Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

gavco98

The Thirteenth Floor

Recommended Posts

gavco98    387
I just watched this film the other day, and its really good. Has anyone else seen it, and if so what did u think of the simulation? Do you think anything like that will ever be possible? G Coates ------------------------------------------------------------
Gavin Coates
Co-Founder
http://www.multiplayercentral.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
borngamer    204
I watched it a few month''s ago for the first time and thought it was great.

I''m not sure if we will ever see anything like that happen in our lifetimes, but hey you never know.

borngamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Airhead Zoom    122
Well it was entertaining but in the end it was just another Matrix ripoff. (Well actually I don''t really know if this movie was before the Matrix or after. Just that there are many movies with the same idea. Existenz, for instance and some other of which I don''t know the name anymore)

It boils down to an old philosofical question: "Do we live ''inside'' another world?" (or something like it. I don''t quite have the power of language to state it effectively)
This was actually my original belief when I heard there were going to be a Matrix 2 and 3. For the AI, it would be smart to build more worlds inside worlds. The humans would be too busy to fight themselves into the ''real'' world underlying the Matrix world we live in that they wouldn''t think about a world which underlies the underlying world etc etc.
The creators of the movie could then also easily correct their mistakes (The major one being: where does the energy come from for the humans if the sun''s blocked out?) since the world was fake anyway.
Maybe the Matrix 2/3 will indeed be based on this idea, maybe not.

But back to your question if it''s possible? I think so. Why wouldn''t it be possible to get your brain plugged into a system so you think it''s all real? I don''t know how it works with hypnosis, but if you can tell a person he''s dying, he''ll probably believe it and die. If this is indeed possible with hypnosis (and much is possible!), it will surely be possible by telling your brain it is so by electrical impulses.
One thing I didn''t like about the movie is that at some point, an AI is uploaded into the real person''s brain. This is probably not possible. I don''t think your brain has exactly the same amount of cells and because of this we couldn''t swap consciousness.
But the AI''s in the computerworld might be realised one day. It''s probably a better idea to simulate a computer world and have an AI live in there than to have the computer as a whole interact with this world. Could both be possible, but the simulated world just is more intuitively to me somehow.

---
Allow me to clear my head for once...
Stop polluting the air!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gavco98    387
yea i thought that was a bit daft too, although in a way it did make sense.

Basically when u entered the system it loaded the mind of the person you were taking over into your mind, then when you exited it restored your true mind back. However because he died in the simulation, the connection was dropped before it restored his mind.

I couldnt help but feel it was similar to the matrix too, but this film was made in 1999, and i think the matrix was too. Therefore the script was probably written at the same time, and it is unlikely that it was based on the matrix or vice versa. With regards to existenz im sure i saw that mentioned somewhere in The Thirteenth Floor, i have a feeling that the film was based on existenze, ill check when i get back to my room.

With regards to the matrix i see your point about the humans existance without the sun, and that is a very good point. Perhaps humans have been genetically engineered by the robots so that they do not rely on the sun? Anyway all the neutrition they need is provided by the slime stuff that they are submerged in. All they really need is food to stay alive, as they never move, therefore not requiring energy.

G Coates
------------------------------------------------------------

Gavin Coates

Co-Founder

http://www.multiplayercentral.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
krez    443
actually, sun or no sun, the whole using-humans-for-batteries thing wouldn''t work... it is true that human bodies produce so much heat and some electrical energy, but that is only because they eat more than that amount of energy in their food (or slime if you like)... energy cannot be created or destroyed (even nuclear energy is not created, but rather released by the fusion or fission of matter), so the evil robots would have to use more energy feeding the humans than they could get out of them. thus, they would be better off not using the people. only a percentage of the energy in the food we eat comes back out as heat and whatnot; the rest is "lost" (not destroyed) within the body, for building/rebuilding cells, metabolic processes, et cetera.
don''t get me wrong; i loved the matrix. it was a fun movie. it just wasn''t very good sci-fi. luckily the kung-fu made up for that

--- krez (krezisback@aol.com)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster   
Guest Anonymous Poster
True, it would have been more believable if they were trying to use the humans as a network of parallel processors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timkin    864
quote:
Original post by krez
actually, sun or no sun, the whole using-humans-for-batteries thing wouldn''t work... it is true that human bodies produce so much heat and some electrical energy, but that is only because they eat more than that amount of energy in their food (or slime if you like)... energy cannot be created or destroyed (even nuclear energy is not created, but rather released by the fusion or fission of matter), so the evil robots would have to use more energy feeding the humans than they could get out of them. thus, they would be better off not using the people. only a percentage of the energy in the food we eat comes back out as heat and whatnot; the rest is "lost" (not destroyed) within the body, for building/rebuilding cells, metabolic processes, et cetera.
don''t get me wrong; i loved the matrix. it was a fun movie. it just wasn''t very good sci-fi. luckily the kung-fu made up for that




Actually, it''s more a question of efficient energy conversion. We use energy in many ways in our lives, not just to keep us alive. Basically, the machines in ''The Matrix'' couldn''t go around digesting organic matter to convert it to energy, but they could feed the organic matter to humans kept in pods and extract from them some of the electrical energy produced by the battery (our body). Much the same way we burn coal to heat water to make steam to drive a turbine to make electricity to fuel our heaters (if we don''t have a fireplace in which to burn the coal for ourselves!).

Cheers,

Timkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ragonastick    134
(After several attempts of rephrasing... I almost gave up trying to express this )

Let "Our world" = The world we see
Let "Outside world" = The "real" world which we are supposedly contained by

Now, our world is governed by laws which reside in the outside world. The laws of gravity and all that would be defined in that outside world. If I were to then write a computer program which defined more rules for a world inside of it, those rules obviously would not need to apply to our world. So, in the same way, the outside world, does not need to have rules similar to our world. So while it may not seem likely to us that there could exist a world where rules are totally different, The Matrix (and I''m assuming the 13th floor too, but I''ve never seen it) does have one, and possibly the most confusing aspect is its similarity to our world.

(and why does the spell checker insist that I spelt 13th wrong... suggested replacements are 1st, nth, ATh, HTH, Utah, etch, itch, I''ho, other, Ethan, Ethel, ether, ethic, ethos, ethyl.... spell checking AI has a long way to go )

Trying is the first step towards failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Airhead Zoom    122
Ragonastick> Allright very true, so the outside world could be completely different than ours, maybe even without gravity and such.
But the agent Smiths said such a different computer generated world was unbelievable for the humans so they broke out. Then again, if a newborn would be plugged in to a system like this it wouldn''t know any different and just accept it as ''the real thing''. Then the only thing the computers had to do was kill everybody. This could be achived by simple means: biological and nuclear warfare.
But this is just digressing and we can only hope the next movies will be as good as the first one.
But I wonder what your point is precisely? Because I somehow see this as just an observation and a little bit strange as to how it fits in the discussion. Maybe it''s just me though...
(no insult intended)

About the energy preserving thing: Well all energy must somehow be recycled, but this is so difficult even solar systems as a whole can''t pull it off. The sun will eventually burn up and then there will be no more energy left in the whole system.
Where does all energy come from is the really interesting question here? Maybe the energy just gets bounced back and forth, just like the galaxy expanding and shrinking (which is just a theory, mind you). So it emits energy (expands) and then when the energy source (center of universe) is used up, it starts absorbing that energy again, somehow attracting it all back (shrinking of universe) then emitting again etc.
BTW does a sun turn into a black hole when it''s burn up? I wouldn''t know myself but it would be quite logical to have it suck energy to create a new solar system from scratch.
(planets are then like a battery, energy which created it stored in it to have it extracted again when they''re destroyed)

Hmm I guess this is more like philosofating (is that good English?) than anything else.

---
Allow me to clear my head for once...
Stop polluting the air!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
krez    443
quote:
Original post by Timkin
Actually, it''s more a question of efficient energy conversion. We use energy in many ways in our lives, not just to keep us alive. Basically, the machines in ''The Matrix'' couldn''t go around digesting organic matter to convert it to energy, but they could feed the organic matter to humans kept in pods and extract from them some of the electrical energy produced by the battery (our body).

energy is lost during transfer, in every case in the universe. this is one of the laws of thermodynamics. the "slime" would need energy to grow. the amount of energy stored in the slime (the amount of energy available to the humans to digest) would be less than the amount of energy put into the slime when it was growing (no system is 100% efficient). then, the energy the humans got from the slime would be less than was available, and the energy the robots could get from the humans would be less than that. at every step, energy is lost. this is just a fact of life.
quote:
Much the same way we burn coal to heat water to make steam to drive a turbine to make electricity to fuel our heaters (if we don''t have a fireplace in which to burn the coal for ourselves!).

a lot of energy is lost this way also. thus, if the only way to GET coal is to use the energy produced by humans, it would eventually all slip away in the transfers. similiarly, if the robots had to produce the slime (remember there was no sun, so they must have), then the energy they got back after it going from slime to human to electricity would be significantly less than they put into the system in the first place.
quote:
Original post by Airhead Zoom
About the energy preserving thing: Well all energy must somehow be recycled, but this is so difficult even solar systems as a whole can''t pull it off. The sun will eventually burn up and then there will be no more energy left in the whole system.
Where does all energy come from is the really interesting question here? Maybe the energy just gets bounced back and forth, just like the galaxy expanding and shrinking (which is just a theory, mind you). So it emits energy (expands) and then when the energy source (center of universe) is used up, it starts absorbing that energy again, somehow attracting it all back (shrinking of universe) then emitting again etc.

i read that some astronomers and physicists calculated the mass of the universe, and the speed at which it is expanding, and they said there wasn''t enough mass to cause a re-collapse when the energy is gone. that is, the galaxies could have been slowed down and reversed in direction, so everything would eventually meet again at the center; they said it wouldn''t. this looks like a job for isaac asimov...
quote:
BTW does a sun turn into a black hole when it''s burn up? I wouldn''t know myself but it would be quite logical to have it suck energy to create a new solar system from scratch.
(planets are then like a battery, energy which created it stored in it to have it extracted again when they''re destroyed)

nah they either get less hot and smaller, turning into a dwarf star and then just burn out, or in the case of suns big enough (like ours), they collapse and explode, causing a red giant (which not only would toast all the planets up to mars or so, but would also eventually shrink down into a red dwarf and then burn out). of course all this happens over the course of millions of years.

--- krez (krezisback@aol.com)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vaporisator    122
quote:
Original post by krez
nah they either get less hot and smaller, turning into a dwarf star and then just burn out, or in the case of suns big enough (like ours), they collapse and explode, causing a red giant (which not only would toast all the planets up to mars or so, but would also eventually shrink down into a red dwarf and then burn out). of course all this happens over the course of millions of years.

--- krez (krezisback@aol.com)


Our sun won''t collapse and THEN turn into a red giant. They would first grow in size, then turn into a red giant and after this it could become a super-nova.
But I think it could also collapse and remain as a brown dwarf or a neutron-star or maybe a pulsar (or even a black hole if the star was big enough?). Anyway, different sizes result in different "deaths" of the stars.
Oh and the gas-clouds remaining from a dead solar-system would then reform to a new one...

I''ve read also another thing: When a sun burned all of its hydrogenium it starts burning Helium to Carbonium. This can go up to Iron, I think. Any comments?


Yesterday we still stood at the verge of the abyss,
today we''re a step onward!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gavco98    387
i dont know much about the universe, but the one thing i do know that is relevent is this:

If the sun was to become a black hole, it would have to be compressed to the size of a pea.

The reason is that a black hole is simply a planet which has a force of gravity that is so strong that the speed needed to escape from its pull is faster than the speed of light, hence light cannot escape. Seen as gravity is simply the density of the planet, the sun must become the size of a pea to have a density great enough to become a balck hole.

It is my ujdestanding that the sun will collapse, then expand to swallow mars too...

what this has to do with "The Thirteenth Floor" i do not know...

G Coates
------------------------------------------------------------

Gavin Coates

Co-Founder

http://www.multiplayercentral.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Electron    122
Don't you think we're getting of the main question here? =)

Well, to redirect everything, i would like to say my opinion:
No, you cannot make an exact simulation of our world. Why? There isn't enought material to do so!
For example: If you take up a rock of the ground and do a simulation of it. ok, we need zoom in so we can see the atoms of the rock. (Or even zoom in longer?) Ok, now we need to simulate this atom. We need a position for it, say 3 floats (It wouldn't last, but let's accept it for now.), further, we need it speed in the 3 directions, additional 3 floats. And we need it's energy level. We are now up to 7 floats. Just for one atom.

How many atoms are there in a bit in the computer?



Edited by - Electron on November 11, 2001 2:56:59 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Electron    122
After i wrote this previous reply, i went thinking: There is no way you can do an exact simulation of your own world. Sure, you can do shortcuts (Like textured walls in a game), but you can never let it have the same features as in the real world. (Try to blast a wall in, say Quake.)

I''d like to say our world is pretty advanced. Everything''s got a function. Our universe is pretty big, isn''t it?

If this is only a simulation, imagine the size of the real world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Airhead Zoom    122
Well, that''s why it''s called science fiction!
The Matrix (Thirteenth floor doesn''t specify if I''m correct) takes places in the future. Maybe by then the machines are big enough to simulate it.
Not every atom has to be simulated, though, just the impulses sent to our brains when touching, eating, smelling etc it.

---
Allow me to clear my head for once...
Stop polluting the air!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vaporisator    122
No you really don''t have to simulate every quark or atom (just to stress it), but you could surely do it because:
1. Noone said the simulation had to be as fast as reality
2. As in the 13th Floor only a part of the world was simulated
3. If you as a human don''t want to interact with this world can run at whatever speed you want it (it can) (just to make point 1 clearer and to blow up my listing)

The other question is: Why would you want to do it if you can''t interact with it (at least in realtime)...

Oh and btw, try blasting walls in ''Red Faction''


Yesterday we still stood at the verge of the abyss,
today we''re a step onward!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KingPin    122
Our universe has to be a simulation. There''s no way a world as complex as ours could be created ''randomly'' or by accident. I like to think of the big bang theory as some highly intelligent being entering or creating our universe. Now our universe was created in what ... billions of years? It''s just basically an experiment, just as was the dinosaurs. It''s amazing how much the universe and people have evolved.

And now we _just_ began creating simulations of our own, computer generated virtual worlds, with only a few hundred thousand years of evolution. Even though our simulations are nothing compared to our world, give it a billion years and im sure we could have a contender. Maybe the people running our simulation are just very advanced humans or are very similar to us, but just very evolved forms [I doubt it, cuz why would they experiment with dinosaurs and not take what works and use that ... I bet dinosaurs were just entertainment to them ... cool they can have fun ] Maybe the link to the outer world lies in the center of the universe where it all began, or the center of a black hole [the most interesting thing in the universe imo].

You know if you enter a black hole, time slows for you so basically you can travel through a wormhole [Einstein says they''re there] in no time at all. When you enter a black hole. to the people on the outside it appears that your falling very very very slow into the hole, but to you it appears that people are aging very very fast. So traveling though the center of a blackhole is a form of time-travel. Now just strap on some nuclear fusion or fission [The type of energy the sun, nuclear bombs, and nuclear power plants use as energy ... use what works] generators onto the back of a spaceship and travel into that black hole we just discovered a few years ago, the only one we found in the universe so far!

Sorry if I went a little off topic.


"1-2GB of virtual memory, that''s way more than i''ll ever need!" - Bill Gates
"The Arcade: Quite possibly the game of the century!" - The Gaming Community
may or may not represent anybody in paticular

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Omnipotent_Q    122
>>Our universe has to be a simulation. There''s no way a world as
>>complex as ours could be created ''randomly'' or by accident.

Well, something complex had to be created by accident. If our universe is a simulation, then whatever it is simulating must be more complex than it. If that more complex universe is just a simulation, than there is something more complex than it, and so on... so eventually one of them had to be created randomly.

By the way, in the Matrix, why did the machines use humans? If all they need is energy, couldn''t they have used a less rebellious species? Deer, maybe? And why not just launch solar power satellites? Sorry, but that movie was full of holes so it kind of bugged me. The special effects did make up for it, though.

>>Seen as gravity is simply the density of the planet, the sun
>>must become the size of a pea to have a density great enough
>>to become a balck hole.

Gravity is the result of mass, not density. Although a star would have to be sufficiently small to collapse into a black hole, the gravity will do all the compression work.

On the real topic, Electron is right. You can''t do a complete simulation of the universe without creating another universe. But you don''t really need to. Just make a simulation where everything happens like people expect it to (well, usually) and no one''s the wiser.

I still haven''t seen the Thirteenth Floor, but it sounds good. I''ll have to check it out.

------------------------------
Omnipotent_Q
"Natural Gas! It gives you... ideas!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TerranFury    142
The only way to overcome the massive storage requirements needed to simulate the universe and at the same time simulate everything all the way down to a microscopic level is to use fractals. One could, with powerful enough hardware, simulate quantum mechanical interactions between a massive number of parametrically-generated subatomic particles and quanta. The problem with this approach is it fails to accurately simulate very large scale macroscopic interactions. The "theory of everything" has not yet been reached; gravity and quantum mechanics do not fit nicely into the same model. We will need the "theory of everything" and a more accurate understanding of the universe in order to simulate all of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites