6 ms·

I've been compiling a list of ways in which physical reality is similar to game engines or mechanical simulation in general. Here's my list so far: - The obser

by bwood 2y ago

I've been compiling a list of ways in which physical reality is similar to game engines or mechanical simulation in general. Here's my list so far: - The observer effect, quantum entanglement and wavefunction collapse --> lazy evaluation - Speed of light --> speed of causality to resolve the object interaction problem O(n^2) - Quanta of energy, Planck's length --> discretization of reality to limit computational precision - Unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics --> reality is implemented with mathematics - Parsimonious physics --> simple physical rules are less computationally expensive to evaluate - Entropy --> stability of the simulation and a guaranteed "wind down"

szvsw 2y ago
For speed of light, a more direct analogue (though your example still makes sense) would be what is often called the “speed of sound” in numerical methods (like the finite difference method, aka FDM), which is often closely related to both temporal and spatial discretization schemes and can lead to numerical instability (cf. CFL condition, Von Neumann stability analysis, etc). It’s also related to things like stiff problems. It essentially has to do with how fast computational information propagates through the simulated domain. Note that it is still called “the speed of sound” even when you are not simulating the wave equation! (At least by my profs)
state_less 2y ago
The simulation framing tends to draw deterministic connotations. I think when people think of a simulation or perhaps physical interpretations, they imagine life as happening to them, rather than through them. I think it’s easy to perceive it one way or the other, and what you seek you will find. But something like ‘lazy evaluation’ could provide a bridge between the two views. A choice is made AND a physically compatible path is observed as if it were always so from the past to the present. Personally, I think of the universe is alive with choice and we do get to participate. PS. I kept a copy of Kip Thorne’s Black Holes and Time Warps on my nightstand as a kid - it filled me with fascination. Thanks Kip!
- szvsw 2y ago
  > The simulation framing tends to draw deterministic connotations. I bristle at this because there is obviously a massive amount of probabilistic programming methodology and stochastic simulation techniques out there, but at the end of the day in terms of connotation you are probably correct…
  - Mattasher 2y ago
    I think there's a case to be made that, if the simulation hypothesis is correct, we are god's dice[1]. We exist as agents to introduce randomness in the form of free will or enough chaos to ensure non-determinism, at least from the perspective of whatever force built this place. [1] https://mattasher.substack.com/p/btf-6-gods-dice https://mattasher.substack.com/p/btf-6-gods-dice
    - medstrom 2y ago
      Sounds like anthropocentric bias. If you can implement a true RNG for some things, why not for all things?
nickpsecurity 2y ago
Add a few more observations: 1. The laws of the universe require unimaginable power, knowledge, and precision to implement. Its Creator must have these traits. 2. It doesn’t fail. Everything humans build requires maintenance but still fails. That this universe runs with a 100% reliability rate shows its maintainer’s power, knowledge, and perfection. It also shows He is sustaining us every second. He’s thinking about and caring for His creation. 3. Humans appear hardwired to seek who God is. So, the Creator wants us to look for them. 4. Even as children, humans have basic notions of love, justice, and are relational. The Creator is a relational, moral being who wants them to think like that. 5. All life passes through genes that carry some appearance and behavior. The higher creations raise their offspring. The Creator designed us to bear children who we teach. We’re creators in a way, too. 6. Many claim the Creator reveals Himself to them. One had objective proof, power, and outcomes that back that up (eg GetHisWord.com). The Creator has purpose for us which He helpfully shares. Jesus also lived it, too, in the same flesh before dying for our sins. Just these six suggest that, in contrast to gaming, our world is run by God who has power, omniscience, morals, and a relationship with His people. So, that says the way to win is to be close to Him (Jesus) while playing the game by His rules. Also, to enjoy learning how it works which is endlessly deep and fun. :) In contrast, a game engine or computer doesn’t compare mostly because of how the universe works perfectly despite billions upon billions upon billions of interactions. It can’t be overstated how unlikely that is based on all observations of reality. It’s truly astounding.
- anthk 2y ago
  That's a bunch of fallacies.
  - nickpsecurity 2y ago
    You didn't say that about either the claims in the OP article or prior submissions with less proof of what they say. Your reaction might be emotional, not logical. I encourage you to consider it logically. An easy test would be to find human machines that have 100% reliability without design or maintenance. Then, strong arguments that they'll remain that way for thousands to billions of years with no intelligent intervention. If you wouldn't believe that, why would you believe an atheist that says the universe's superior machinery was likewise undesigned, is unmaintained, and is accidentally perfect? That goes against everything we've observed. We also have a guess on the computational requirements which are mind-boggling. Just simulating tiny molecular or quantum systems with total accuracy, if it's even happened, takes a ton of computation. Every sub-particle or force in the entire universe running at the same time is unimaginable computation. Plus, the Creator makes them all work exactly as desired with the same, observed patterns. We can't get cellular automata to work like we want but the Creator is directing a universe of simple interactions to cause specific behavior, global and local? God is the best theory for these observations. That also makes Him the most interesting of all beings in existence. Since we know Him, we also worship Him on top of it. That's acquired through non-scientific means, though. He supernaturally imparts it to those who believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It's more phenomenological but indirectly observable.

by bwood 2y ago

szvsw 2y ago

For speed of light, a more direct analogue (though your example still makes sense) would be what is often called the “speed of sound” in numerical methods (like the finite difference method, aka FDM), which is often closely related to both temporal and spatial discretization schemes and can lead to numerical instability (cf. CFL condition, Von Neumann stability analysis, etc). It’s also related to things like stiff problems. It essentially has to do with how fast computational information propagates through the simulated domain. Note that it is still called “the speed of sound” even when you are not simulating the wave equation! (At least by my profs)

state_less 2y ago

The simulation framing tends to draw deterministic connotations. I think when people think of a simulation or perhaps physical interpretations, they imagine life as happening to them, rather than through them. I think it’s easy to perceive it one way or the other, and what you seek you will find. But something like ‘lazy evaluation’ could provide a bridge between the two views. A choice is made AND a physically compatible path is observed as if it were always so from the past to the present. Personally, I think of the universe is alive with choice and we do get to participate. PS. I kept a copy of Kip Thorne’s Black Holes and Time Warps on my nightstand as a kid - it filled me with fascination. Thanks Kip!

szvsw 2y ago
> The simulation framing tends to draw deterministic connotations. I bristle at this because there is obviously a massive amount of probabilistic programming methodology and stochastic simulation techniques out there, but at the end of the day in terms of connotation you are probably correct…
- Mattasher 2y ago
  I think there's a case to be made that, if the simulation hypothesis is correct, we are god's dice[1]. We exist as agents to introduce randomness in the form of free will or enough chaos to ensure non-determinism, at least from the perspective of whatever force built this place. [1] https://mattasher.substack.com/p/btf-6-gods-dice https://mattasher.substack.com/p/btf-6-gods-dice
  - medstrom 2y ago
    Sounds like anthropocentric bias. If you can implement a true RNG for some things, why not for all things?

nickpsecurity 2y ago

Add a few more observations: 1. The laws of the universe require unimaginable power, knowledge, and precision to implement. Its Creator must have these traits. 2. It doesn’t fail. Everything humans build requires maintenance but still fails. That this universe runs with a 100% reliability rate shows its maintainer’s power, knowledge, and perfection. It also shows He is sustaining us every second. He’s thinking about and caring for His creation. 3. Humans appear hardwired to seek who God is. So, the Creator wants us to look for them. 4. Even as children, humans have basic notions of love, justice, and are relational. The Creator is a relational, moral being who wants them to think like that. 5. All life passes through genes that carry some appearance and behavior. The higher creations raise their offspring. The Creator designed us to bear children who we teach. We’re creators in a way, too. 6. Many claim the Creator reveals Himself to them. One had objective proof, power, and outcomes that back that up (eg GetHisWord.com). The Creator has purpose for us which He helpfully shares. Jesus also lived it, too, in the same flesh before dying for our sins. Just these six suggest that, in contrast to gaming, our world is run by God who has power, omniscience, morals, and a relationship with His people. So, that says the way to win is to be close to Him (Jesus) while playing the game by His rules. Also, to enjoy learning how it works which is endlessly deep and fun. :) In contrast, a game engine or computer doesn’t compare mostly because of how the universe works perfectly despite billions upon billions upon billions of interactions. It can’t be overstated how unlikely that is based on all observations of reality. It’s truly astounding.

anthk 2y ago
That's a bunch of fallacies.
- nickpsecurity 2y ago
  You didn't say that about either the claims in the OP article or prior submissions with less proof of what they say. Your reaction might be emotional, not logical. I encourage you to consider it logically. An easy test would be to find human machines that have 100% reliability without design or maintenance. Then, strong arguments that they'll remain that way for thousands to billions of years with no intelligent intervention. If you wouldn't believe that, why would you believe an atheist that says the universe's superior machinery was likewise undesigned, is unmaintained, and is accidentally perfect? That goes against everything we've observed. We also have a guess on the computational requirements which are mind-boggling. Just simulating tiny molecular or quantum systems with total accuracy, if it's even happened, takes a ton of computation. Every sub-particle or force in the entire universe running at the same time is unimaginable computation. Plus, the Creator makes them all work exactly as desired with the same, observed patterns. We can't get cellular automata to work like we want but the Creator is directing a universe of simple interactions to cause specific behavior, global and local? God is the best theory for these observations. That also makes Him the most interesting of all beings in existence. Since we know Him, we also worship Him on top of it. That's acquired through non-scientific means, though. He supernaturally imparts it to those who believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It's more phenomenological but indirectly observable.