Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

God Is the Machine
Wired ^ | December 2002 | Kevin Kelly

Posted on 11/21/2002 8:14:40 PM PST by FreetheSouth!

God Is the Machine

IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS 0. AND THEN THERE WAS 1. A MIND-BENDING MEDITATION ON THE TRANSCENDENT POWER OF DIGITAL COMPUTATION

At today's rates of compression, you could download the entire 3 billion digits of your DNA onto about four CDs. That 3-gigabyte genome sequence represents the prime coding information of a human body — your life as numbers. Biology, that pulsating mass of plant and animal flesh, is conceived by science today as an information process. As computers keep shrinking, we can imagine our complex bodies being numerically condensed to the size of two tiny cells. These micro-memory devices are called the egg and sperm. They are packed with information.

That life might be information, as biologists propose, is far more intuitive than the corresponding idea that hard matter is information as well. When we bang a knee against a table leg, it sure doesn't feel like we knocked into information. But that's the idea many physicists are formulating.

The spooky nature of material things is not new. Once science examined matter below the level of fleeting quarks and muons, it knew the world was incorporeal. What could be less substantial than a realm built out of waves of quantum probabilities? And what could be weirder? Digital physics is both. It suggests that those strange and insubstantial quantum wavicles, along with everything else in the universe, are themselves made of nothing but 1s and 0s. The physical world itself is digital.

The scientist John Archibald Wheeler (coiner of the term "black hole") was onto this in the '80s. He claimed that, fundamentally, atoms are made up of of bits of information. As he put it in a 1989 lecture, "Its are from bits." He elaborated: "Every it — every particle, every field of force, even the space-time continuum itself — derives its function, its meaning, its very existence entirely from binary choices, bits. What we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes/no questions."

To get a sense of the challenge of describing physics as a software program, picture three atoms: two hydrogen and one oxygen. Put on the magic glasses of digital physics and watch as the three atoms bind together to form a water molecule. As they merge, each seems to be calculating the optimal angle and distance at which to attach itself to the others. The oxygen atom uses yes/no decisions to evaluate all possible courses toward the hydrogen atom, then usually selects the optimal 104.45 degrees by moving toward the other hydrogen at that very angle. Every chemical bond is thus calculated.

If this sounds like a simulation of physics, then you understand perfectly, because in a world made up of bits, physics is exactly the same as a simulation of physics. There's no difference in kind, just in degree of exactness. In the movie The Matrix, simulations are so good you can't tell if you're in one. In a universe run on bits, everything is a simulation.

An ultimate simulation needs an ultimate computer, and the new science of digitalism says that the universe itself is the ultimate computer — actually the only computer. Further, it says, all the computation of the human world, especially our puny little PCs, merely piggybacks on cycles of the great computer. Weaving together the esoteric teachings of quantum physics with the latest theories in computer science, pioneering digital thinkers are outlining a way of understanding all of physics as a form of computation.

From this perspective, computation seems almost a theological process. It takes as its fodder the primeval choice between yes or no, the fundamental state of 1 or 0. After stripping away all externalities, all material embellishments, what remains is the purest state of existence: here/not here. Am/not am. In the Old Testament, when Moses asks the Creator, "Who are you?" the being says, in effect, "Am." One bit. One almighty bit. Yes. One. Exist. It is the simplest statement possible.

(Excerpt) Read more at wired.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: alanturing; computers; digitalcomputation; edfredkin; god; isaacasimov; stephenwolfram
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-138 next last
Universe has encountered an problem. Would you like to send GOD an error report?
1 posted on 11/21/2002 8:14:40 PM PST by FreetheSouth!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FreetheSouth!
IMHO, there is only analog pretending to be digital.
2 posted on 11/21/2002 8:17:28 PM PST by Abcdefg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreetheSouth!
I just had a great thought. Maybe instead of this maddening diet I'm on, I can just somehow squeeze my corpulent self into a much slimmer "Zip" archive?
3 posted on 11/21/2002 8:21:23 PM PST by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Abcdefg
IMHO, there is only analog pretending to be digital.

Bucky did some research on microscopic bubbles and found out that the circumference of a microscopic bubble is actually a series of straight lines.

Sorta sounds like digital pretending to be analog. ;>)

/john

4 posted on 11/21/2002 8:22:07 PM PST by JRandomFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
I can just somehow squeeze my corpulent self into a much slimmer "Zip" archive?

Sorry, it's like trying to compress a .jpg. You are stored at the optimum compression. Further compression results in a larger file size. ;>)

/john

5 posted on 11/21/2002 8:24:09 PM PST by JRandomFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bitwhacker; lepton
!gnip
6 posted on 11/21/2002 8:24:50 PM PST by JRandomFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FreetheSouth!
In the movie The Matrix . . .

Oh, now I get it.

7 posted on 11/21/2002 8:33:57 PM PST by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Nope, you’re stuck with weight lossy compression.
8 posted on 11/21/2002 8:35:08 PM PST by FreetheSouth!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FreetheSouth!
Would you like to send GOD an error report?

He already knows about the errors (original sin), pre-planned for it, and has coded the resolution (man chooses God over sin; God saves man).

Just remember, God is not linear. He has no beginning, and no end. He exists outside our time dimension. Only he can fix the program.

SFS

9 posted on 11/21/2002 8:44:19 PM PST by Steel and Fire and Stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreetheSouth!
If nature computed, why not the entire universe? The first to put down on paper the outrageous idea of a universe-wide computer was science fiction writer Isaac Asimov. In his 1956 short story "The Last Question," humans create a computer smart enough to bootstrap new computers smarter than itself. These analytical engines recursively grow super smarter and super bigger until they act as a single giant computer filling the universe. At each stage of development, humans ask the mighty machine if it knows how to reverse entropy. Each time it answers: "Insufficient data for a meaningful reply." The story ends when human minds merge into the ultimate computer mind, which takes over the entire mass and energy of the universe. Then the universal computer figures out how to reverse entropy and create a universe.

According to my recollection of the story, at the point where the universe/computer figures out how to reverse entropy, it proclaims the answer to the "final question" in this manner: "Let there be light!"

10 posted on 11/21/2002 8:46:43 PM PST by FairWitness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
You wouldn’t happen to be a Bob Heinlein fan, would you now?
11 posted on 11/21/2002 8:53:47 PM PST by FreetheSouth!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
Cool article.
12 posted on 11/21/2002 8:55:08 PM PST by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FreetheSouth!
I'm in no way a Heinlein "expert", like some Freepers I've observed, but I have read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Friday and, of course, Stranger in a Strange Land. I've read a lot more of Asimov than of Heinlein, including The Final Question that is cited in the article above.
13 posted on 11/21/2002 9:03:36 PM PST by FairWitness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
>>I can just somehow squeeze my corpulent self into a much slimmer "Zip" archive?

>Sorry, it's like trying to compress a .jpg. You are stored at the optimum
>compression. Further compression results in a larger file size. ;>)

I've tried to reduce myself on a number of occasions, but I keep encountering a loss of resolution.

14 posted on 11/21/2002 9:04:56 PM PST by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Erasmus
Me too, usually around Jan. 20th
15 posted on 11/21/2002 9:34:27 PM PST by FreetheSouth!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Erasmus
I've tried to reduce myself on a number of occasions, but I keep encountering a loss of resolution.

Perhaps, there is no problem with resolution: maybe the prescription for your glasses ran out?

(I am paraphrasing S. Wright).

16 posted on 11/21/2002 9:37:28 PM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
I’ve read about all of them, but Robert Heinlein holds a very special place in my heart and bookshelf.
17 posted on 11/21/2002 9:38:27 PM PST by FreetheSouth!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
That explains a LOT.
18 posted on 11/22/2002 2:26:40 AM PST by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
.jpgs can be compressed...it just starts taking more and more proccessing power, and varying algorithms. You could theorhetically compress down to a single bit and a set of decompression instructions...it's merely impractical. :)
19 posted on 11/22/2002 7:06:01 AM PST by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
Bucky did some research on microscopic bubbles and found out that the circumference of a microscopic bubble is actually a series of straight lines.

Rather like the old attempts to solve for Pi. Given that bubbles are made of atoms and molecules, any attempt to define it would have to appear as a series of lines connecting the probability centers of the atoms and molecules. That, however, doesn't prove the point in the article. The article assumes that 1) there are minimum increments to everything, and 2) that a point where you can get an agreement between digital models and analogish symbolism is the proper place to stop enlarging. The latter seems much like an argument Dr. Sowell makes in pointing out statistical analysis flaws.

20 posted on 11/22/2002 7:12:00 AM PST by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-138 next 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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