Re: The God Language
On Thursday, 29 December 2011 at 09:16:23 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: http://pastebin.com/AtuzJqh0 I thought this topic was about a mix of Go (Google Language) and D.
Re: The God Language
On 12/29/2011 02:15 AM, Caligo wrote: This is somewhat of a serious question: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? It would be hard for us mortals to imagine, but would it resemble a functional programming language more or something else? And what type of hardware would the code run on? I mean, there are computations happening all around us, e.g., when an apple falls or planets circle the sun, etc, so what's performing all the computation? I have two contradictory answers: Languages, Prolog. Hardware, something that can solve the hauling problem (but just for for turning machines).
Re: The God Language
Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote in message news:jduasl$ndh$1...@digitalmars.com... On 01/03/2012 08:26 AM, Gour wrote: On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 23:29:17 +0100 Timon Gehrtimon.g...@gmx.ch wrote: God cannot be omnipotent. If he was, he could invent a task he cannot solve. Wrong. He is not static, but dynamic, so He can invent a task he cannot solve, but in the next moment he can solve it. ;) Sincerely, Gour I meant he can invent a task he will never be able to solve. ;) I've never felt that argument to be particularly compelling: I see it as merely indicating that an omnipotent being is able to give up their own omnipotence. Which, being omnipotent, they'd of course have to be capable of doing. Of course, you could then try Could he create a task he couldn't solve without giving up his own omnipotence? But I think amounts to a logical contradiction akin to any other such as Could an omnipotent being make a rock that isn't a rock? And that's a whole other philosophical matter (ie, Do logical contradictions count as something an omnipotent being must be able to do?).
Re: The God Language
2012/1/3 J Arrizza cppge...@gmail.com Are you sure? There is good evidence he strongly prefers gc's. Consider almost all insects; consider dung beetles specifically. Consider super novas, gravity and accretion disks. Consider Disney and the Circle of Life. It's pretty clear he views automated recycling as a general architectural approach. A large benefit of a gc is it disassociates responsibility for cleanup from the creator of the object. Now imagine the opposite: after you died, you were responsible for disassembling yourself for use by others to create themselves (think Soylent Green, The Next Generation). And if you didn't do it, or you didn't do it properly, the world would eventually overcrowd and explode, leaving a core dump in space. Nice. Of course, he'd give himself a switch to turn off the gc when he really needed to. there is no destruction/creation going on, energy is constant at all times in a closed system. That's how I thought about it :) If it's constant anyway he wouldn't have to bother with a gc, would he? I meant he can invent a task he will never be able to solve. ;) this seems rather strange doesn't it? If something is able to do everything, he should be able to invent something he is not able to do. if he invented something he is not able to do, he can't do everything. One could therefore assume it is not possible to be able to do everything :D Well, if you want to discuss string theory... http://xkcd.com/171/ http://xkcd.com/397/ :) great one, I really like the first one. It's really the essence of string theory in a way :)
Re: The God Language
On 1/3/2012 12:48 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Could an omnipotent being make a rock that isn't a rock? I don't know, but I'm sure he could make a product that is both a floor wax and a dessert topping.
Re: The God Language
Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote in message news:jdvgnr$2uer$1...@digitalmars.com... On 1/3/2012 12:48 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Could an omnipotent being make a rock that isn't a rock? I don't know, but I'm sure he could make a product that is both a floor wax and a dessert topping. I'm having visions of Billy Mays...
Re: The God Language
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:36 AM, maarten van damme maartenvd1...@gmail.comwrote: there is no destruction/creation going on, energy is constant at all times in a closed system. That's how I thought about it :) If it's constant anyway he wouldn't have to bother with a gc, would he? I see. Something like Matter is neither created nor destroyed But similarly memory is neither created nor destroyed. Unless of course you're talking about a god language that can create hardware at run-time: // make sure the power supply can handle the extra memory this.PowerSupply.currentCurrent()++; // ... don't forget extra bypass capacitance // and check the wiring just in case. Capacitor mycap = new Capacitor(0.47uF); this.PowerSupply.BypassCap.Add(mycap); assert(this.PowerSupply.PositiveRail..capacity 2.1A); assert(this.PowerSupply.NegativeRail..capacity 2.1A); // finally! Add the extra storage we need this.SDRAM.extend(1GB); I meant he can invent a task he will never be able to solve. ;) this seems rather strange doesn't it? If something is able to do everything, he should be able to invent something he is not able to do. if he invented something he is not able to do, he can't do everything. One could therefore assume it is not possible to be able to do everything :D Can an omnipotent being bypass logical syllogisms? Don't forget: *ALL* powerful means not just the physical stuff. If so, then your argument doesn't hold... or it does. More precisely, it holds and doesn't hold at the same time, until you open the box and Schrodinger's cat jumps out. Or doesn't. John
Re: The God Language
On 1/3/2012 10:25 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Walter Brightnewshou...@digitalmars.com wrote in message news:jdvgnr$2uer$1...@digitalmars.com... On 1/3/2012 12:48 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Could an omnipotent being make a rock that isn't a rock? I don't know, but I'm sure he could make a product that is both a floor wax and a dessert topping. I'm having visions of Billy Mays... Wrong reference! Google floor wax and dessert topping.
Re: The God Language
maarten van damme maartenvd1...@gmail.com wrote in message news:mailman.1985.1325157846.24802.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... I think it would be an object oriented language, I'm a believer in the string theory :) I heard on the Science Channel that M-theory was becoming favored over string therory. (Not that I would actually know.) I have actually thought of the whole universe as one big simulation, would really explain how light waves without medium (like a math function). I came across a book one time that talked about the 'verse basically being one big quantum computer. I didn't actually red through it though, and I can't remember what it was called... :( If I were god I would def use object oriented because it makes for easy describing of different particles and strings. and I'm pretty sure there is no garbage collector included in gods language :p If I were god, then I'd presumably be omnipotent, and if I were omnipotent, then I'd be able to do it all in something like FuckFuck, or that shakesperian language, or that lolcat language without any difficulty. And I could just fix any limitations in the implementation. So that would seem the best option :)
Re: The God Language
On Thursday, December 29, 2011 12:23:47 maarten van damme wrote: I think it would be an object oriented language, I'm a believer in the string theory :) Well, if you want to discuss string theory... http://xkcd.com/171/ http://xkcd.com/397/ :) - Jonathan M Davis
Re: The God Language
On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 21:08:29 +0100, FeepingCreature default_357-l...@yahoo.de wrote: On 12/29/11 19:27, Walter Bright wrote: On 12/29/2011 2:15 AM, Caligo wrote: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? Mathematics. Fan of Tegmark¹, eh? :) -- ¹http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_universe_hypothesis I love that one. My favorite is that it indicates the existence of a boolean universe. I like to believe it is currently 'off'.
Re: The God Language
On 01/02/2012 09:00 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: maarten van dammemaartenvd1...@gmail.com wrote in message news:mailman.1985.1325157846.24802.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... I think it would be an object oriented language, I'm a believer in the string theory :) I heard on the Science Channel that M-theory was becoming favored over string therory. (Not that I would actually know.) I have actually thought of the whole universe as one big simulation, would really explain how light waves without medium (like a math function). I came across a book one time that talked about the 'verse basically being one big quantum computer. I didn't actually red through it though, and I can't remember what it was called... :( If I were god I would def use object oriented because it makes for easy describing of different particles and strings. and I'm pretty sure there is no garbage collector included in gods language :p If I were god, then I'd presumably be omnipotent, and if I were omnipotent, then I'd be able to do it all in something like FuckFuck, or that shakesperian language, or that lolcat language without any difficulty. And I could just fix any limitations in the implementation. So that would seem the best option :) God cannot be omnipotent. If he was, he could invent a task he cannot solve.
Re: The God Language
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote: On 01/02/2012 09:00 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: maarten van dammemaartenvd1...@gmail.com** wrote in message news:mailman.1985.1325157846.**24802.digitalmars-d@puremagic.**com... I think it would be an object oriented language, I'm a believer in the string theory :) I heard on the Science Channel that M-theory was becoming favored over string therory. (Not that I would actually know.) I have actually thought of the whole universe as one big simulation, would really explain how light waves without medium (like a math function). I came across a book one time that talked about the 'verse basically being one big quantum computer. I didn't actually red through it though, and I can't remember what it was called... :( If I were god I would def use object oriented because it makes for easy describing of different particles and strings. and I'm pretty sure there is no garbage collector included in gods language :p If I were god, then I'd presumably be omnipotent, and if I were omnipotent, then I'd be able to do it all in something like FuckFuck, or that shakesperian language, or that lolcat language without any difficulty. And I could just fix any limitations in the implementation. So that would seem the best option :) God cannot be omnipotent. If he was, he could invent a task he cannot solve. He has; the human race.
Re: The God Language
and I'm pretty sure there is no garbage collector included in gods language :p Are you sure? There is good evidence he strongly prefers gc's. Consider almost all insects; consider dung beetles specifically. Consider super novas, gravity and accretion disks. Consider Disney and the Circle of Life. It's pretty clear he views automated recycling as a general architectural approach. A large benefit of a gc is it disassociates responsibility for cleanup from the creator of the object. Now imagine the opposite: after you died, you were responsible for disassembling yourself for use by others to create themselves (think Soylent Green, The Next Generation). And if you didn't do it, or you didn't do it properly, the world would eventually overcrowd and explode, leaving a core dump in space. Nice. Of course, he'd give himself a switch to turn off the gc when he really needed to. John
Re: The God Language
On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 23:29:17 +0100 Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote: God cannot be omnipotent. If he was, he could invent a task he cannot solve. Wrong. He is not static, but dynamic, so He can invent a task he cannot solve, but in the next moment he can solve it. ;) Sincerely, Gour -- When your intelligence has passed out of the dense forest of delusion, you shall become indifferent to all that has been heard and all that is to be heard. http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: The God Language
On 01/03/2012 08:26 AM, Gour wrote: On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 23:29:17 +0100 Timon Gehrtimon.g...@gmx.ch wrote: God cannot be omnipotent. If he was, he could invent a task he cannot solve. Wrong. He is not static, but dynamic, so He can invent a task he cannot solve, but in the next moment he can solve it. ;) Sincerely, Gour I meant he can invent a task he will never be able to solve. ;)
Re: The God Language
On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 08:31:33 +0100 Timon Gehr timon.g...@gmx.ch wrote: I meant he can invent a task he will never be able to solve. ;) Nah...those are just side-effects, iow. noise. :-D Sincerely, Gour -- But those who, out of envy, disregard these teachings and do not follow them are to be considered bereft of all knowledge, befooled, and ruined in their endeavors for perfection. http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: The God Language
On 12/29/2011 11:16 AM, Walter Bright wrote: http://pastebin.com/AtuzJqh0 He will soon realize that he wants an earthborn language rather than the one of God :)
Re: The God Language
On 12/29/2011 1:32 AM, Max Samukha wrote: On 12/29/2011 11:16 AM, Walter Bright wrote: http://pastebin.com/AtuzJqh0 He will soon realize that he wants an earthborn language rather than the one of God :) Watch out, or you may attract a thunderbolt!!
Re: The God Language
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.comwrote: http://pastebin.com/AtuzJqh0 This is somewhat of a serious question: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? It would be hard for us mortals to imagine, but would it resemble a functional programming language more or something else? And what type of hardware would the code run on? I mean, there are computations happening all around us, e.g., when an apple falls or planets circle the sun, etc, so what's performing all the computation?
Re: The God Language
On Thursday, 29 December 2011 at 10:16:03 UTC, Caligo wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.comwrote: http://pastebin.com/AtuzJqh0 This is somewhat of a serious question: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? It would be hard for us mortals to imagine, but would it resemble a functional programming language more or something else? And what type of hardware would the code run on? I mean, there are computations happening all around us, e.g., when an apple falls or planets circle the sun, etc, so what's performing all the computation? Obligatory XKCD: http://xkcd.com/224/
Re: The God Language
On 29.12.2011 11:15, Caligo wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com mailto:newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote: http://pastebin.com/AtuzJqh0 This is somewhat of a serious question: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? It would be hard for us mortals to imagine, but would it resemble a functional programming language more or something else? And what type of hardware would the code run on? I mean, there are computations happening all around us, e.g., when an apple falls or planets circle the sun, etc, so what's performing all the computation? Declarative. Program begins with void. Let there be thing.
Re: The God Language
On 12/29/11 4:15 AM, Caligo wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com mailto:newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote: http://pastebin.com/AtuzJqh0 This is somewhat of a serious question: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? It would be hard for us mortals to imagine, but would it resemble a functional programming language more or something else? And what type of hardware would the code run on? I mean, there are computations happening all around us, e.g., when an apple falls or planets circle the sun, etc, so what's performing all the computation? Obligatory: http://xkcd.com/224/ Andrei
Re: The God Language
On 12/29/2011 2:15 AM, Caligo wrote: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? Mathematics.
Re: The God Language
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Gour g...@atmarama.net wrote: Just answer the following question: Are we mortals the result of pure function or just side-effect? You are asking about creationism and evolution, aren't you? I have to say that I don't know. Always trust the one who is looking for the truth, not the one who has found it. :-)
Re: The God Language
On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 04:15:27 -0600 Caligo iteronve...@gmail.com wrote: This is somewhat of a serious question: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), There is. ;) It would be hard for us mortals to imagine, but would it resemble a functional programming language more or something else? Just answer the following question: Are we mortals the result of pure function or just side-effect? Sincerely, Gour -- There are principles to regulate attachment and aversion pertaining to the senses and their objects. One should not come under the control of such attachment and aversion, because they are stumbling blocks on the path of self-realization. http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: The God Language
I think it would be an object oriented language, I'm a believer in the string theory :) I have actually thought of the whole universe as one big simulation, would really explain how light waves without medium (like a math function). If I were god I would def use object oriented because it makes for easy describing of different particles and strings. and I'm pretty sure there is no garbage collector included in gods language :p
Re: The God Language
On 2011-12-29 11:15, Caligo wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com mailto:newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote: http://pastebin.com/AtuzJqh0 This is somewhat of a serious question: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? It would be hard for us mortals to imagine, but would it resemble a functional programming language more or something else? And what type of hardware would the code run on? I mean, there are computations happening all around us, e.g., when an apple falls or planets circle the sun, etc, so what's performing all the computation? Servers in the cloud of course :) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: The God Language
On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 20:27:43 +0200, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote: On 12/29/2011 2:15 AM, Caligo wrote: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? Mathematics. In the essence and the spirit math is THE answer, but if you mean the implementation we have now, it is verbose nonsense. Yet we are talking about GODs language, you have a point! Only an immortal could comprehend math fully.
Re: The God Language
On 12/29/11 19:27, Walter Bright wrote: On 12/29/2011 2:15 AM, Caligo wrote: If there is a God (I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying there is), what language would he choose to create the universe? Mathematics. Fan of Tegmark¹, eh? :) -- ¹http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_universe_hypothesis
