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

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Thorneblood

How can this be a metaphor? Are you kidding?? It´s ok if you´re on his defence but keep it logic ok?
The OP wrote he wants answers from someone who is into VR-programming.
-> Then, several "programmers" write their opinion in the thread.
OP is not satisfied with Krazyshots answer, wants some information from someone who REALY was into VR programming
-> Shows he has no idea of how "VR-programming" would be done.
I asked him to define VR-programming and said I bet his answers look like the description of current OOP

No you come and say I "don´t get it" because its all a metaphor.
BIGGEST FACEPALM EVER

My question was pretty simple and yet I was unable to think how silly the question really is. I am thinking of what our world would be and how it would have come about had their been a creator that made a pattern, a perfected pattern that was used to make the finished product. How that might change our understanding of all the ancient texts IF they indeed were provided as a source of information and not just written up by random humans with no real knowledge.

Enoch especially is interesting.

I am truly sorry if I messed up by trying to marry the science to the religious but both are extremely interesting to me.
Both sides of the issue the point from a programer and the religious views are equally interesting and part of the original (perhaps uninformed and thus dumb) question.

a reply to: Char-Lee

Oh my mistake! It was not you, it was mikegrouchy who was not satisfied with Krazysh0ts answer. Blame that one on me.

Pattern...
You know in OOP (object oriented programming) for example you have templates called classes.
Those classes are essentially templates, set´s of constants, variables, functions.
You could have a class called "Vehicle" that describes what that vehicle does. But a vehicle is vague. Better would be another class, derived from Vehicle called "Car" or "Bike" that describes those functions and variables (speed,color,status) and overtakes (inherets) everything described in the class vehicle.

So you could have a class called molecule derived from the class atom and so on.
I hope I described it so you understand what I mean.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You are the least likely to be swayed by want and imagination, so I would like to ask you.

IF you were able had the capabilities and all needed to create a VR with sentient life in it. What would you feel about that life? Would you program each "person" for everything from birth to death or would it be made with a random element and how much would you randomize as opposed to not.

If you were replicating ancestors cave man for instance would you leave poison oak and mosquitos and let them suffer?


Random chance would explain death at birth I suppose but if your VR was a penal colony maybe their sentence was for womb to birth :-)

a reply to: verschickter

Thank you!

Better would be another class, derived from Vehicle called "Car" or "Bike" that describes those functions and variables (speed,color,status) and overtakes (inherits) everything described in the class vehicle.

Now it being a running program would you have to describe the full life of say a car, every ding, chip and problem to crash or rot? or could you create in a VR program a random happening within parameters for the car?

a reply to: Thorneblood

Would you be able to accept a god who had created "children" in a VR program as being a real god?
What would that say about what you know of the religious side of things the books and stories passed down?

a reply to: char-lee

Good question. To answer that question, I'm going to introduce you to a computer programming concept called recursion (for a fun time, google recursion and you'll see that it asks if you really meant "recursion"). Recursion is where a function within the program calls itself.

Recursive functions are usually built with conditional statements so that you don't accidentally cause a function to call itself forever. One of the conditions is supposed to be a terminating statement, and once reached will send its output to the previous calls of itself until all the functions have been resolved.

I know that may not make a lot of sense (that's why I posted the wiki link on it), but I brought it up for a reason. Programmers don't try to program things individually, they create processes and functions that they can call at will that do it for them. In this case, there are processes in reality that are recursive in nature. Evolution takes the previous function (the parents) and calls itself with different variables (their children and the various mutations that they may have gained). But this isn't just constrained to evolution of life. ALL evolutionary processes are recursive in nature.

Therefore if one were to program a VR of the universe, it is likely that the person would program many "set it and forget it" processes that you just call and then let them do the rest. There is no direction from the operator or programmer, you just let things happen. That is MUCH easier to do than micro-managing EVERY single different life form in the universe.

a reply to: char-lee

If you set everything in stone it´s barely a true simulation more like a script.
What I failed to mention is that those classes/templates are used to "spawn" objects. Those objects are then used in the runtime environment. Would be our reality. For a car, you still need a driver that would be another object generated by a class called "Human". The biggest problem here would be, how to simulate a brain or even billion brains to get a reason for the human to use the car (drive to town, meet others).

Depends on the level you start with. You could simulate the universe at it´s birth or start with earth 1900.
Be aware, that in order to simulate a earth in 1900 you have to give to programm all those parameters. Impossible because for a somehow accurate simulation you need to simulate the lowest objects in order, going down to quantuum level und even deeper. You would have to transfer the state of the object earth, that consists of an unthinkable count of sub-objects like atoms etc. This is not possible because even measuring a value can alter the state of another value.
For example if you want to measure current and potential between two points in a circuit, it depends how you set up your devices, you get false readings in potential or current. You cannot measure both at the same time accuratly. However you can design your measuring method to take measuring A then shortly afterwards measuring B.
You would never get the true values for A+B at the same time.

It would be easier to start with "the big bang" and let the simulation sort the parameters out as the atoms get created etc.

But that would not garant anything resembling the universe how it is today. Because slightest variations will alter the outcome.

Additionally to all that, like Krazysh0t wrote, you would have an unthinkable amount of processes to do all the changes in parallel, this is where the recursion comes into play. You´d have a near infinitive amount of processes running because you just cannot do it with the line by line execution we have today on our machines (comming back to the base-n argument). Although you think your computer does run 30 so called threads at the same time, what really happens is that a cycle is sliced into 30 pieces and everything gets it´s time to execute, stop, save the outcome to memory and recall when right piece is executing.
The problem with this is you never know for sure when the 21th piece is going to be executed stopped or finished.

a reply to: verschickter

Doing my best to understand.

It would be easier to start with "the big bang" and let the simulation sort the parameters out as the atoms get created etc.

Interesting.

Those objects are then used in the runtime environment. Would be our reality. For a car, you still need a driver that would be another object generated by a class called "Human". The biggest problem here would be, how to simulate a brain or even billion brains to get a reason for the human to use the car (drive to town, meet others).

Copying our own selves and environment would be the easiest way would it not, but that would be inaccurate to cavemen I suppose. Still they would be different and yet "In our likeness".

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: char-lee

Good question. To answer that question, I'm going to introduce you to a computer programming concept called recursion (for a fun time, google recursion and you'll see that it asks if you really meant "recursion"). Recursion is where a function within the program calls itself.

Recursive functions are usually built with conditional statements so that you don't accidentally cause a function to call itself forever. One of the conditions is supposed to be a terminating statement, and once reached will send its output to the previous calls of itself until all the functions have been resolved.

I know that may not make a lot of sense (that's why I posted the wiki link on it), but I brought it up for a reason. Programmers don't try to program things individually, they create processes and functions that they can call at will that do it for them. In this case, there are processes in reality that are recursive in nature. Evolution takes the previous function (the parents) and calls itself with different variables (their children and the various mutations that they may have gained). But this isn't just constrained to evolution of life. ALL evolutionary processes are recursive in nature.

Therefore if one were to program a VR of the universe, it is likely that the person would program many "set it and forget it" processes that you just call and then let them do the rest. There is no direction from the operator or programmer, you just let things happen. That is MUCH easier to do than micro-managing EVERY single different life form in the universe.

I had never heard that word, I learned something new. I wonder if you have a large "set it and forget it" system and you let it go and don't do anything does it corrupt over time, do programs need upkeep is it enough to build in some form up fix? I know my game Everquest does a lot of updates but if they were not adding anything could it just run on as long as there was power? Hope this is not to dumb of a question.

a reply to: char-lee
No it would not be the easiest because of the measuring problem. You may create a class called cavemen but how do you simulate their brain? You do not know for sure how it looked.

The "easiest" way would be simulating a near infinitive amount of simulations in parallel, detect earth like outcomes and discard every simulation but not the ones that got similar then our universe. That alone would take unthinkable amounts of time computing power and what not.

I wonder if you have a large "set it and forget it" system and you let it go and don't do anything does it corrupt over time, do programs need upkeep is it enough to build in some form up fix?

There is a very high probability that it screws up over time. The question is How do you define screwing up?
Is a screwd up simulation everything that does not resemble our universe?
Basically everything would be recursive, set and forget.

a reply to: char-lee

Yes i would, there is actually a fascinating section of one of the books i mentioned earlier that goes into this.

Close your eyes and imagine you are floating in the pure emptiness of space, there is neither light nor dark, there is nothing but your mind. Now picture all of eternity being just like that. After awhile your mind would start to wander, your imagination would take over. Soon you might find yourself dreaming of light, of earth, of mountains and rivers, of animals and men.

But its all distant, like a drive in movie playing across the street. Sure you can see it, but you are missing so much.

You start to think more about the animals, you think about how it would be to run like a cheetah, or fly, or swim. Perhaps its just imagination and perhaps its just more, but eventually you begin to dream of the lives the people you created are living. You being to live those lives, experiencing what they experience, learning what they learn.

Slowly, very slowly, you learn everything simply because you were everything.

a reply to: verschickter

Be aware that the class "car" would include everything needed to make the car, every single part of it (atom,quantuum level and deeper). It was just an example to get you into the thinking. After all, WE define that a car is this and that. For the whole outcome, there wouldnt be a class/object called CAR, it would be a conglomeration of many many subclasses interfering with each other, from rusting to chemical bonds to the quantuum fluctuations or how its called down there.

Take a look at this article
news.discovery.com...
Consider it a very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very (you get the point) LOW resolution simulation of the fundamental things you can simulate and it´s just a tiny tiny tiny ...... tiny amount of space and it´s only in 3D. No time involved...Gravity? Not so much as it´s not fully understood yet.

a reply to: verschickter

There is a very high probability that it screws up over time. The question is How do you define screwing up?
Is a screwed up simulation everything that does not resemble our universe?

So true. I was wondering though if we are in a degrading system without proper maintenance.

Off into my imaginings... A world with unlimited power having harnessed some continuous renewing power source, creates a program of simulated life (ancestor or beloved new children for example) or make copies of themselves and place them in a simulation of their own world..maybe they can place the system somewhere safe but not move many real people and a catastrophe arrives...the simulation of their world runs on and they all die...

The program parameters would maybe be created to allow them to grow and explore with the option to add to their environment in the future, but if they are all dead and gone then the outer reaches the creations are heading for will be shown to be incomplete space to simply give an impression of say distant space.

So then from what you say it may degrade over time.

Thanks for putting up with that :-)

a reply to: char-lee

Power is not so much the problem, computing power and time consumption is what get´s you in the end.
Now, if you happen to create a TRUE AI, everything becomes much more easier suddenly.
The whole topic is truely mind blowing. Read into fuzzy logics it covers and touches so much we discussed here.

a reply to: verschickter
How very very very very very etc. :-) EXCITING!!!

The model only uses equations from theories constructed from decades (even centuries) of astronomical observations and allowed to evolve with time. The result is nothing short of breathtaking and it can be hard to distinguish the model from real observations.

Today, however, astronomers have announced the results of three months of computer number-crunching, combining 8,000 CPUs all running in parallel, modeling our evolving universe. If the same simulation was carried out on your office desktop computer, the simulation would take 2,000 years to recreate.

What if all of the world's known and I suspect secret, supercomputers were involved!

a reply to: char-lee

Larger programs can have unresolved procedures. There have been servers that haven't been shutdown for decades and when they went to look at the procedure list saw unresolved procedures dating back to when the server was first put online. So I'd say that yes, a "set it and forget it" system could end up with corrupted software.

Keep in mind, according to the rules of this universe, nothing last forever. Everything eventually breaks down and falls apart (even matter, though the lifespan of matter happens to be longer than the predicted age of the universe), so it isn't hard to assume that a computer program will do the same. Hard drives fail. Circuit boards fail. Data becomes corrupted. Etc.

Keep in mind, according to the rules of this universe, nothing last forever. Everything eventually breaks down and falls apart (even matter, though the lifespan of matter happens to be longer than the predicted age of the universe), so it isn't hard to assume that a computer program will do the same. Hard drives fail. Circuit boards fail. Data becomes corrupted. Etc.

And then there is this.

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: VVV88
The Hebrew word that was translated to "days" is Yom. Yom relates to the concept of time. Yom is not just for a day, but for time in general. How yom is translated depends on the context of its use. For example, Yom can mean epochs or eras. As a Christian, I do not believe the Earth was created in 6 literal days.

It does say it was day and night and a second day etc.

As in multiple (6) distinct epochs with periods of time between each (night).

My friends,

If anything this Universe uses "procedural generation", and everything stems from a single algorithm. That single algorithm is what scientists are searching for, it is the "Theory of Everything".

If one were to program this Universe you wouldn't need to define a class for every object we experience in this reality. You would simply need to define a single algorithm that, when continuously executed, exponentially expands into everything that we experience today. That algorithm would allow for every possibility you can imagine to exist. The possibilities that end up existing are the "effects" of the initial "cause", or the "procedural seed".

Someone or something intelligent enough could indeed create this algorithm, and modify it, so that certain possibilities become the most probable. Knowledge of the algorithm would allow one to calculate the exact state of the Universe at any given point during its execution, and even know the final outcome of all things, if one were to exist.

This algorithm may even be more simple than you could image. Knowing that all things are based on the binary fact that something can either exist or not exist, you end up creating concepts such as duality. You end up with on and off, none or one, which gives rise to concepts like more than one, and less than none, which is negative and positive. Then all infinite points in between are possible. Which give rise to higher and lower, greater than and lesser than, add and subtract, divide and multiply, and all mathematical concepts in between.

In this reality, everything can be reduced down to the same two things, which is really two sides of the One thing.

a reply to: More1ThanAny1

If one were to program this Universe you wouldn't need to define a class for every object we experience in this reality. You would simply need to define a single algorithm that, when continuously executed, exponentially expands into everything that we experience today.

So everything? Not like a tree would become all trees each according to it's kind reproducing and yet ability to change making everything from Tree ferns to Oak?