Re:Galactic Algorithm
by comboy on Saturday October 05, 2019 @05:47AM
(#21164661)
It's just there for a reference, maybe a better one would be Kurzweil's ultimate laptop (made from the whole universe). But the interesting part is that I don't think the ultimate laptop takes into account interactions and state between atoms. AFAIR it assumes computation is done on every available dimension (like electron spin) but not on how atoms move and interact with each other. Intuitively it shouldn't make much difference though.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Galactic Algorithm
by marcosdumay on Saturday October 05, 2019 @09:22AM
(#21165339)
The number of digits of the possible interactions between the atoms is still proportional to the number of atoms.
Re:Galactic Algorithm
by asdaddasdad on Saturday October 05, 2019 @09:35AM
(#21165409)
What counts as an interaction? It seems to me there can be an infinite number of interactions between just two atoms.
Number of states of the universe is a quantum value, not a classical one.
Re:Galactic Algorithm
by asdaddasdad on Saturday October 05, 2019 @05:01PM
(#21167934)
So what quantum value is it? Shouldn't the argument then at least say "the number is greater than the number of possible states of the universe", or something like that?