Re:Unconventional Sorting Algorithms
by Sharlin on Thursday October 21, 2021 @02:26PM
(#28948877)
(the problem of destroying the universe left as an exercise to the reader)
[ Parent
| on HN ]
For the operation of this algorithm, is there any meaningful difference between destroying the universe and destroying the observer(s)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortalit...
EDIT: If you allow for the objects to spontaneously sort themselves, the runtime is O(1).
Surely O(n) for checking whether it is sorted?
Re:Unconventional Sorting Algorithms
by contravariant on Thursday October 21, 2021 @06:20PM
(#28951523)
You could just destroy all universes to ensure it's sorted in the remaining reality.
Re:Unconventional Sorting Algorithms
by michaelmior on Thursday October 21, 2021 @06:48PM
(#28951759)
I'm confused. What reality is remaining if all universes are destroyed?
Re:Unconventional Sorting Algorithms
by contravariant on Thursday October 21, 2021 @07:33PM
(#28952133)
None, but in it the list is sorted.
Or rather a reality wherein it wasn't sorted doesn't exist anymore.
Re:Unconventional Sorting Algorithms
by michaelmior on Thursday October 21, 2021 @07:52PM
(#28952273)
True although not very helpful if you actually want to do something with the sorted list. But I suppose if you cease to exist, so does whatever problem sorting the list was intended to solve.