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.

 

Programmers...Could it be done in 6 Days if Virtual Reality?

page: 7
13
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How exactly does our inability to program past our current knowledge mean it would be impossible for the world to be virtual.


No one on earth knows the capabilities of any programming done in a base above 2, because no one on earth has really done it yet. Yes, there is testing for quantum computing, but it is very limited and still needs to be more thoroughly explored.
edit on 15-6-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Char-Lee

It's possible that we do live in a virtual reality. I'm not denying it, but I don't think there is any truth contained in the ancient texts beyond people over exaggerating natural events and attributing luck and coincidence to divine influence.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: mikegrouchy

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Char-Lee

Weeeell... The universe would never be able to be properly simulated with binary computing, because things aren't always an either/or answer. in fact, they usually aren't. So no programmer would be able to adequately answer your question in the OP.



One just uses a smaller subset of binary then. If something isn't always yes/no give it ten bits, and it's only yes when all ten are switched on, or more than five, or what ever ratio / specific mode you require. In fact the vast majority of everything we experience is an accumulation of something else's experience. Even light. The color it has is the result of it's life story.


Mike Grouchy


Smaller subset of binary? What does that even mean? If binary doesn't work, then you have to up the number base. What you are describing is just a circuit board...
edit on 15-6-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: AshOnMyTomatoes
I haven't followed this whole thread, but I just wanted to add: if we're going to stretch the biblical "created the earth and the heavens" stuff into "programmed a virtual reality," why do we need to be precise on how long it took?


Well we don't... but I had been reading some of the texts that are in the OP and also reading about VR, it made me start thinking what would those texts be saying IF we actually are talking about a virtual universe.

How different would it make beliefs and what purpose would there be for taking Enoch and teaching him and yes how easy to show him all of creation from its start until the end which it says will come.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Char-Lee

Weeeell... The universe would never be able to be properly simulated with binary computing, because things aren't always an either/or answer. in fact, they usually aren't. So no programmer would be able to adequately answer your question in the OP.





originally posted by: mikegrouchy

One just uses a smaller subset of binary then. If something isn't always yes/no give it ten bits, and it's only yes when all ten are switched on, or more than five, or what ever ratio / specific mode you require. In fact the vast majority of everything we experience is an accumulation of something else's experience. Even light. The color it has is the result of it's life story.


Mike Grouchy




originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Smaller subset of binary? What does that even mean? If binary doesn't work, then you have to up the number base. What you are describing is just a circuit board...


I'm sorry. My mistake. I thought I was talking with someone who understood math and had actually done some VR programming. If the answer above seems completely meaningless to the reader, just know that there are no buzz-words in the explanation and that a nine year old could follow the given approach and program a solution before their class period is over.

In other words, if the reader "doesn't want to know" then they "don't want to know." Saying things like have to as if there is only one way to do math, and then up the number base as though there is no such thing as smaller fractions .... how to say it? What to say to such a train wreck of opinion and math-sounding words.

Your Fired. Not qualified to work with this crew. And a disruption to the focus and efforts of those who are actually trying to build something. Please leave the construction site immediately, before we have you escorted by security. If you want to criticize our construction efforts go find an opinion magazine somewhere and waste a reporters time. Not ours.


Mike Grouchy




posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How exactly does our inability to program past our current knowledge mean it would be impossible for the world to be virtual.


No one on earth knows the capabilities of any programming done in a base above 2, because no one on earth has really done it yet. Yes, there is testing for quantum computing, but it is very limited and still needs to be more thoroughly explored.
I was wildly interested in Ternary computing as the beginning of my IT career. Sadly, only a few russian programmers are still actively pursuing it. Could you imagine computers that operate on Base 3, rather than 2?



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




No one on earth knows the capabilities of any programming done in a base above 2, because no one on earth has really done it yet. Yes, there is testing for quantum computing, but it is very limited and still needs to be more thoroughly explored.


Ok lets say the world is virtual. You are saying that because the avatars in the virtual world can't program in a base above 2, then it follows that the world cannot be virtual? I don't see how that is your conclusion. Also one could posit that DNA works in a base above two, but that argument is pointless. Our intellectual limits have nothing to do with the nature of the reality that we live in.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:50 PM
link   


Ok there is a self repeating error correcting computer code written into our reality which is identical to Claude Shannons(MIT computer scientist) computer code made in the 40s, so yes we know we are in a simulation of sorts.




posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: mikegrouchy
I'm sorry. My mistake. I thought I was talking with someone who understood math and had actually done some VR programming. If the answer above seems completely meaningless to the reader, just know that there are no buzz-words in the explanation and that a nine year old could follow the given approach and program a solution before their class period is over.


Ad hominems aside. I DO understand math, and what you just said ISN'T going to work.


In other words, if the reader "doesn't want to know" then they "don't want to know." Saying things like have to as if there is only one way to do math, and then up the number base as though there is no such thing as smaller fractions .... how to say it? What to say to such a train wreck of opinion and math-sounding words.


Read this very slowly. You. described. a. circuit. board. It is all still base 2 computing, you are just giving adding additional yes/no checks onto whatever yes/no check you are trying to simulate yes/no/maybe. Except there is literally ZERO way to make binary into trinary. It isn't feasible. At the end of the day, the system is STILL ran on binary code, which CAN'T adequately simulate multiple choices. Hence why I said a computer program simulating the universe could NEVER be programmed using binary code.


Your Fired. Not qualified to work with this crew. And a disruption to the focus and efforts of those who are actually trying to build something. Please leave the construction site immediately, before we have you escorted by security. If you want to criticize our construction efforts go find an opinion magazine somewhere and waste a reporters time. Not ours.


Mike Grouchy



Says the guy who contributed a zero substance response to my post (oh and doesn't know the difference between your and you're).

I happen to actually HAVE programming experience buddy. I studied math extensively. I've studied the computer science models that apply to computers. I know what a Turning Machine is. What experience do YOU have in the computing industry to tell me that I'm wrong? I'd wager none considering your response about a "subset of binary". You aren't going to BS your way past me on this topic grouchy.
edit on 15-6-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Says the guy who contributed a zero substance response to my post (oh and doesn't know the difference between your and you're).

I happen to actually HAVE programming experience buddy. I studied math extensively. I've studied the computer science models that apply to computers. I know what a Turning Machine is. What experience do YOU have an the industry to tell me that I'm wrong? I'd wager none considering your response about a "subset of binary".



There are easier ways to admit that one doesn't understand.

For instance, I don't understand what any of the above has to do with the topic.

See? Wasn't that easy.


Mike Grouchy



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Krazy is right.

Ternary computing has to be designed from the hardware level up. All current computing technology and storage methods are expressed in Binary from hardware. Even the hardware of RAM is dependent on Binary allocation. You can't just "program" in Ternary if the hardware doesn't support it. At best, you might be able to emulate it, but the underlying hardware is still binary.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Yea, it would be pretty neat. More choices and options, means more power. Though conditional statements would have to be redone.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: mikegrouchy

Of course you don't, because you are just BSing me and pretending like you understand programming, when you don't.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

No, the Op started the thread asking if programmers could shed some light on if a universe could be programmed in 6 days. I responded by saying that even programmers don't have authority to speak on that topic, because no programmer on earth is versed with the necessary level of computing that would be required to program a virtual universe.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Yea, it would be pretty neat. More choices and options, means more power. Though conditional statements would have to be redone.
I'm no programmer, I'm a hardware/network gal, but the idea of Ternary computers is something I've always been fond of. I imagine fuzzy logic would be easier if expressed in ternary, and Boolean would be more efficient as well.

It could easily be done. Hell, the Russians did it in the 50's with their Setun system.

I think Ternary will make a comeback to a viable system eventually. Either with optical computers or quantum computers.
edit on 15-6-2015 by ScientificRailgun because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Yep. Plus, one of the beauties is that with higher bases, you could always simulate a lower base system by restricting the number of outputs it can do. So a computer made in base 3 could easily simulate a base 2 computer. You just can't go in reverse (which is what I've been trying to explain to grouchy, but he appears to be too busy wanting to hear himself talk than actually listen to what someone knowledgeable on the subject has to say about it).



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Yep. Plus, one of the beauties is that with higher bases, you could always simulate a lower base system by restricting the number of outputs it can do. So a computer made in base 3 could easily simulate a base 2 computer. You just can't go in reverse (which is what I've been trying to explain to grouchy, but he appears to be too busy wanting to hear himself talk than actually listen to what someone knowledgeable on the subject has to say about it).
There was actually a case of someone who successfully emulated Ternary computing on a binary machine, but it was still only a proof of concept idea, and the underlying hardware was still binary, so the author confessed it wasn't true Ternary computing. I think it was called "Ternac", or something similar. Though he did prove that Ternary emulation could be done, and that it would perform just as well as Binary. That is, on a Binary machine. If a Ternary system was truly built from the hardware level upward using today's technology, imagine the possibilities!

Trouble with that of course is all the programmers would need to learn new languages, and indeed perhaps even change the way they logically think.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:22 PM
link   
The math we use to describe the fundamental nature of our universe at the super semetric level turns out to be binary code. Meaning the universe is/was programmed and is binary in nature.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Interesting. I was unfamiliar with that account. Do you have a link to anything I can read about it? Though like you said it could only simulate up to binary computing, clearly it could never exceed binary computing, because at heart it is still technically binary computing.

Learning new programming languages and techniques isn't so bad. Though I could see it taking awhile before everyone was proficient in that computing, since everyone would start out at the same understanding level, with nothing prior to build on it except binary computing. So I'd think that the first base 3 computers we build will be programmed in a mish-mash of binary and ternary computing since binary is something they are familiar with. Though they'd probably wouldn't be able to use object oriented programming, but maybe functional or conditional programming languages.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Interesting. I was unfamiliar with that account. Do you have a link to anything I can read about it? Though like you said it could only simulate up to binary computing, clearly it could never exceed binary computing, because at heart it is still technically binary computing.

Learning new programming languages and techniques isn't so bad. Though I could see it taking awhile before everyone was proficient in that computing, since everyone would start out at the same understanding level, with nothing prior to build on it except binary computing. So I'd think that the first base 3 computers we build will be programmed in a mish-mash of binary and ternary computing since binary is something they are familiar with. Though they'd probably wouldn't be able to use object oriented programming, but maybe functional or conditional programming languages.


Here's a Wiki Stub on Ternac
Admittedly, not a lot of information on it, but I think there's some youtube videos floating around about the project as well.




top topics



 
13
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join