Computational capacity of the universe · HackerPapers discussions

Computational capacity of the universe — HN submission

Sat, 22 Feb 2025 07:57:36 GMT

Computational Capacity of the Universe

1 point; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — mentioned by ben_w

Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:35:51 GMT

[Arbitrary number] is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road, but that's just peanuts to [arbitrary number]. Assuming the binary digits of π are randomly distributed[0], any given n-bit binary sequence is going to come up with a probability of 1-in-2^n at any given point in the whole thing. A 1 kB file of any kind, app or data, is already one in 1-in-2^(8*(2^10))). The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy says that if you hold a lungful of air you can survive in the total vacuum of space for about thirty…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — mentioned by reaperman

Tue, 17 Oct 2023 15:27:59 GMT

BB(6) might be too large even to store (let alone compute) using all the mass and energy of the universe. I think the computable limit if you converted all the mass in the observable universe to energy (E = mc^2) would be BB(5), assuming adherence to the Laundauer Limit[0]. After calculating this I found a quote in wikipedia[1]: "There is not enough computational capacity in the known part of the universe to have performed even S(6) operations directly." That cited this paper[2], which is probably better than my model at utilizing the total available physics of the universe for calculation…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — mentioned by stillbourne

Wed, 27 Jun 2018 20:30:47 GMT

https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0110141.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20171111160807/http://fab.cba.mi... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000GCFBP6/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?... Also read the references.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — mentioned by mc808

Sat, 19 Mar 2016 11:11:30 GMT

It's been estimated that if the universe were a computer, it could have performed no more than 10^120 operations on 10^90 bits of data so far (based on the size, age, and total energy of the known universe). http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0110141 I think the number of physically relevant bits of pi would be represented in there somewhere. But there's a long road ahead. If the universe keeps "computing" forever, the precision of numbers involved could also keep growing.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — HN submission

Fri, 13 Feb 2015 17:10:02 GMT

Computational capacity of the universe (2001)

10 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — HN submission

Fri, 07 Nov 2014 05:57:23 GMT

Computational capacity of the universe

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — HN submission

Tue, 13 Jul 2010 01:06:00 GMT

Computational capacity of the universe

2 points; 1 discussion reply on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — mentioned by neilc

Fri, 26 Mar 2010 22:30:37 GMT

Except that the computational capacity of the universe is finite (see http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0110141).

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — HN submission

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 19:40:03 GMT

Computational capacity of the universe

10 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Computational capacity of the universe — mentioned by nostrademons

Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:02:51 GMT

Non-PDF homepage = http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0110141, where you have a choice between PostScript/PDF/DVI/TeX source.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.