It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: Arrestme
That doesn't change the fact that as soon as Pi needs to be truly expressed, it would load and then crash the "server".
originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: ScientificRailgun
That's our interpretation. Computers get used to keep finding more and more digits of these numbers. Aren't we talking about a potential unending sequence, not necessarily storing that sequence.
I return to the diagram of a circle with a line as the diameter. Clearly exists even though the ratio is not simply the ratio of two integers. Is the infinite universe required to draw that figure on a small piece of paper.
No the infinite universe is not required to draw that on a piece of paper. But to express it mathematically would take an infinite amount of space. And when you get down to it, if we're all simulated we're all just math and algorithms, and so is the universe. So in order for Pi to exist, it need first to be expressed mathematically.
originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: ScientificRailgun
That's our interpretation. Computers get used to keep finding more and more digits of these numbers. Aren't we talking about a potential unending sequence, not necessarily storing that sequence.
I return to the diagram of a circle with a line as the diameter. Clearly exists even though the ratio is not simply the ratio of two integers. Is the infinite universe required to draw that figure on a small piece of paper.
originally posted by: wildespace
Can self-awareness exist inside a computer simulation or a hologram? I doubt that.
As it turns out, mathematicians do not yet know whether the digits of pi contains every single finite sequence of numbers. That being said, many mathematicians suspect that this is the case, which would imply not only that the digits of pi contain any number that you can think of, but also that they contains a binary representation of britney spears’ DNA, as well as a jpeg encoded image of you making out with a polar bear.
I find it egotistical to think someone cares enough about us to simulate us, and maintain the equipment that simulates us.
originally posted by: roadgravel
What I find ' hilariously stupid' is the ego and shot sightedness of the human race.
I say it's not evidence of simulated universe, I say nothing about creation.
originally posted by: np6888
a reply to: ScientificRailgun
So instead of wondering how such a number could possibly exist, you turn it around and say it's not evidence of creation.
originally posted by: snarfbot
i see this idea being championed around here ever so often. its really stupid. say you were going to build a model of just one atom. say a plastic model that didnt actually work, or simulate anything. all it did was structurally resemble an atom at a macroscopic scale. it would take billions of billions of atoms, arranged into molecules and so forth. the point is that the model would be much larger than the object it was modeled after.
we have computers in this reality. a single transistor of which is made of billions of atoms. these atoms can be imaged with atomic force microscopes. we know theyre actually there. to simulate the state of a single one of those atoms would require a processor, ram, wires between them so they can talk to each other etc. this is how things work. you cant make them smaller than an atom. even if it took 2 atoms to store the state of one atom then a computer that simulated the universe would be 2x as large as the universe.
its like saying we wanted to build a matrix prison to force bricks to live in, and we built the prison out of more bricks.
its hilariously stupid.