30 پاسخ به “آیا کامپیوتر می تواند خود را شبیه سازی کند؟”

1. I think in theory it would be possible inside the cloud, because it would be a network(on the super computer) simulating a computer that could potentially replicate itself an infinite amount of times.

2. Is this the guy from Gameranx? Philosopher gamers are like me and we should be friends.

3. oRacle vIRTUSLboX

4. What if there is a computer with a processor containing two cores… one dedicated to simulating all the components of the master dual-core processor, and the other dedicated to everything else… if the processor cores are powerful enough to simulate the amount of atoms the whole processor is made of then the second core is left free to process other shit 😛

   Now let's say that simulated processor simulates another one, and so on… you can essentially keep adding virtual cores since there is always one core remaining.

5. It’s possible if you use a vm

6. theoretically a quantum processor can run a 1:1 ratio of a binary processor. I feel like this assumes binary

7. yes

8. A few trillion:1 maybe?

9. i think you never heard of esxi vmware..

10. YOU ARE SO COOL

11. Think of it like DID. Working under the assumption the brain is essentially just an organic super computer (yes, I know that's not 100% accurate and I know about the processing speed paradoxes but just go with it for now) you can make the assumption that your personality plus all automatic functions in your body are essentially your OS. Now for someone with DID the disassociated personalities are a simulation of a personality that runs differently and is flawed in some form. You don't get a perfect simulation; in fact what you get is very different from the outside looking in. But it's the result of the same organic operating system running on a different set of patterns.

12. You know AI already started it's journey in Facebook.

13. if you interested in this sort of question then i would say look into Virtual Machines. Which is essentially this excact thing. The ratio for that is best left at 2:1.

14. well perhaps it would be a quantum computer it would make alot more sence

15. I thought it said…….

    STIMULATE

16. yeah, using the logic of the mother computer being better than the daughter computer. if its actual run speed being seen as a limitation, then that means south korea, and japan have the best computers, not the best run speed, which is absolutely ubsurd

17. Xbox one emulate a Xbox 360

18. There is an implicit argument against perpetual energy here that I find interesting. Don't forget the epistemological component, namely, can the simulated computer know it's a simulation? Ultimately: no. There is no prima facie justification for it. Since the burden of proof cannot be satisfied the question is actually meaningless. How important is a question that cannot be answered? How many angels can dance on the point of a pen? Just as meaningful a question as "are we living in a simulation." It's interesting how many people, not stupid people BTW, think this is worth contemplating when it's actually a waste of time. No offense to anyone intended, in fact I respect the cerebral exercise itself, it's just better spent on superior questions.

19. another channel to hear Falcon's sexy ass voice lmao no homo

20. My brain hurts now

21. This blew my mind and they're still scrubbing my brains off the ceiling

22. What if everything is run slow but we perceive it differently?

23. You do know that a simulated computer is called an emulation?

24. Ah I just watched a video of a Microsoft employee use a virtual machine to troll a scammer. Nice timing.

25. if we are living in a simulation our computers could be as fast as the computers of whoever is running the simulation but only to us and not to them since we would be slowed by the same factors as the computer. so our perception of processes would be 1 to 1 to theirs even though to them our blah the blah blah blah… its all dumb, something something nhilism.

26. This really isn't that big a question if you look at it like a number line going from 1 to infinity (1 being the original computer). So you have 1 simulate itself as 2 and 2 is told to do something by 1 which was told by 0 (a human) to do so, 2 would not be able to do so because 2 does not technically exist, everything 2 does 1 is actually doing because a computer can not give instructions to a digital/non existing object so 1 is just making it seem like 2 is doing it. And that is why a computer can't simulate itself.

27. no it can't, the hardware won't be powerful enough to run the software, as the computer would need to simulate it self and that computer would need to simulate a computer simulating a computer else it's not simulating it self.

    even if you would only simulate it once it still can't simulate it self because the your own computer will use some power of the hardware which won't be available if you try to simulate it which would mean it's not a simulation.

28. Stahp so trippy 🙁

29. well somebody watched last week's ep of Doctor Who

30. i did the 1k like. do I get anything?

نظرات بسته شده اند.