New universe simulation supports Big Bang and theories of universal evolution

page: 3
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 14 2014 @ 12:30 AM
link   
The first thing to come to my mind when I saw this was Nick Bostrom’s Simulation Hypothesis. It fits so perfectly. I think it lends a little credibility to some of Bostrom’s assertions regarding possible directions an advancing technology may choose to take.

As I understand it, the simulation adheres to currently accepted mathematical/physical formulations and principles. So, when the simulation is launched, it initializes/establishes the conditions we believe existed around 12 million years after the bang. At this stage, inflation had taken place, the 4 known forces and particles as we understand them began to manifest, expansion was well underway and the universe was basically a hot, thermal plasma of particles. The simulation would then proceed through the next 400,000 years, or so, of expansion as the universe is cooling, but is still opaque (not visible through optical telescopes). By the end of this period things will have cooled off enough for charged particles to start pairing up and for photons to propagate freely. And then, Voila! Let there be light. Star and galaxy formation, and everything else we know of, took off from there. Each step of the way, I understand all the physical structures and spacetime geometry is dynamically created by rigorously applying established mathematical/physical models, and that it reflects a resonable approximation of cosmic evolution as we believe it occurred. That being the case then, although a unique universe is created with each iteration of the simulation, the primary/overall structure of that universe is consistently the same each time, as it’s driven by a well-defined set of physical/natural laws.

I don’t understand why so many people want to minimize what was achieved, without having the slightest idea what went behind it. It cannot be compared with typical gaming software, as has been suggested. Granted, the simulation doesn’t account for every single detail of cosmic evolution, and is still not a complete picture of EVERYTHING, but it is currently the most comprehesive simulation to date. What is represented seems to adhere to sound and accepted scientific thinking, and appears to be on the right track.

If the above is halfway correct, and the simulation results in a reasonable approximation of the real thing each time, that would then seem to imply that current thinking regarding cosmic evolution may be at least somewhat credible. As the program is updated and enhanced over time with increasingly finer detail, including other well-defined aspects of nature, such as biological processes, rules of natural selection, etc., things could get very interesting. Considering the likely computing power and storage capabilities available 20-30 years from now, and the level of detail and realism achievable by continually updated versions of the simulation program, I can’t help but wonder if maybe Nick Bostrom was onto something. We’ll see.

If anyone really cares to read a little more about what's behind the simulation, you can start here...
edit on 5/14/2014 by netbound because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 14 2014 @ 01:33 AM
link   
Not a physics person, but I was under the impression that we don't exactly know what dark matter is. If that is the case, then how can we model it in a simulation?



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 06:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: KrzYma

Whatever your point is, you're not making it. Try again. I want to know what you mean.


I'm just saying... any computer model is just a model, done on purpose to put out an result as expected ( programmed !), and if a theory (true or false) is expressed with mathematical equations and you put this into a computer model, there is no other way for something unexpected coming out.
All you get out is what you put in.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: pavil


I was under the impression that we don't exactly know what dark matter is. If that is the case, then how can we model it in a simulation?

That's actually a really easy one. You model its effects as they appear in reality, and which are indicated by such physical quantities as the rotational speed of galaxies about their central axes. Don't forget that we can see back in time almost to the beginning of the universe by just looking up into the sky. The movements of things we can see allow us to infer the actions of things we can't see.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: KrzYma

Oh, is that all? I don't think you've quite grasped what's going on here. Go to the Illustris link posted by netbound and you'll get a better idea what this stuff is about.

By the way, thanks, netbound. You deserve more for your post than the one star I've given you.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 06:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: KrzYma

Oh, is that all? I don't think you've quite grasped what's going on here. Go to the Illustris link posted by netbound and you'll get a better idea what this stuff is about.

By the way, thanks, netbound. You deserve more for your post than the one star I've given you.


HEH... looks like Blockbuster movie, but the sound is cool. It tells exactly what it is
"That's not real, just a computer generated fantasy..."
I agree to that !
edit on 15-5-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join