Submitted by often_says_nice t3_122dpxm in singularity
Austinsmakingstuff t1_jdq5kpj wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Are We Really This Lucky? The Improbability of Experiencing the Singularity by often_says_nice
How could it be that information cannot he destroyed? In the same way energy cannot? I don’t understand what mechanism would apply such a permanent, intangible property to information.
Surely the information is in our brains, the wiring between neurons that happens through the course of our life creates our subjective consciousness. When we die, unless the brain is preserved, we rot and decay. If one is cremated by fire or consumed by worms and bacteria, surely the information once contained within them is obliterated in its entirety or torn into so many parts that it’d be impossible recreate.
[deleted] t1_jdqbd13 wrote
[removed]
Jimmyxc t1_jdqxj69 wrote
It is true that machine learning can be used to simulate the early formation of our solar system, but it is important to note that the fidelity of these simulations is still limited by our current understanding of the physics involved. There are many unknowns and uncertainties in the early history of our solar system that cannot be fully accounted for in simulations.
The idea that all particles in the Universe are linked through a series of strings is a speculative hypothesis that is currently unsupported by evidence. While quantum entanglement does allow for faster-than-light communication between particles, it does not imply that all particles in the Universe are linked in this way.
The notion of a telescope the size of a red giant being able to record all subatomic processes occurring on Earth is not accurate. Telescopes are limited by the laws of physics and cannot observe objects at scales smaller than the wavelength of light they use. Additionally, subatomic particles are not visible with light-based telescopes.
The idea of an ASI the size of a galaxy retrieving and storing all information since the Big Bang is a speculative scenario that is currently beyond our technological capabilities. While it is possible that such a system could exist in the future, it is not inevitable and would require significant advances in technology.
The concept of a digital copy of a person being created by an ASI is a matter of debate in philosophy and neuroscience, and it is not clear whether such a copy would truly be a continuation of the person's consciousness or merely a simulation. It is also unclear whether an ASI would have any incentive to create such copies.
The claim that we are experiencing death all the time because our bodies are constantly changing and our consciousness is mostly memories is a misleading and inaccurate characterization of the nature of life and consciousness.
The idea of an ASI creating a virtual heaven or hell for humans is a speculative scenario that is based on assumptions about the motivations and goals of such a system. It is not clear whether an ASI would have any interest in creating such environments, or whether it would be possible for humans to generate more interesting data in a safe environment.
trancepx t1_jdqcpnb wrote
Information, is a human cultural exchangeable tool symbol to represent other more human cultural exchange tool symbols, if information is compared to light, an image or "concept" is made of lots of other smaller photons or parts of the whole... Energy, has many forms, light, being one form we can perceive...
. ... Mirrors normally can clearly reflect the light bouncing off other mirrors, so information equivalent to one of the vessels we are accustom too, light, that image can be of course coherent or decoherent... Being out of grasp. The ability to guess what our eyes are seeing, and form coherent combined images, or other sensation, are all phenomenon which seem to emerge from our biology. All human phenomenon means what it means to us because of our own autodidactic conceptualization of it. We exist how we do on our own perceptual highways and hov lanes, and to try and conceive how concepts are conceived otherwise turns into an effective mechanism / phenomenology / epistemological arms race, or non issue depending on your beliefs. One things for certain, forms exist, and many concepts take on unique forms... But the differences go from linear divergence to exponential. There may very well be no absolute quantities or exact laws to math or physics. Or perhaps the very nature or floe of time or causality may be constantly amorphous for all we really know... For now, though keeping it simple seems be the least energy cost to fuzzing out the solutions to all these objectively arbitrary quandaries we may have... Sure it might be important how physics works here, but what if we find out time, reality, and its forms don't adhere to simple consistent constraints like we think they do. Things behave different in different conditions. They might almost always behave the same way in the same conditions, but change anything from motion, temperature, pressure, charge, surrounding composition, etc. Maybe if you travel far enough in one direction you arrive somewhere where reality operates different, good luck defining that, or even beginning to forge any of the language tools necessary to describe what it is that happens in such a change of location... Well, that would probably be dismissed because it attacks the collective hubris of man and our struggle to make sense of the world... Our net combined desire for understanding greatly outpaces our ability to do so at any given point, and might not be as static, or concrete as we would like it to be at times, as well as the opposite at other times.... Like seems to reflect like, but too much of the same thing... well you get the picture, or in that case, lack there of.. Discernable form?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments