wedrifid comments on The conscious tape - Less Wrong

11 Post author: PhilGoetz 16 September 2010 07:55PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (113)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: wedrifid 18 September 2010 04:13:42AM 0 points [-]

In any physically possible case, in which the computer's speed can be arbitrarily close to c, things develop completely normally in the computer's own reference frame.

For the right right value of 'arbitrary' the computer never performs a single operation. The entire box is obliterated by collision with a stray electron before the processor can tick. The collision releases arbitrarily large amounts of energy and from there things just start getting messy.

Comment author: Vladimir_M 18 September 2010 07:13:27AM *  2 points [-]

In a thought experiment, you can assume anything, however unrealistic, as long as it's logically consistent with the theory on which you're basing it. Assuming away stray electrons is therefore OK in this particular thought experiment, since the assumption of a universe that would provide an endless completely obstacle-free path would still be consistent with special relativity. In fact, among the standard conventions for discussing thought experiments is not to bring up objections about such things, since it's presumed that the author is intentionally assuming them away to make a more essential point about something else.

In contrast, introducing objects that move at exactly the speed c into a thought experiment based on special relativity results in a logical inconsistency. It's the same mistake as if you assumed that Peano axioms hold and then started talking about a natural number such that zero is its successor. Since the very definition of such an object involves a logical contradiction, nothing useful can ever come out of such a discussion.