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

a reply to: More1ThanAny1
That car class was just a example to explain char-lee what OOP is. In fact I wrote you would not have a car class, more like a conglomerate of the lower building bricks like atoms and such. A single algorithm using procedural generation would

a) take longer to create
b) be harder to debug
c) be unflexible
d) be suboptimal if you think about that it just renders what you look at. Where is the physics?

in my opinion. Not saying there is no use but definitly not that single algorithm

a reply to: Krazysh0t

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.

There are concepts about a virtual universe that simply wouldn't change regardless of the complexities involved. For example, virtual time will remain the same. The creators ability to manipulate their code remains the same. Just because people who program wouldn't be able to do such a things doesn't mean they don't have some insight into how a virtual world would work, and pretty much all video games are vitual world's designed by us. They aren't complex enough to produce taste and touch and smell, but they are virtual worlds and programmers understand them pretty well.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb
Yes but concept is not reality and if you think simulating the outcome from lets say 100 input variables while affecting only the top skin of that said world (where everything out of view is not affected or calculated) is comparable to the universe, well, then you are wrong. Taste and smell? Shows you maybe got the idea a little bit wrong.

If a bullet hit´s the wall in a game, you might simulate some deforming of the wall and splintering. What you not simulate is everything that happens in that wall, from force distribution to cracks statics and so on. The air that´s getting displaced and hot, the energy converted. Get it?

You know that he speaks at least one language from what I got from his posts? And I bet, no attack, outsmarts you on this topic very fast. So what he wrote is perfect plausible.

(Not because he would probably outsmart you, simply because he is right. We as programmers can only speculate.)
And to add something, I for myself, have participated and leaded teams on many projects at THE german company that´s leading in technology when it comes to bionic hardware, robotic -self learning- animals,automatization and robotic hardware. Yes machines that you throw in the air that learn to organize and optimize flight patterns on their own, working on advanced KIs and their virtual environments.
Google FESTO animals for a start
You will find me on a picture next to a table showing a self learning..CLASSIFIED

a reply to: verschickter

Its cool that you're working on all that stuff, and I am not claiming to be an expert or even to have a lot of knowledge on topic.

If a bullet hit´s the wall in a game, you might simulate some deforming of the wall and splintering. What you not simulate is everything that happens in that wall, from force distribution to cracks statics and so on. The air that´s getting displaced and hot, the energy converted. Get it?

You're right we do not simulate these things, but that does not mean that a meticulous and incredibly intelligent being couldn't create a virtual world in which those things are calculated based off of extremely accurate physics. Look into quantum realism and you'll see where I am coming from.

and I would agree with the fact that we can only speculate, but a more firm understanding of how they work in this world will definitely give you a much easier time drawing abstractions between the world we live and the tech world.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb
Either I got something wrong or you but I think no one said it´s not possible or not possible for a incredibly intelligent being. It´s just current hardware architecture that makes in impossible for now.

Using the concepts Krazysh0t and I mentioned the last two(?) pages comes pretty close. I´m sure there is more buried on the pages before. Some keywords would be extensive OOP coupled with recursive functions, base-(>2) systems, fuzzy logics, real artifical inteligence, insane parallelism executing. Another member brought up the idea of an universal algorithm.

Not that we have no imagination how it would be done, it´s just nearly nobody worked on a base-3 system (meaning quantuum computing at large but there are some other designs that can utilize base-3 calculations but not in a way quantuum allows us to) yet, let alone how the software would be written and interpreted.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

You can imagine the concepts all day, but if you can't define the data structures required to program them, then your input is just as useless as the next guy's.

a reply to: verschickter

I think what we got wrong was my conversation wasn't about the hardware, but rather about whether this world could be virtual reality. My point was merely that people who understand the tech world such as yourself have a much better understanding of how a virtual reality would behave or its capabilities which is why a programmer is not a bad person to ask about the subject. Now I would agree with Krazyshot that no one has true authority on the topic. But I think me and him were probably talking about something else.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Hard to say if we´re living in one. I could not find evidence yet
However, if you think about it. Does a deep sea fish that never touches the surface recognizes he´s in water?

a reply to: verschickter

I could not find evidence yet

gizmodo.com...

give it a read tell me what you think.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Sorry aborted reading it.
All based on assumptions and theories that are upheld to be valid and then finding flaws in it to prove a point. The rest is semantic. Cheap journalism. That they have 10 reasons flat tells you alot, alone.

I find the idea of a simulated universe entertaining, but this article is not worth the space it´s hosted on. There may be some valid points but.... I´m no expert in quantuum physics dark matter and what not, just the way they do is a red flag for me.
Just my opinion.

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

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.

When I listen to this video there is factual proof that we are in a simulation of sorts period.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

It´s a theory, not factual proof. I noticed you posting statements lately as they are proofen right. Maybe this time, here and now you can show the "factual proof". Most people here have seen the vids on ATS for years...

a reply to: verschickter

Your entitled to your opinion and that just a quick read for you I have better information, but learn more about quantum physics and you'll see the parallels between what they find there and the tech world. Being able to program on a level such as yours abstractions should come easy.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

You can imagine the concepts all day, but if you can't define the data structures required to program them, then your input is just as useless as the next guy's.

Not on subject but can you tell me, when i play Everquest, I have a healer character that is supposed to heal my avatar Wizard in the game. Sometimes out of the blue she runs away and will take off across the zone and leave me to die :-)

is this part of the program, a flaw or a problem in the particular area or zone in the game? Just very curious.

I have been reading Permutation City is a 1994 science fiction novel by Greg Egan way over my head but very enjoyable, if you or anyone has read it or read it I could ask a few questions.

a reply to: Char-Lee

I'd say that is a bug in the system. Have you tried contacting Sony and asking them what's up? Me I was always the healer in MMO's so I didn't have to worry about my healer running away on me

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

I'd say that is a bug in the system. Have you tried contacting Sony and asking them what's up? Me I was always the healer in MMO's so I didn't have to worry about my healer running away on me

Nah never bothered to ask and now they have changed hands the new ownership has been really bad about help. I need a new Linksys as mine is really old but I didn't know what would be right to buy and they asked for files I submitted the files 3 times and gave up.

Healers are usually nice people with caring hearts

a reply to: Char-Lee

That sucks. Though I really started being a healer because I could never find one. Plus I liked being something that not everyone else was. Even when I tried playing other MMO's, I'd TRY to play dps, but I'd just get annoyed of not being able to find groups and just became a healer because it's what I'm good at and I always get groups.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ah I see, my first was a healer I liked being able to help out strangers as i passed by :-

Finished that book, sure makes a person think even if they don't get the computer stuff.

VR could explain a lot of things, like maybe the placebo effect if we are not physically anyway what we REALLY think is what is real...maybe.

It's an interesting question, but it is not one that we may be capable of comprehending, much less providing answers with ANY sort of authority or confidence.

If we take the premise as true (a simulated universe with a programmer), then spacetime would be a construct within the "computer." what we would perceive as the length of time of "creation" would essentially be an arbitrary amount. So, six days within the program (our universe) may not have any connection to the passage of time for the programmer.

All that said, I would think it would be fully programmed before it was run. So, in that, the six days may be more accurately equated with the boot up time of the computer.

originally posted by: Serdgiam
It's an interesting question, but it is not one that we may be capable of comprehending, much less providing answers with ANY sort of authority or confidence.

If we take the premise as true (a simulated universe with a programmer), then spacetime would be a construct within the "computer." what we would perceive as the length of time of "creation" would essentially be an arbitrary amount. So, six days within the program (our universe) may not have any connection to the passage of time for the programmer.

All that said, I would think it would be fully programmed before it was run. So, in that, the six days may be more accurately equated with the boot up time of the computer.

It sounds very reasonable. I will think on it some more.

I believe about half of what I say and say about half of what I believe