Chatterbox Wednesday

If I was still working, I'd hire a monkey suit and go in as the Librarian of the Unseen University, which would be quite appropriate...

I read that and responded with a treatise which ended with



I think therefore I am not



and the blue bear ate the fucker!

On rendering reality It is now well understood in the emerging science of Uncertainty Quantification that low complexity computation must be performed with hierarchiesof multi-fidelity models. It is also now well understood, in the domain of game development, that low computational complexity requires rendering/displaying content only when observed by a player. Recent games, such as No-Man’s Sky and Boundless have shown that vast open universes (potentially including “over 18 quintillion planets with their own sets of flora and fauna” are made feasible by creating content, only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a player, through randomized generation techniques (such as procedural generation). Therefore, to minimize computational complexity in the simulation theory, the system performing the simulation would render reality only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a conscious observer (a player), and the resolution/granularity of the rendering would be adjusted to the level of perception of the observer. More
precisely, using such techniques, the complexity of simulation would not be constrained by the apparent size of the universe or an underlying pre-determined mesh/grid size [4] but by the number of players and the resolution of the information made available for observation.

users.cms.caltech.edu/~owhadi/index_htm_files/IJQF2017.pdf

I didn't read the G article, or any of babyf's posts, but I have obviously been researching Simulation Theory for a while.

The proof that we're living in a simulation will only come when we've created a plausible simulation in this reality surely? If we* can do it, then that must be the biggest indicator that it's already been done

*not 'we' as in us chatterboxers, I mean those sciencey types

Anyone got any thoughts on the Fermi Paradox? I guess Simulation Theory could be one possible explanation

Wordle 417 4/6

⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬛🟩🟩⬛
🟩⬛🟩🟩⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

Ouch!

The Babyfark puny significance theory.

Mankind and the universe are actually part of something far bigger than we could ever comprehend. For example take a lump of dog poo and chuck it against a wall and there will be movement on sub-atomic levels as stuff goes spinning off and bits fall way etc...Now imagine our universe is one of these tiny atoms which is subject to the laws of physics directing a tiny blob of shit either upwards, downwards etc..and our concept of time means millions of years pass for us but for the thrower of the poo, mere seconds.

Well we've only been searching for a very brief period.
If any sort of broadcast reached us in 1900 or before we just wouldn't have known.
Even since then for a lot of the time radio frequencies haven't been monitored.
Our on attempts at broadcasting in to space only started in the 1970s. There may have been some leakage before then but nothing deliberate.

So in the 350m years or so that there has been moving life on land there have been no signals from earth for 99.99998% of the time.
It's quite possible someone was sending us signals for 350m years and gave up in 1920* and we would never know.

It's also very possible there are more efficient methods of long distance signalling we don't know about and aren't monitoring. Or the messages are too big or too small for us to spot. A message that unveiled itself over centuries wouldn't be detected easily.
Or that long distance signalling is very difficult. Messages may be damaged or broken up when travelling between star systems in a way we are unaware of.

Or the distances may just be too large. Without FTL travel it is effectively impossible to visit anything further away then the closest stars. Even that might be very difficult. The energy shielding and time required might make sending a  crewed ship to Proxima Centauri just not practical.

Or the universe might be dangerous as in The Three Body Problem. Any civilisation raising it's head above the parapet will get shot. Or life is very rare. Or Civilisations almost inevitably destroy themselves.

If the universe/ galaxy  is empty of life except on earth that would be the strangest thing. It just seems very unlikely given the size of the galaxy and the number of galaxies that earth is unique in developing life. It also seems that if life exists somewhere reasonably habitable it would tend towards complexity and would develop communications we might be able to detect.

But yeah it's weird.

* The distance equivalent at light speed or whatever speed the message was sent at

[/quote]If this was a Melvazord simulation, wouldn't be all be painted mushrooms or something?
[/quote]


Trust* 'the science'.

*except when 'the science' doesn't fit policy, then chuck it in the bin.

I'm thinking Kane's nose.