If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Politics & ReligionWell Since every damn forum has one. Might as well leave it out there. This place is loosely moderated and should not be entered if you're weak of heart.
Scientists are already able to use physics engines to demonstrate how lifelike galaxies could have been formed after the big bang. Astronomers are in a generally accepted agreement about the total energy of the universe, and how the big bang distributed matter and energy. Of course, the galaxies created were not created from atoms, but globs of neutral material that would just register into equations for gravity and such. According to Moore's Law, the computing power of an integrated circuit doubles every 2 years. What if in 1000 years, or 100,000 years, our knowledge of computer science, physics, and astronomy, are so immense, that we could create a simulation of the start of the universe, and have it represent every single atom, and piece of energy, and every piece of dark energy or dark matter.
What if the fabric of our universe was perfectly recreated, and atleast in certain parts, the conditions were right for atoms to start making complex bonds with eachother. What if the most basic form of life was created? What if, after billions of years of this universe, intelligent life was created?
Would it be immoral to turn the program off?
Can you prove that your intelligence, isn't a simulation? Since we know nothing outside of our own existance, what do we have to compare to?
Can you prove that your intelligence, isn't a simulation? Since we know nothing outside of our own existance, what do we have to compare to?
Welcome to philosophy 101...the deconstruction of reality in an attempt to create meaning.
The answer lies in your requirement of proof, or more accurately the requirement of proof of the particular observer requiring the proof.
When I stub my toe, that's proof enough for me. I suppose to satisfy your proof though, I would have to stub your toe. If that still stikes you as a simulation, good luck with your survival!
__________________ There no need to ascribe to conspiracy that which can be attributed to indifference.
__________________
In life, you only need two tools - WD-40 and Duct tape.
If it doesn't move but should, use the WD-40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the duct tape.
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggy69
Why is it that people jump on people assuming its their first bike...because they just joined the forum....maybe they just want to converse and ask questions...people can ride for eternity without coming here for our infinite wisdom
Quote:
Originally Posted by R.Brosnan
It's better to learn on a 250 for all the same reasons that experts can make a 600 do so much more. The design compromises that make a sportbike so responsive in the hands of an expert also make it amplify the mistakes of a beginner.
__________________ jim schmidtIf you didn't spank her hard during first date sex, you've already lost the battle, you wuss and pussy! ChaunceyAs we speak, speedy is in class right now learning about anatomy. He had a few questions regarding these things called "testicles" and something called a "spine".
Proud Member of The Cock Crew (Unofficial Fan Club of 'The Pussy Posse') Preventing 'Gay Friends' ...one pecker at a time. asci_blue Now if you want mean I'll do mean. Men are really evolved women. Since the default gender is female men have to be better. ;)
under the current math of quantum mechanics (especially M theory) it's entirely possible to create a universe in your basement that will expand without displacing our universe.
The more we evolve and learn, the less we need religion to hide our ignorance behind. Loss of religion is the next true step in human evolution.
under the current math of quantum mechanics (especially M theory) it's entirely possible to create a universe in your basement that will expand without displacing our universe.
maybe, but a simulation is something else entirely. You can dick with a simulation any way you want, and hence probably at least know if something intelligent exists in it at all. A physics simulator to create intelligence is crazy overkill and totally impractical for a computer working on principles even close to as they exist today. And I mean take Moore's law as far into the future as humans exist, we will not have something fast enough to simulate even a single person down to the atoms, not to mention an entire planet for long enough to allow that person to evolve in the first place.
But that's dodging the question. Simulating neurons is a LOT easier, even if we still aren't sure how to put enough of them together into something smart. But let's say we do know sometime in the future and create an intelligent AI.
We don't seem to have a problem killing very intelligent animals, why would the backup-able, pausable, copyable AI be any higher on the ladder?
__________________
boldly going forward 'cause we can't find reverse
We don't seem to have a problem killing very intelligent animals, why would the backup-able, pausable, copyable AI be any higher on the ladder?
--The more efficient something is, the less it will tolerate inefficiency.
For that reason, and because the computers we are giving the most intelligence to are generally weapons- I don't see any reason why a SkyNet type scenario like Terminator wouldn't be the ultimate fate of mankind. We are terribly ineffecient.
But I think we wont get that far. It wont be a malicious computer that decides to wipe out these insects called humans. It will be because man creates the machines and we are inefficient and mistake prone. It'll be a mistake that does in mankind. A glitch no one foresaw not far from the crazy computer in War Games (damn did that just date me or what?)
Playing God?
...one pecker at a time.
