SquirrelInHell comments on Morality of Doing Simulations Is Not Coherent [SOLVED, INVALID] - Less Wrong

3 [deleted] 07 June 2016 02:34AM

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

Comments (34)

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

Comment author: SquirrelInHell 08 June 2016 06:49:09AM 0 points [-]

The computations in the second situation have the same fidelity and granularity as the first, and are morally equivalent. Your X is bigger (and therefore takes more to compute) than A(S), exactly because it contains both worlds. At any point in the physics simulation, you can subtract out Rt and get A(S)t.

OK, but this only moves the problem to a different place. Say I can find an operation that let's me transform the data irreversibly, in such a way that I can still get my computations and answers done, but no way of getting the original states back. What would you say then?

Comment author: Wes_W 08 June 2016 08:31:24PM 1 point [-]

No part of his objection hinged on reversibility, only the same linearity assumption you rely on to get a result at all.