Re: Q: Simulation checking

From: ABlainey@aol.com
Date: Sat Jun 07 2003 - 05:28:28 MDT

  • Next message: Anders Sandberg: "Re: Happy News One & Two"

    In a message dated 07/06/03 07:28:08 GMT Daylight Time, sentience@pobox.com
    writes:

    > Aside from speaking into a voice recorder, does anyone else have any
    > suggestions for creating a permanent record of an event which would force
    > that event to be simulated in greater detail? In particular, such that
    > for the simulator to get a historically accurate probability distribution
    > on the gross characteristics of the permanent record created (its ones and
    > zeroes, which would be later examined), the simulator would find it useful
    > to simulate the original event in greater-than-usual detail.
    >

    This reminds me of the old question 'if a tree falls and there is no one to
    hear it, does it make a sound?' If the world is a simulation, would there be
    any reason for a sound to be simulated? or even the falling of the tree? If
    there were no one to see or hear it, would the simulation of the tree simple go
    from upright to laying down, with no falling simulation in between?

    Alex



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 07 2003 - 05:38:34 MDT