[HN Gopher] The frame rate of the universe (2009)
___________________________________________________________________
The frame rate of the universe (2009)
Author : codesections
Score : 45 points
Date : 2021-02-18 10:37 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.librador.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.librador.com)
| jdmoreira wrote:
| My physics almost stopped at Newton but I liked the article
| because it resonates with some thoughts I had about Zeno's arrow
| paradox -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#Arrow_parad...
|
| What if space is discrete and time is also discrete? Then there
| is no paradox. It disappears. I find the possibility that the
| Universe computes in `ticks` and space is discrete to be very
| soothing and I'm sure it has nothing to do with me liking
| computers :)
| gzalo wrote:
| Some years ago, when learning about quantum mechanics, and how
| you could find a particle inside a forbidden region, I
| connected that with physics engines in games (and how computing
| them not fast enough can cause things to intersect in odd
| ways), and I had this idea: What if time flows in discrete
| steps, but the `ticks` aren't uniformly separated? For example,
| they could be distributed probabilistically as a Poisson
| distribution. In that case, a particle hitting a potential
| barrier could pass it briefly, until the tick happens and it
| moves out of it. There might be a way to compute an optimal
| probability distribution for that case, but I'm not sure if it
| could be consistent with Schrodinger equation. But I never had
| time nor knowledge to search whether someone had already
| thought of it, or if it could be even remotely plausible.
| matthewfcarlson wrote:
| I took a creative writing class at University (mostly on a
| whim). One of the stories I proof-read was a novel about this
| idea. That the universe didn't tick at a uniform rate and
| there were people who could "tick" faster or slow. Of course,
| you run into all sorts of people with breathing and moving
| through very hard air. The core tenet of the book was that
| the clock domains of the universe were drifting apart at an
| accelerated rate and the protagonists were trying to stop it.
| It was an interesting concept and a fun short story.
| PUSH_AX wrote:
| > Some years ago, when learning about quantum mechanics, and
| how you could find a particle inside a forbidden region
|
| Where can I learn more about this? It sounds interesting.
| gzalo wrote:
| The classical simplest "problem" is
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectangular_potential_barrier
|
| And the actual quantum phenomenon is
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling
| jonsen wrote:
| > ...whether someone had already thought of it
|
| Stephen Wolfram certainly did in _A New Kind of Science_ :
|
| https://www.wolframscience.com/nks/chap-9--fundamental-
| physi...
|
| And Louis Nielsen:
|
| https://www.rostra.dk/louis/
|
| And probably many others.
| _def wrote:
| I now have even more respect towards speedrunners and glitch
| hunters than I already had. They are like scientists of
| fictional universes!
| Causality1 wrote:
| To me a neat consequence of quantized motion and dimensional
| extent is that there's a hard limit on angular orientation and
| hence accuracy. That is to say, it's possible to be far enough
| away and in a proper position such that a particle in another
| certain position could not be propelled directly at you, only at
| positions around you since you could be standing in the middle of
| the maximum angular resolution of the propelling force.
| UnFleshedOne wrote:
| Doesn't that require global absolute fixed grid?
| rbanffy wrote:
| Kind of on the same vibe, you can think of the speed of light as
| the bandwidth of spacetime.
| worker767424 wrote:
| > If we want to fit the universe into a box, its sides would have
| to be twice that size. That is 5.4 x 10^61 Planck lengths.
|
| 206 bits is enough to address the precise position of anything in
| the universe.
| dry_soup wrote:
| Wouldn't it be that times three, one for each dimension?
| tutfbhuf wrote:
| He did the monster math and calculated that the frame rate of the
| universe is 18 septillion FPS.
|
| Let's assume we are already in a game running with this FPS.
| Could we somehow prove that it's actually a simulation or
| disprove in the case it's not?
| TrainedMonkey wrote:
| This is called simulation theory
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
|
| AFAIK whether we are in a simulation is undecidable as long as
| the simulation rules are self consistent...
|
| Philosophy had been dealing with similar problems for a long
| time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism . The best they
| come up with is: "I think therefore I am."
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| I think a more interesting question is: would it matter if it
| were?
| kempbellt wrote:
| Depends...
|
| Are we running in a simulation that has a specific FPS target
| cap, or is that the "hardware limit"? Maybe the universe will
| discretely lower the resolution of rocks on Mars to increase
| FPS for localized users on Earth that it knows are testing such
| theories.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-02-18 23:01 UTC)