From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Wed Jun 19 2002 - 19:54:52 MDT
Lee Corbin wrote:
>
> Mike wrote
>
> > Each instance of simulation, on a silicon or biological computer, is a
> > universe. To deny this is to deny that our own universe is a simulation.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "each instance" of simulation.
> Do you mean "each instant"? If so, then that's wrong because
> IMO a simulation requires information flow---cause and effect
> ---between each state of the simulation and the succeeding
> state.
An instance is each time a simulation is run. I run Tomb Raider tonite,
you run it tomorrow. Two different, nearly identical universes.
>
> What is usually meant is an emulation. (I know that some other
> threads have been talking about this.) But if we wanted to get
> really precise about language, I would suggest that a painting
> of the Earth is a simulation of it, because it matches the
> appearance of the Earth. In other words, a portrayal of the
> Earth can count as a simulation.
>
An image is not a portrayal, it is a solid record, like a book. It is a
database. It is not an executable. I may have a kernel in my imagination
USE that image to imagine such a planet.
> A puppet is a portrayal of a character. The puppet only appears
> to have experiences and emotions. They're only simulated.
The physical puppet in the city park is a portrayal. The mental puppet
in my memory, after watching the performance, having further adventures
is in a universe of its own, but may or may not be a sentient being. The
problem with using the term 'puppet' as an example is that puppets are
under external control with no volition, etc. Thus a puppet without a
puppet master is nothing but a database. The master is the executable.
>
> But by common convention here, I think, we'll mean emulation when
> we say simulation. So what is an emulation? In another thread
> they said (with more accuracy) than I'm going to do here, that
> it is necessary for the emulation to re-create every property
> of whatever it is that's being emulated.
A simulation is a universe, but I believe we were treating an
'emulation' as some sort of character or entity within it.
>
> Well, maybe that was good enough for their discussion. But taking
> uploading as an example, I'd say that emulating a human being in
> software---running software of course---requires only that all the
> properties of the person's consciousness need be emulated. Probably
> no one has a problem with that.
>
> Therefore I *could* be an emulation of Lee Corbin, and our world
> *could* be an emulation of 21st century Earth, but a program stored
> away on tape which cannot be running cannot be a simulation of
> anything.
Correct.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:55 MST