- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Higgo James <james.higgo.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:31:16 +0100

Of course, it *is* impossible to construct such a machine in 'our universe'

since 'time' is a quantum phenomenon (a set of relationships) and cannot be

subdivided indefinitely (from our perspective 10e-43 is smallest quantum of

time).

(And note that there are no 'observers' (sets of observer-moments in time

with an objective identity across them), only monad-like observer-moments.

So this observer-moment, which is all you are, survives 'forever'. I don't

suppose anyone will ever take this seriously this but I can't help saying

it whenever I get the chance.)

James

*> -----Original Message-----
*

*> From: Saibal Mitra [SMTP:smitra.domain.name.hidden]
*

*> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 8:56 PM
*

*> To: GSLevy.domain.name.hidden; everything-list.domain.name.hidden.com
*

*> Subject: Re: The Rapidly-Accelerating Computer
*

*>
*

*> George Levy wrote:
*

*>
*

*> > In a message dated 09/14/2000 9:05:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
*

*> > smitra.domain.name.hidden writes:
*

*> >
*

*> > > Stewart, on the other hand, considers the RAC, whose clock accelerates
*

*> > > exponentially fast, with pulses separated by intervals of 1/2, 1/4,
*

*> 1/8
*

*> ...
*

*> > > seconds. So the RAC can cram an infinite number of computational steps
*

*> into
*

*> > a
*

*> > > single second.
*

*> >
*

*> > It may be impossible to construct such a machine in our universe, but
*

*> can
*

*> we
*

*> > achieve the same results by slowing down the consciousness of the
*

*> observer
*

*> > observing a conventional computer? In other words, each observer's clock
*

*> > cycle (assuming a computer model for the observer) would double in
*

*> duration
*

*> > in relation to the computer clock. Could there be such an observer in
*

*> our
*

*> > universe? I suspect that there can't be because the construction of the
*

*> > observer's clock woud require smaller and smaller energy packets in the
*

*> > presence of constant background noise.
*

*> >
*

*> > George Levy
*

*> >
*

*> >
*

*> The observer also has to survive ``forever´´. This problem is investigated
*

*> in the context of eternal inflation models in the paper:
*

*>
*

*> http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/9909143
*

*>
*

*> ABSTRACT:
*

*>
*

*> ``We discuss the large-scale structure of the universe in inflationary
*

*> cosmology and the implications that it may have for the long-term future
*

*> of
*

*> civilizations. Although each civilization is doomed to perish, it may be
*

*> possible to transmit its accumulated knowledge to future civilizations. We
*

*> consider several scenarios of this sort. If the cosmological constant is
*

*> positive, it eventually dominates the universe and bubbles of inflationary
*

*> phase begin to nucleate at a constant rate. Thermalized regions inside
*

*> these
*

*> inflating bubbles will give rise to new galaxies and civilizations. It is
*

*> possible in principle to send a message to one of them. It might even be
*

*> possible to send a device whose purpose is to recreate an approximation of
*

*> the original civilization in the new region. However, the message or
*

*> device
*

*> will almost certainly be intercepted by black holes, which nucleate at a
*

*> much higher rate than inflating bubbles. Formation of new inflating
*

*> regions
*

*> can also be triggered by gravitational collapse, but again the probability
*

*> is low, and the number of attempts required for a positive outcome is
*

*> enormous. The probability can be higher if the energy scale of inflation
*

*> is
*

*> closer to the Planck scale, but a high energy scale produces a tight bound
*

*> on the amount of information that can be transmitted. One can try to avoid
*

*> quantum tunneling altogether, but this requires a violation of quantum
*

*> inequalities which constrain the magnitude of negative energy densities.
*

*> However, the limits of validity of quantum inequalities are not clear, and
*

*> future research may show that the required violation is in fact possible.
*

*> Therein lies the hope for the future of civilizations.´´
*

*>
*

*> You can imagine that a device could be made such that the observer is
*

*> slowing down by a factor of two compared to the previous generation. So,
*

*> maybe the quantum inequalities are a manifestation of the limitations of
*

*> the
*

*> universal Turing machine.
*

*>
*

*> Saibal
*

*>
*

*>
*

*>
*

Received on Fri Sep 15 2000 - 01:34:45 PDT

Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:31:16 +0100

Of course, it *is* impossible to construct such a machine in 'our universe'

since 'time' is a quantum phenomenon (a set of relationships) and cannot be

subdivided indefinitely (from our perspective 10e-43 is smallest quantum of

time).

(And note that there are no 'observers' (sets of observer-moments in time

with an objective identity across them), only monad-like observer-moments.

So this observer-moment, which is all you are, survives 'forever'. I don't

suppose anyone will ever take this seriously this but I can't help saying

it whenever I get the chance.)

James

Received on Fri Sep 15 2000 - 01:34:45 PDT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:07 PST
*