Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Do we live in a computer simulation? How to test the idea.
KurzweilAINetwork ^ | December 13, 2012

Posted on 12/13/2012 6:21:49 AM PST by ExxonPatrolUs

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: ExxonPatrolUs
We have a virus!

Pls update anti-virus program.

21 posted on 12/13/2012 7:22:06 AM PST by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

Was that picture from the first debate?


22 posted on 12/13/2012 7:30:00 AM PST by liberalh8ter (If Barack has a memory like a steel trap, why can't he remember what the Constitution says?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I totally agree. I’ve read her work twice and what’s scary is some of it starts to make a little (very little) sense.


23 posted on 12/13/2012 7:47:06 AM PST by Portcall24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

it’s pretty easy, as these things go, to demonstrate random disorder all over the place ~ this is the thesis that God not only throws dice with the universe, He throws them where even He can’t see them.


24 posted on 12/13/2012 7:53:45 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Just silly. We already know the answer is 42.


25 posted on 12/13/2012 8:37:23 AM PST by TexasRepublic (Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

We all knew this already.
The programmer’s name is “I AM”.


26 posted on 12/13/2012 9:02:53 AM PST by RavenLooneyToon (Tail gunner Joe was right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

m, IMHO, what we think of as disorder, or randomness is lack of knowledge of the order of things.

For example, start with a barrel full of lottery numbers (Step A). Turn it by a handle (Step B) (conventional wisdom says this is “randomizing” the numbers), stop (Step C), then a hand reaches in and pulls out a number (Step D).

If one had precise information at Step A, and precise data on Steps B - D, one would know precisely which number was coming out of the barrel.

Randomizing is really just changing the order of a set of things and keeping the result unknown. The order of the set is then unknown.

If we look at the first few elements of a “random” set, and we see a pattern, then we can guess other elements. But if we see no pattern in our sample, we say ew, it’s random.

IMHO, what we really mean is we see no pattern and, since we only have a sample, we can’t infer anything about the overall order of the set.

IMHO, of course, because I’m sure there are rocket scientists who will offer dissertations on randomness (when simply a “no way”, “sorta” or “yeah” would suffice, perhaps with a link to their dissertation, since we can google for dissertations to our heart’s content; I’m just trying to generalize in a few occamesque paragraphs).


27 posted on 12/13/2012 9:48:23 AM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson