5 ms·
> “In fact, you can’t even imagine how complicated it is.” Well, maybe someone could imagine it, otherwise, all that complexity would have led to a gargantuan
by indigoabstract 3y ago
> “In fact, you can’t even imagine how complicated it is.”
Well, maybe someone could imagine it, otherwise, all that complexity would have led to a gargantuan number of bugs and the universe would have crashed..
- erikaww 3y agoJust needs a little abstraction- and not the leaky variety
- Smoosh 3y agoMaybe all the other instances crashed, but we got lucky and get to apply the anthropic principle. The real question is, are we running on bare metal, in a VM, or in a container?
- gumby 3y ago> The real question is, are we running on bare metal, in a VM, or in a container? We can't be running on the bare hardware; there is clearly an OS enforcing the hardware abstraction (e.g. every electron is identical). But is each universe its own process? What happens if you fork()?
- emmelaich 3y ago> every electron is identical That's an illusion; there is only one electron.
- ForIveSyntax 3y agobuddhism intensifies
- gumby 3y agoThat’s how the kernel implements it anyway; every time you do a syscall to look at it you get a different pointer to the same 'struct lepton'.
- rkagerer 3y agoUniverse is a quantum computer, forking every Planck interval.
- ForIveSyntax 3y agoWhy do you ask? Are you hoping to ROWHAMMER a parallel universe? Genuinely curious if there’s any scientifically useful direction to this question
- WXLCKNO 3y agoI'd watch a movie with that premise.
- tomoyoirl 3y agoI believe they tried an experiment that was similar to that at the start of Schild’s Ladder — and for their troubles they were rewarded with a vacuum decay expanding through space at about 0.5c.
- skirmish 3y ago"According to the more conservative cosmologists, an alien superpower – maybe a collective of Kardashev Type Three galaxy-spanning civilizations – is running a timing channel attack on the computational ultrastructure of space-time itself, trying to break through to whatever's underneath." in Accelerando
- wwilim 3y agoIt's all WebAssembly
- syrusakbary 3y agohahaha as a founder working on the Wasm space, this made me giggle!
- antipaul 3y agoWe run on GPUs. The real question is, what does the AI that runs us, run on?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Aerbil313 3y agoI’ve never understood the anthropic principle. It’s a very big maybe for seemingly no reason. Existence of a single universe is a pretty hard thing to contemplate, why should we consider multiples of it?
- tim333 3y agoThis has always seemed to me one of the best arguments against the simulation hypothesis.
- cantrevealname 3y ago>> all that complexity would have led to a gargantuan number of bugs and the universe would have crashed > This has always seemed to me one of the best arguments against the simulation hypothesis. Can you expand on that? Are you saying that if we were in a simulation, the observed complexity of the universe (or the complexity of particle physics) would have caused the simulation to crash? Ergo, we are not in a simulation?
- tim333 3y agoMy thinking is more that if it was a simulation they wouldn't make it so a single proton was so complex as to be almost impossible to simulate accurately. I mean is a simulation you might expect if to look like pixels or minecraft or something close up. Or maybe simple point particles. But I don't thing the equations describing a proton are exactly soluble and also the results very complex so the best you can do is a very approximate simulation.