The discussion revolves around the concept of computability in relation to the universe and physics. Participants explore different interpretations of what it means for the universe to be computable, including the idea that it may function like a computer or simulation. The conversation touches on theoretical implications, particularly regarding Closed Timelike Curves and their computability.
Participants do not reach a consensus on the meaning of "computable" in this context. Multiple competing views are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the universe's computability.
Limitations include the reliance on informal sources like Reddit for definitions and the ambiguity surrounding the term "computable" as it applies to physics and the universe. There are also unresolved questions about the implications of Closed Timelike Curves in this context.
sophiecentaur said:You would need to quote your source of this statement, I'm afraid. PF doesn't encourage discussions based on casual chat. You would have to ask that "someone" what they meant.
There really isn't enough there to start a proper conversation. The 'simulation' story always sounds to me like another conspiracy theory and that ain't PF material.TheQuestionGuy14 said:It was on r/AskPhysics on reddit, they were talking about how Closed Timelike Curves aren't computable unlike the rest of physics and the universe, and I asked what exactly he meant and another person replied saying that the universe acts like a simulation.
This is shaping up to be a good argument for not getting your physics from Reddit...TheQuestionGuy14 said:It was on r/AskPhysics on reddit, they were talking about how Closed Timelike Curves aren't computable unlike the rest of physics and the universe, and I asked what exactly he meant and another person replied saying that the universe acts like a simulation.