Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by arfa brane, Jan 26, 2016.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
I said "response of the universe is instantaneous". Where is the problem?
The speed of light is the only limit to energy transfer events, both for the current state of computing and for the universe.
We may eventually see quantum computers which work faster by means of superposition and / or entanglement, another less obvious computational process process the universe also does everywhere, evidently.
Very good questions. My opinion is the universe is not computing at all, just running through all possible permutations of all potentials of natural properties inherent in the universal system over evolutionary iterations and recyclings. For example, from its energy potentials it can create particle pairs and recombine them or re annihilate them back to energy potentials. What is it computing if it just does that again and again in cyclic fashion without end? Which brings up the last but most important aspect included in your last question. If the universe is infinite and eternal, and its activity never halts, then what meaning can be attached to the concept of universe computing some thing (in infinitesimal space and temporal localized 'thing') or many things (in extended space and temporal patterns reaching beyond any possibility of 'instantaneous' commonality)? The only answer I can make is that it cannot be computing if it never ends to present an 'answer' either in infinitesimally localized or infinitely extended form. The universe may be a system of activity within its infinite reaches and potentials at any particular stage, but overall it is not one thing, but many sub-things going on all the time all over its entirety which we can never fully comprehend by directly consulting 'an answer' from 'a computation'. We can only ever witness and record and comprehend qualitatively and quantitatively the probable forms and activities involved. But the 'answer' comes from our human logics and pattern recognition capabilities, not from the universe calculating an answer for us to 'read out' since if it is computing for eternity over infinite reaches beyond our exact examination, then there never will be 'an answer' from the universe. We must make do with what we humans can achieve in comprehending the overall universal activity itself. The universe just is and does; we logically and scientifically comprehend what it is and does as best we can.
Universe physically exists. We mathematically compute and simulate, and so logically comprehend the nature of that physical existence . That is my opinion, arf. Does that make any sense?
It is believed that the universe is expanding at a speed higher than the speed of light. So, a speed >c is possible in the universe.
However high the speed of a computer may be, it can not be an instant computer like the universe.
Even if that were true (FTL universe expansion) it could not be tested by means of observation.
I would agree with your second point.
Except that the evidence for this expansion is based on observations. And the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to people producing that evidence.
Of course, this is a side issue for computation. Computations move from state to state. There is no requirement that this takes a set amount of time and there is an entire (sub?) field called hypercomputation devoted to investigating what could happen if one could compute an infinite amount of states in a finite time.
True but a speed >c through space is not possible.
EDIT: Corrected my post so it makes sense!
See the wiki article in my post # 109. Also you can see this http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/th...rom-each-other-faster-than-light-intermediate
I saw them and I stand by what I said.
From your article:
The two galaxies we've been discussing are not travelling through space, it is the space between them that is expanding.
Space is expanding. That means distance is increasing. So can we call it "speed of space >c".
The term generally used is Recession Velocity. The recession velocity of the farthest galaxies from earth are currently much greater than c.
Term it "recession velocity" but in reality, space/distance is increasing at a rate >c.
The universe we are observing is based upon our observation. We can call it "universe relative to an observer". Say, the observation of an observer is perfect. Can the observer, observe the complete aspect of the universe or he can miss some aspects of the universe.
I am really not trying to argue with you. The distance between the galaxies in question is increasing at a rate that exceeds c. We are in agreement. I was simply making the point (which is important) that the galaxies and nothing else can move through space at a speed >c.
I think you are right.
I knew we were in agreement on this. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
To compute this you must compute lol that a calculation needs observation by who or what does not factor as long as there is somthing to be calculated as if a tree falls in the forest does anyone hear it obviously yes as if the trees and plants are alive as goes the same for stars and galaxys wich have there own personalitys and characteristics therefore if on one side of the universe is in complete complience with the other side by communicating on a qunatom scale wich is safe to say a relationship of information involving real time outcomes then my opinion the purpose of this phenomenom is to keep the past present and future in order without over lapping one another. This is leading to a self explanatory explanation that there is no special space in the unvierse where you will find a place that will give you a total blueprint of the history of the universe and a prediction about its future as it must be declaired not chaotic but rather contradictive on the contrary to a spontanious universe but within a limited area to be spontanious making the notion ironic to examine because you only have a perception of the present not the infinite dimensions of time. Luckily i think quantum phsics was calculated by self design with this in mind in order to have a postive and negative attraction and balance itself out and allow other properties to form around itself to gain more energy wich is the main attraction for a particle. Correction not dimentions but only one dimenstion of infinte time
Separate names with a comma.