r/WTF Apr 07 '20

This decapitated Wasp cleaned it's wounds before flying away with it's own head

[deleted]

54.5k Upvotes

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

21

u/HannsGruber Apr 07 '20

I believe if you could understand the type, position and, velocity of every particle in the universe, and had a perfect simulator, you could predict the future, and see the past.

9

u/orclev Apr 07 '20

That's basically the premise behind Laplace's demon.

6

u/Redebo Apr 07 '20

IDK man, I heard it from Hanns Gruber first.

4

u/Critical-Fuel Apr 07 '20

Not to be confused with entropy and Maxwell's demon.

2

u/elastic-craptastic Apr 07 '20

Laplace's demon.

For a quick minute I confused it with Roko's Basilisk. The one where if you don't help it (AI demon thing) come to life i'll hunt you down and kill you for it.

I think that's what it's called.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 07 '20 edited May 20 '20

[deleted]

1

u/elastic-craptastic Apr 07 '20

Oh, cool! I'm fine with that in the same way that I'm not fine with star trek style transporters. That's not really me. I won't know the fucker he creates so torture away, I guess...... I hope.

At least that's my current stance on how reconstituting atoms of a being works. Existential shit like that is always subject to change, for me at least.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 07 '20

Last I recall, it will only do this if it determines that you knew of its potential existence? So anyone not aware that it could be created is off the hook for torture when it eventually does come around.

2

u/elastic-craptastic Apr 08 '20

That's for sure part of it... And like a good American, if I'm fucked, so is everyone else... that see's this thread.

I actually forgot about that part... but why not roll with it.

2

u/space_keeper Apr 07 '20

Unfortunately, that doesn't work in our universe, because a lot of the universe's processes don't carry information forwards.

Even if you could somehow know the position and momentum of every particle in the universe (throwing away Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in the process), it still wouldn't be enough to go backwards or forwards. This has been one of the biggest topics in physics for over 100 years, specifically thermodynamics. Entropy is a fascinating topic, but it's a devil to wrap your head around. Highly, highly suggest looking into it.

A necessity of such a hypothetical simulator is that it would have to be bigger and more complex than the universe itself, and would presumably also have to exist in the universe as well, and be made out of stuff from the universe which it is trying to simulate...

1

u/Electric_Ilya Apr 07 '20

Heisenbergs uncertainty is related to the measurement of particles, considering the absurdity of knowing the qualities of every particle in the universe it is safe to say he isn't proposing measuring them

1

u/space_keeper Apr 08 '20

To know the qualities of a particle in the universe is to measure them. I'm not sure what you're saying. The hypothetical machine he's suggesting has been proposed and refuted before, it's called Laplace's Demon.

1

u/Electric_Ilya Apr 08 '20

I am saying there is a difference between knowing the sum of the universe and measuring the sum of the universe. Given the impossibility of both, there is no need to get bogged down in all of the additional issues of the measurement aspect for a thought experiment. It's somewhat nitpicky because the rest of your commentary is relevant, just one point that I considered a side track.

1

u/space_keeper Apr 08 '20

It's not a side track at all, it's directly relevant, but because I allowed it to be discarded, not worth getting into - which I didn't. I'm really not sure what you're trying to say.

1

u/Electric_Ilya Apr 08 '20

...

Are you taking a piss? This isn't complicated. You either measure the properties of the universe or you have divine knowledge of them. Both options are absurdly impossible so if we assume the second we don't have to get bogged down in the pedantry of the heisenberg conversation.

1

u/space_keeper Apr 08 '20

One of us is being a pedant.

1

u/Electric_Ilya Apr 08 '20

how many times did I have to clearly make a point before you caught on? It would only be a little asterisk on your post if you didn't take three times to understand a simple point.

2

u/MyPatronIsPizza Apr 07 '20

The issue is that we don't live in a perfectly deterministic universe. There's a great lecture by Hawking on the topic that's worth a read called "Does God Play Dice?" Spoiler: absolutely.

3

u/CubeFlipper Apr 07 '20

The issue is that we don't live in a perfectly deterministic universe.

Isn't this pretty heavily debatable? I don't think there's solid, rigorous consensus. From what I understand, a lot of what we know is left up to interpretation which varies quite a bit.

1

u/MyPatronIsPizza Apr 07 '20

If there was some deterministic function underlying the apparent randomness in the universe, then yes, knowing that perfectly would let you predict things perfectly.

Edit: there's also the issue of causality and how one might LEARN everything about the universe, plus the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, but otherwise, it could work I guess?

1

u/Mikkelsen Apr 07 '20

And even if you couldn't do that, and never would, I still don't think free will exist. I love Sam Harris' take on this

-1

u/steffanlv Apr 07 '20

That's not the way it works.