User talk:Maughaum
From Simulism
Hello, please leave me a comment!
Hey, thanks for all your contributions, I hope you enjoy the site and continu to contribute! --Ivo 10:28, 3 February 2007 (CET)
---
Hi Maugham
There is actually an interesting novel about communication between an artificial computer-generated world and its programmers. In this case it was not a simulation, more of an experiment to see whether a two-dimensional version of our world could be created: Dewdney, A. K. The Planiverse: Computer Contact With a Two-Dimensional World. New York: Copernicus Books, 2000. (This was first published in the 1980's I think)
In the novel, the 2D world is generated as a class project. Initially it just contains basic elements, but then begins to take on a life of its own when students get enthused with more sophisticated programs to generate inhabitant behaviour, and incorporate planet-wide phenomena such as geology, climate etc.
At that point the beings in the Planiverse beings begin to communicate with their programmers. However, it turns out that the Planiverse was an already-existing entity, and that the artificial world was simply the conduit which allows communication. As a book, Planiverse is fascinating, as it 'works out' how 2D beings could function. (For example, eating is a problem; an alimentary canal which runs through the body would split a 2D being into two parts.)
There is an interesting history to this type of fiction. It goes back to a book called Flatland, first published in 1884. (Abbott, Edwin A. Flatland. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1992. )
You might wonder whether Terry Pratchett was influenced by any of this, but I couldn't possibly comment. :oP --TonyFleet 08:28, 5 February 2007 (CET)
Thanks Tony, I will look for those. --Maughaum
[edit] Hi there
Hi Maughaum, long time no see. Don't really understand your AI query.--TonyFleet 00:21, 26 May 2007 (CEST)
Hello Tony, I meant to ask, how would Ivo classify (degree of simulism) the simuation where a being or simulator creates a simulated life form that is to exist in the level or reality of the simulator? I think it is an interesting point, an almost inverse of what we've been discussing...creating simulated life in a simulated environment. For example in AI, an artificial life is created without the difficulty of creating the simlated environment. Isn't it amazing that we don't see that as so far fetched although a one time it must have seemed impossible. I would suggest that is evidence that creating a simulated environment won't seem so difficult in the future.
Question1: Since everything is symetrical, what is the exact inverse of simulism? How about the simulees dystroying the simulators?
Question2: If we are indeed simulated creatures, and our thoughts are actually running on the computer of a higher level, wouldn't the fact that we even think thoughts about simulation, or write books, or articles and movies about simulated creatures and worlds demonstrate the ability to run recursive simulations as a possibility? But if you think about it, try and creatively think of a simulated world in your mind, how much detail can you fill in? What if we all tried it at the same time - would we impact the simulation?
--Maughaum
- In all that I have written on this site (and elsewhere) about simulation, I have always had that idea of simulated consciousness emerging from simulated life (this is a suggestion in The Planiverse); furthermore I have been coming round to the view that what you suggest is the only way in which a simulation of reality could work (i.e. one which would be so convincing that we would not know ). One of the reasons for this is the 'computable universe' theory of Seth Lloyd. He says that, to arrive at the here-now, "...the universe has performed the maximum possible number of operations allowed by the laws of physics". This means two things: firstly, even if the universe is at it appears to be, we still could conceivably be in a huge program (how would we tell?), and secondly, such programs do not come cheap in terms of program development and run time. To get another simulation to where we are now means running a 15 Billion Year Program.
- Your second point makes interesting reading, and coincidentally one which I was going to address later tody. As you have probably noticed, I have been writing quite a bit on The Fabric of Reality. In one chapter, Deutsch examines what I will call "The Chessboard Theory", i.e if the pieces in a computer chess game achieved consciousness, could they work out that they were in a chess game? His answer is yes, but I am not so sure. Whether they could rebel against their creators and change their programming is, of course what The Matrix is all about. What is certain is that they could not harm their creators, unless they somehow had access to control of the resources on which the parent civilisation depended - this theme has been explored several times in Star Trek next Generation.--TonyFleet 08:36, 27 May 2007 (CEST)
