←back to thread

First images from Euclid are in

(dlmultimedia.esa.int)
1413 points mooreds | 5 comments | 21 Oct 24 20:15 UTC | HN request time: 1.277s | source
Show context
geenkeuse ◴[22 Oct 24 00:46 UTC] No.41910105[source]▶
We still have a long way to go to beat this draw distance, but we are on our way. The day will come when we have "sentient" beings, living in a massive world created by us. And they will ponder the same things as we do now.

And we will remain invisible and out of reach, but completely observant, and influential in their world. After all, we wrote the program.

And they will study the code and discover their own "natural laws" and invent their own things.

And they will progress until they create a completely simulated world of their own.

I wonder at which level are we. How many sims down from the original program...

replies(4): >>41910112 #>>41910200 #>>41911019 #>>41912214 #
smaddox ◴[22 Oct 24 01:06 UTC] No.41910200[source]▶
Exponential slowdowns at each level ruin this hypothesis.
replies(1): >>41910389 #
1. geenkeuse ◴[22 Oct 24 01:50 UTC] No.41910389[source]▶
The documents I copied are not as sharp as the original, so the photocopier must not exist.
replies(1): >>41910762 #
2. smaddox ◴[22 Oct 24 02:54 UTC] No.41910762[source]▶
Photocopying has little to do with simulation of the physical world.

First of all, Bits != Q-bits. You can clone bits. You can't clone Q-bits: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-cloning_theorem

Second, photocopies are static. The physical world is not static.

replies(1): >>41912027 #
3. TrapLord_Rhodo ◴[22 Oct 24 07:30 UTC] No.41912027[source]▶
Why would their be exponential slowdown? Time can be relative, but superbroadcasting can help explain the loss of fidelity as we scale down. So you can't "Clone" but you can superentangle multiple copies in a degraded state.
replies(1): >>41925335 #
4. smaddox ◴[23 Oct 24 14:24 UTC] No.41925335{3}[source]▶
The slowdown is in the simulation, not in the internally perceived flow of time. The internally perceived flow of time would of course not change.

The problem is that an exponential slowdown at each level requires discounting the probability of being in a simulation by an exponential amount per level. So instead of being able to say that the weighted odds of being in a simulation are higher than the odds of not being in a simulation, you have to say that, at best, there's a small chance of being in a simulation.

replies(1): >>41941442 #
5. TrapLord_Rhodo ◴[25 Oct 24 01:18 UTC] No.41941442{4}[source]▶
but if you have entanglement, you don't have slowdown. that was my point. It's "wasteful", by producing multiple copies to have a probablity across the set, but it does allow it to be "Parrallel" so no exponetial slowdown.