Danny Mayes writes: > Assuming MWI is correct, and that Tipler's Omega point theory is correct > in that in at least some portion of the multiverse there will exist the > physical capacity for a computer to exist with infinite computing power, > even in the confines of a finite universe, does this then allow for an > eternally self-recreating universe with no outside explanation necessary?
I think there are some problems with this, which I'll get to in a moment. But first it is good to keep in mind that current cosmological observations contradict Tipler's predictions. There is strong evidence that the universal expansion is increasing and that there will be no collapse and no Omega Point. > Specifically, the question is whether the Omega point computer could > simulate the birth of a new, fully intact multiverse and run it through > to the creation of a new virtual omega point computer, that would then > continue the process in an endless cycle (or chain)? Does one computer > with infinite computing power (and only a millisecond to exist from an > objective viewpoint) allow for this infinite layer of creation? Does it > matter whether the multiverse itself is infinite or just very large? I see a few problems with this. First, the OP computer could in fact simulate many universes, including those different from itself. Perhaps it could even simulate all possible universes. So its actions don't go too far in explaining why it, itself, exists. Second, if you study the details of the OP you learn that it is a difficult time to live. It is not a stable situation. Life will grow exponentially more difficult as the collapse intensifies. At the same time, life grows perhaps exponentially more powerful, so there would be reason to hope that it could manage to survive forever. However, this is not assured. In particular, there is no guarantee that the OP computation project will be maintained forever. The beings in charge of the computer might change their minds and start using it to play video games. Or survival may become so challenging that they can't waste their time simulating all possible universes, or even their own. Keep in mind that even though it only takes a finite amount of time from the outside, the appropriate time scale is the internal one, and that one lasts forever. The OP is the product of life and intelligence, and for this model to work, these entities must live forever and run their computer forever. Literally, forever and ever and ever. That's the only way the philosophical model works. Such stability seems inconsistent with the nature of life and intelligence as we know it. Third, it's not clear how exactly this explanation works. If the universe is real, it doesn't need to simulate itself in order to exist. If it isn't real, the fact that it simulates itself doesn't seem like enough to bring it into existence. I can imagine no end of universes that simulate themselves, in fact most of them would have a much easier time of it than the OP beings struggling with their chaotic collapse. Does that mean they are all just as real as our universe would be, if the OP's simulations were what made us real? In fact among the simplest of such self-simulating universes is Bruno's Universal Dovetailer, a trivial program which runs all programs (including, by definition, itself). If the OP brings itself into existence, so does the UD, which is much simpler. And the UD then makes us exist along with all other universes, whether the OP turns out to be cosmologically plausible or not. Hal Finney