1. Joined
    23 Jul '05
    Moves
    8869
    27 Jul '05 21:21
    From the thread list 'If God Used a Computer......' dale21 suggests that God used a computer to design a program to create the earth and the stars.

    I would like to know your opinions on the possibility that we ourselves are part of a computer program on an extremely powerful computer.

    Could computers be that powerful?
  2. Joined
    16 Jul '04
    Moves
    1227
    29 Jul '05 05:17
    No. In order to completely describe the universe the computer programme would have to hold more information than the universe.
  3. Cosmos
    Joined
    21 Jan '04
    Moves
    11184
    29 Jul '05 07:03
    Yes, don't you know that Earth is a computer created by mice?
  4. Standard memberNyxie
    The eyes of truth
    elsewhere
    Joined
    26 Apr '04
    Moves
    21784
    29 Jul '05 07:04
    We apoligize for the inconvience.
  5. Joined
    07 Feb '03
    Moves
    1058
    29 Jul '05 08:44
    Originally posted by Bad wolf
    From the thread list 'If God Used a Computer......' dale21 suggests that God used a computer to design a program to create the earth and the stars.

    I would like to know your opinions on the possibility that we ourselves are part of a computer program on an extremely powerful computer.

    Could computers be that powerful?
    We are hard drives programmed by the software of culture 🙂
  6. Joined
    09 Mar '05
    Moves
    333
    29 Jul '05 12:10
    "No. In order to completely describe the universe the computer programme would have to hold more information than the universe."

    Why is that a problem?
  7. Standard memberThequ1ck
    Fast above
    Slow Below
    Joined
    29 Sep '03
    Moves
    25914
    29 Jul '05 14:07
    Originally posted by PotatoError
    "No. In order to completely describe the universe the computer programme would have to hold more information than the universe."

    Why is that a problem?
    No it wouldn't.
    It would only require the amount of information neccesary
    to complete the memory of every animal that has ever lived.

    In terms of HD space we could do that now.

  8. Joined
    19 Nov '03
    Moves
    31382
    29 Jul '05 14:13
    Originally posted by Thequ1ck
    No it wouldn't.
    It would only require the amount of information neccesary
    to complete the memory of every animal that has ever lived.

    In terms of HD space we could do that now.

    What about the movement of protons, the interaction of quarks, the spin of electrons, the radiation emitted in the blast of a white dwarf, the time between flashes of all the pulsar stars in existence now and throughout all time before? The information on the entire universe is a lot more than just the memory of animals. And we certainly don't have the hard disk space to record all of it.
  9. Standard memberThequ1ck
    Fast above
    Slow Below
    Joined
    29 Sep '03
    Moves
    25914
    29 Jul '05 14:28
    Originally posted by Starrman
    What about the movement of protons, the interaction of quarks, the spin of electrons, the radiation emitted in the blast of a white dwarf, the time between flashes of all the pulsar stars in existence now and throughout all time before? The information on the entire universe is a lot more than just the memory of animals. And we certainly don't have the hard disk space to record all of it.
    All of this information exists as probabilities until it is
    measured. The results of that information only exist
    on paper, computers and in peoples minds.
    As the paper and computer only exist in our minds
    too then the only thing of consequence and hence the
    only information required to create 'reality' is in our
    minds. It's only a few terabytes per person really.


  10. Joined
    19 Nov '03
    Moves
    31382
    29 Jul '05 14:38
    Originally posted by Thequ1ck
    All of this information exists as probabilities until it is
    measured. The results of that information only exist
    on paper, computers and in peoples minds.
    As the paper and computer only exist in our minds
    too then the only thing of consequence and hence the
    only information required to create 'reality' is in our
    minds. It's only a few terabytes per person really.


    Fair enough, but that isn't what was originally asked about. Your definition is not a complete assessment of the universe, but a selective one within the parameters of current human knowledge.

    Also, if we are to actually do anything with this data beyond just store it, we need to know how it interacts as well. That would be impossible without a complete understanding of the universe beyond man's current perception.
  11. Standard memberThequ1ck
    Fast above
    Slow Below
    Joined
    29 Sep '03
    Moves
    25914
    29 Jul '05 15:14
    Originally posted by Starrman
    Fair enough, but that isn't what was originally asked about. Your definition is not a complete assessment of the universe, but a selective one within the parameters of current human knowledge.

    Also, if we are to actually do anything with this data beyond just store it, we need to know how it interacts as well. That would be impossible without a complete understanding of the universe beyond man's current perception.
    The idea that the information needs to interact
    would imply that it is a computer program running
    calculations in realtime.
    I'm suggesting that it is not running along a
    timeline at all but a complete history of life
    stored as you would any data from start to finish.
    Time is just an illusion.

    The only data required would be sensory data
    from all humans and animals.
    It wouldn't take much space at all.
  12. Joined
    19 Nov '03
    Moves
    31382
    29 Jul '05 15:21
    Originally posted by Thequ1ck
    The idea that the information needs to interact
    would imply that it is a computer program running
    calculations in realtime.
    I'm suggesting that it is not running along a
    timeline at all but a complete history of life
    stored as you would any data from start to finish.
    Time is just an illusion.

    The only data required would be sensory data
    from all humans and animals.
    It wouldn't take much space at all.
    I agree if you limit the computer's function to a history of animal life there would be no problem with data storage.
  13. Joined
    15 Jul '05
    Moves
    351
    29 Jul '05 17:40
    Originally posted by Peter X
    No. In order to completely describe the universe the computer programme would have to hold more information than the universe.
    And of course, since the universe we are part of would, in this example, be that computer programme, the "true universe" (where the computer running us is) would be a much larger thing....
  14. Joined
    23 Jul '05
    Moves
    8869
    29 Jul '05 22:56
    These are some very interesting opinions. 😀

    Any thoughts on God using a computer.
Back to Top