.
      - Thorrez 4y ago
        Can you elaborate? Related: the idea of the Big Bang was first thought of by the Catholic priest Monsignor Georges Lemaître. Many scientists at the time dismissed the Big Bang, saying it was an attempt to bring religious concepts into physics. Another tangent: Msgr. Lemaître was quite interested in computer programming, as computers started to be invented toward the end of his life.

ciphol 4y ago

I think the issue is that Asimov uses "hyperspace" as a get-out-of-jail-free card for anything that seems to contradict physics. Faster than light travel? Possible through hyperspace. Infinitely powerful computers? Can exist in hyperspace.

TuringTest 4y ago
Quite true, but that's not something unique to Asimov. Applied Phlebotinum [1] is a common device in Science Fiction whenever the science can't support a plot device required by the fiction (SF narratives are stories in the first place, after all). There's even a trope specifically for how hyperspace and subspace are used in that way.[2] [1] https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Applied_Phlebotinum https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Applied_Phlebotinu... [2] https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Subspace_or_Hyperspace https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Subspace_or_Hyperspace
- thesuitonym 4y ago
  Why would you link the the super ad-ridden and obnoxious fandom copy of a TV Tropes article?
  - TuringTest 4y ago
    Because TV Tropes has severe licensing problems[1] - most of its content originally was submitted by its editors under a CC BY-SA license, but then the site maintainer relicensed (without permission) all its database under the incompatible CC BY-NC-SA, creating a situation where its content can't be legally redistributed. I use adblocking so I didn't notice the ads; if you prefer, you may check it[1] at AllTheTropes,[2] the initial fork that kept the content under its original legal license. Though as far as I understand it, that project migrated to Tropedia and it is no longer maintained, which is why I linked there instead. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Tropes#Licensing_and_content_forks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Tropes#Licensing_and_conten... [2] https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Category:Applied_Phlebotinum https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Category:Applied_Phlebotinum [3] https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Main_Page https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Main_Page

thrwyoilarticle 4y ago

There's the concept of the AI effect, where the goalposts for what is considered AI are continuously moved so that they no longer encapsulate what today's AI can do. I wonder if the same thing applies to godhood. For thousands of years, humans have shifted the evolutionary path of other species. We create humans outside of the human body every day. We manipulate fundamental forces and create particles. For fun, we interact with virtual worlds full of creatures we made. We've even put life on other worlds. Maybe our universe is just some greaterverse being's homework.