Java-Gaming.org    
Featured games (79)
games approved by the League of Dukes
Games in Showcase (477)
Games in Android Showcase (107)
games submitted by our members
Games in WIP (535)
games currently in development
News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
 
    Home     Help   Search   Login   Register   
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
  ignore  |  Print  
  Is our Universe Simulatable?  (Read 4984 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Offline lcass
« Reply #60 - Posted 2014-04-21 20:55:21 »

bouncing against eachother

Wrooooooooong! Grin
They don't actually get in contact with each other Tongue

* Philipp runs!

Maybe offtopic, but would you agree that any kind of energy is also a kind of movement, so energy is movement?

I don't think so. Is chemical energy movement? It's just tension between two particles, keeping them from getting apart from each other. I don't see any movment with a simple uranium atom. It's chemical energy is used in nuclear reactors.

if you mean chemical potential energy then its non existant , its the chance of something happening not any force that is currently exisiting and if it is string theory were talking about here the second a reaction occurs you have the chemical potential energy "released" when its not acctually doing anything as it already gained the energy state from performing work.
Offline BurntPizza
« Reply #61 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:00:35 »

if you mean chemical potential energy then its non existant , its the chance of something happening not any force that is currently exisiting and if it is string theory were talking about here the second a reaction occurs you have the chemical potential energy "released" when its not acctually doing anything as it already gained the energy state from performing work.

Well, if you want to be pedantic and fun at parties, you could say that most of what we say happens in regards to physics and similar subjects "doesn't exist" because it's all just theories. Example: fields (electric, magnetic, etc) don't exist, we have never and don't know how to prove their existence. But they are the current best model that seems to work for our universe.

And now this thread has gone full circle.
Offline opiop65

JGO Kernel


Medals: 153
Projects: 7
Exp: 3 years


JumpButton Studios


« Reply #62 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:01:33 »

Just like time is relative?

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline BurntPizza
« Reply #63 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:05:16 »

Just like time is relative?

Until you can actually prove how something works (if we could we could definitely simulate the universe, ha) any scientific theory may or may not be correct. Therories have been beleived for years only to be proven incorrect or incomplete later. Example: Newtonian mechanics.

Note that these "disproven" theories are usually still useful (refer to the example).

Edit: that being said, special and general relativity have held up very well so far. Check out GPS satellites for an everyday example of something that simply doesn't work without them.
Offline pitbuller
« Reply #64 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:16:57 »

If you only simulate interesting parts of universe with high accuracy. Lazy evaluation could explain quantum mechanic oddities.
Offline matheus23

JGO Kernel


Medals: 106
Projects: 3


You think about my Avatar right now!


« Reply #65 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:25:11 »

Lazy evaluation could explain quantum mechanic oddities.

Not quite. Only when you have side effects. The idea of lazy evaluation is that every program fed into the lazy evaluation program that was written strictly should give exactly the same result. It was just computed in a different way.

But I get the idea. Just wanted to say that it's not like the universe is a lazy simulation.

See my:
    My development Blog:     | Or look at my RPG | Or simply my coding
http://matheusdev.tumblr.comRuins of Revenge  |      On Github
Offline Cero
« Reply #66 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:28:05 »

@lcass a processor is all about communication, any circuit is... sending a signal from A to B

with quantum entanglement this speed increases from C to infinite/instantaneously. how will that make a cpu not faster ?

Offline BurntPizza
« Reply #67 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:31:06 »



Lazy evaluation could explain quantum mechanic oddities.

Not quite. Only when you have side effects. The idea of lazy evaluation is that every program fed into the lazy evaluation program that was written strictly should give exactly the same result. It was just computed in a different way.

But I get the idea. Just wanted to say that it's not like the universe is a lazy simulation.

Maybe not your universe!

1  
2  
3  
Cat s_cat = new Cat();

s_cat.isDead(); // <-- lazily evaluated


 Tongue
Offline Cero
« Reply #68 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:35:07 »

Lazy evaluation could explain quantum mechanic oddities.
Thats a very interesting idea. However seems to be absolute conjecture. Just because we do computing and know something that behaves similarly :P

Offline matheus23

JGO Kernel


Medals: 106
Projects: 3


You think about my Avatar right now!


« Reply #69 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:36:22 »



Lazy evaluation could explain quantum mechanic oddities.

Not quite. Only when you have side effects. The idea of lazy evaluation is that every program fed into the lazy evaluation program that was written strictly should give exactly the same result. It was just computed in a different way.

But I get the idea. Just wanted to say that it's not like the universe is a lazy simulation.

Maybe not your universe!

1  
2  
3  
Cat s_cat = new Cat();

s_cat.isDead(); // <-- lazily evaluated


 Tongue

Yeah. And no one ever found out that the cat is dead until they called
s_cat.isDead()
. If they had, it would have evaluated. This is exactly what schroedinger's katze is.

And now comes the moment where I say "Oooooh I get it.".
Sorry Cheesy

So who said that the cat is not yet evaluated? How come they know that? ôo

My point was: You shouldn't notice the oddities if it were truely lazyly evaluated...

See my:
    My development Blog:     | Or look at my RPG | Or simply my coding
http://matheusdev.tumblr.comRuins of Revenge  |      On Github
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline Riven
« League of Dukes »

JGO Overlord


Medals: 744
Projects: 4
Exp: 16 years


Hand over your head.


« Reply #70 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:38:03 »

Lazy evaluation does not imply determinism, although it's highly prefered. On a side note: what's that smell? Will we ever know?

Hi, appreciate more people! Σ ♥ = ¾
Learn how to award medals... and work your way up the social rankings
Offline BurntPizza
« Reply #71 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:39:32 »

I forget where I saw it, but there was a really good video explaining Schrodinger's Cat and why/how people get it wrong most of the time.

I'll post it here if I find it.



On a side note: what's that smell?

It's the smell of Science!
Offline matheus23

JGO Kernel


Medals: 106
Projects: 3


You think about my Avatar right now!


« Reply #72 - Posted 2014-04-21 21:57:27 »

On a side note: what's that smell? Will we ever know?

I think it's functional programming. The smell is becoming stronger and stronger. But I hope I don't derail this thread Smiley

See my:
    My development Blog:     | Or look at my RPG | Or simply my coding
http://matheusdev.tumblr.comRuins of Revenge  |      On Github
Offline Drenius
« Reply #73 - Posted 2014-04-21 22:08:22 »

Quote
But I hope I don't derail this thread
This thread has no straight rail, or it should not have one since all these topics lead to all the other ones.
Let it go.
Offline matheus23

JGO Kernel


Medals: 106
Projects: 3


You think about my Avatar right now!


« Reply #74 - Posted 2014-04-21 22:10:21 »

Quote
But I hope I don't derail this thread
This thread has no straight rail, or it should not have one since all these topics lead to all the other ones.
Let it go.

Yeah, but at least it was about science. And I don't want to start a discussion about programming languages in a java forum Grin

See my:
    My development Blog:     | Or look at my RPG | Or simply my coding
http://matheusdev.tumblr.comRuins of Revenge  |      On Github
Offline lcass
« Reply #75 - Posted 2014-04-21 22:18:27 »

if you mean chemical potential energy then its non existant , its the chance of something happening not any force that is currently exisiting and if it is string theory were talking about here the second a reaction occurs you have the chemical potential energy "released" when its not acctually doing anything as it already gained the energy state from performing work.

Well, if you want to be pedantic and fun at parties, you could say that most of what we say happens in regards to physics and similar subjects "doesn't exist" because it's all just theories. Example: fields (electric, magnetic, etc) don't exist, we have never and don't know how to prove their existence. But they are the current best model that seems to work for our universe.

And now this thread has gone full circle.
Well theorys in a dictionary definition are ideas with support evidence. They are proven to functions , fields yes we cannot prove the particles that go through them however we know they are there , what I am describing is a potential for something to happen which is basically "The energy it could release" it doesnt directly describe the reaction or energy state of the specific medium. Fields are ... complicated they incooperate multiple theorys and change depending on which model you describe them with , the most accepted version suggest they are made up of virtual particles that are only in existence for the purpose of generating the feild and therefore cannot be detected externally . You can think of them as existant but when you attempt to access them you dont get anything returned.
for example
1  
2  
3  
4  
5  
6  
7  
public class virtualphoton{

public void getparticle(){
    return null; //<------
}

}


There are other examples of this , famously the double slit experiment in which electrons were proven to be able to switch between the state of a particle and a wave ( which is suggested because they do not have a defined size). When observed however the result given was not as expected. heisenberg uncertainty principle yet another example.
Offline BurntPizza
« Reply #76 - Posted 2014-04-21 22:27:22 »

So... you agree with me? It's hard to tell exactly what your point is.
Offline hwinwuzhere
« Reply #77 - Posted 2014-04-21 23:00:59 »

The actual question is ofcourse: Is the universe simulatable in java? hint hint wink wink Tongue

What did the boolean say to the integer? You can't handle the truth.
Offline RobinB

JGO Ninja


Medals: 44
Projects: 1
Exp: 3 years


Spacegame in progress


« Reply #78 - Posted 2014-04-22 08:40:40 »

It means that all weird stuff thats happening with quantum mechanica (the observer influences the experiment), happens because we are simulated. When you are not looking, its not rendered (optimizing), therefore has a superposition state.
Online Roquen
« Reply #79 - Posted 2014-04-22 10:19:04 »

Quote
Btw that brings up a 2 classic questions:
1) can beings of lesser dimensions exist in a universe with more dimensions ?
Yes. Why not?  Interactions are easier when you embed N dimensions is a higher number.

Notice that nobody (other than Riven) have made a nod to the math.  From the paper I linked:

This paper quantifies the amount of information that the universe can register and the number of elementary operations that it can have performed over its history. The universe can have performed no more than 10120 ops on 1090 bits.

Translating the ops into pot: ~2399 operations.  You see what I mean?
Offline delt0r

JGO Knight


Medals: 26
Exp: 18 years


Computers can do that?


« Reply #80 - Posted 2014-04-22 14:18:13 »

It is not clear that quantum mechanics/the universe is turning complete. Of course there is the possibly of a physically based computer than may in fact be more than turning complete. Last i heard quantum computers can still only solve turning complete problems, but some of those problems with different classes of complexity. 

Quantum entanglement does not send any information at all. None. If i get 2 die and i throw them .. i tell you that the sum adds to 7 then shoot myself after posting one in a box to you and one to someone on the ISS. When you open it and see a 3, you didn't make the other die magically become a 4. Furthermore you could not make the dice you look at a 2 and "communicate" a 5 to the iss. Even worse you don't know if they already opened there box and saw a 4 thereby doing "spooky action at a distance" in the other direction.

The Problem is that people try to ascribe meaning to the math of quantum physics, when the correct answer may well be that there is no meaning in the math. Only the outcomes. 

I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious.--Albert Einstein
Offline Riven
« League of Dukes »

JGO Overlord


Medals: 744
Projects: 4
Exp: 16 years


Hand over your head.


« Reply #81 - Posted 2014-04-22 16:35:17 »

Presumably you mean Turing complete Smiley You just added some spin!


Dadum, tsssshhhh.

Hi, appreciate more people! Σ ♥ = ¾
Learn how to award medals... and work your way up the social rankings
Offline delt0r

JGO Knight


Medals: 26
Exp: 18 years


Computers can do that?


« Reply #82 - Posted 2014-04-22 18:12:36 »

lol yea... it was totally intentional.

I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious.--Albert Einstein
Offline Slyth2727
« Reply #83 - Posted 2014-04-22 18:46:27 »

Dammit my brain is... guys.. GUYS!!!!

//Gifs don't wanna work with me.

Was I before Chuang Tzu who dreamt about being a butterfly, or am I now a butterfly who dreams about being Chuang Tzu?
Offline kpars

JGO Wizard


Medals: 75
Projects: 4
Exp: 3 years


Radirius Software Developer


« Reply #84 - Posted 2014-04-22 18:47:09 »

I'm too sober for this discussion.

- Jev

Check out #JGO on EsperNet IRC! | Check out the MERCury 2D Java Game Library! | Also, Check out My Site
Offline Drenius
« Reply #85 - Posted 2014-04-22 18:50:32 »

And the thread went downhill...
Online Roquen
« Reply #86 - Posted 2014-04-23 09:52:09 »

I only gave this a quick skim...but it looks somewhat accessible (same author as previous link): The Universe as Quantum Computer
Offline Oskuro

JGO Knight


Medals: 39
Exp: 6 years


Coding in Style


« Reply #87 - Posted 2014-04-24 10:26:17 »

My simplistic interpretation, which matches what some have already said, is that in order to perfectly simulate a system, the simulator must, in essence, contain the entire system (or else we'd be working with approximations, which is what current simulators do).

So a perfect simulation of the Universe requires containing the entire universe. As was pointed out, a simulator within the universe would need to contain itself, and thus complexity would increase recursively making it impossible to simulate.

So we'd need to get "out" (whatever that means*) of the universe, and essentially build a replica with a "fast forward" button.



* The concept of getting "outside" the universe is hard to understand for a lot of people. I usually simplify it by making an analogy to, say, the Sims game.
For a Sims character to get out of its universe (the game), it needs to exit the program. The problem is that, outside of the game, the Sims character has no meaning (just a bunch of random data as far as the rest of the computer is concerned), and even less meaning if it is trying to get out of the computer.

That's what the Universe is, where our physical reality makes sense, and "outside" of it, space, matter or time cease to make any sense, and thus to exist.

So now think how hard it'd be to get "outside" our universe and somehow build a duplicate  Wink

Offline ikovrigin

Senior Newbie





« Reply #88 - Posted 2014-04-24 10:31:49 »

Can you build a simulator not in our universe? If so may be yes in other case simulator will be the part of the universe and need to simulate itself %).
Online Roquen
« Reply #89 - Posted 2014-04-24 11:55:44 »

I assume (perhaps naively) that the underlying rules of the universe are probably quite simple.  Perhaps something like cellular automaton.  If our universe were a simulation then it would have to be perfect.  And to the entities running the simulation "our universe" is closer the game of life than to any of our attempts to model physical interactions.  The complexity here is really absurd:  lex parsimoniae
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
  ignore  |  Print  
 
 

 

Add your game by posting it in the WIP section,
or publish it in Showcase.

The first screenshot will be displayed as a thumbnail.

Riven (4 views)
2014-07-29 12:53:52

Dwinin (7 views)
2014-07-29 10:59:34

E.R. Fleming (20 views)
2014-07-29 03:07:13

E.R. Fleming (8 views)
2014-07-29 03:06:25

pw (39 views)
2014-07-24 01:59:36

Riven (39 views)
2014-07-23 21:16:32

Riven (26 views)
2014-07-23 21:07:15

Riven (28 views)
2014-07-23 20:56:16

ctomni231 (59 views)
2014-07-18 06:55:21

Zero Volt (51 views)
2014-07-17 23:47:54
HotSpot Options
by dleskov
2014-07-08 03:59:08

Java and Game Development Tutorials
by SwordsMiner
2014-06-14 00:58:24

Java and Game Development Tutorials
by SwordsMiner
2014-06-14 00:47:22

How do I start Java Game Development?
by ra4king
2014-05-17 11:13:37

HotSpot Options
by Roquen
2014-05-15 09:59:54

HotSpot Options
by Roquen
2014-05-06 15:03:10

Escape Analysis
by Roquen
2014-04-29 22:16:43

Experimental Toys
by Roquen
2014-04-28 13:24:22
java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑gaming.org
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Managed by Enhanced Four Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!