Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8674848" data-attributes="member: 22779">I've provided pretty clear evidence about why you can't call these mechanics a simulation.&nbsp; So, no, that's not true.So what?&nbsp; I don't need to know how gravity works in order to simulate the effects of gravity.&nbsp; Your own example SHOWS that you can simulate the effects of gravity and that simulation is not a black box at all.&nbsp; We can use the simulation quite effectively to demonstrate how gravity works.&nbsp; If I wanted to, for example, demonstrate what happens when a satellite is deorbited around a planet, this would work perfectly well.&nbsp; &quot;How it works&quot; is something you're adding in, not a criteria I've ever even suggested.&nbsp; What I have suggested is that for mechanics to actually be simulationist, they actually have to simulate something.&nbsp; They can't be black boxes.&nbsp; A black box that only spits out results isn't a simulation.But, these aspects DON'T MIMIC REALITY.&nbsp; If it's a black box, and you seem to be agreeing that it is, then it's not mimicking reality.&nbsp; You can keep harping on this idea of &quot;academic definition&quot; all you like, but, it's not really helping your argument.&nbsp; I'm using the basic definition of simulation.&nbsp; The character standing at the bottom of the hill ----&gt;cloud of completely unknowable probabilities----&gt;character is at the top of the hill is NOT a simulation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8674848, member: 22779"] I've provided pretty clear evidence about why you can't call these mechanics a simulation. So, no, that's not true. So what? I don't need to know how gravity works in order to simulate the effects of gravity. Your own example SHOWS that you can simulate the effects of gravity and that simulation is not a black box at all. We can use the simulation quite effectively to demonstrate how gravity works. If I wanted to, for example, demonstrate what happens when a satellite is deorbited around a planet, this would work perfectly well. "How it works" is something you're adding in, not a criteria I've ever even suggested. What I have suggested is that for mechanics to actually be simulationist, they actually have to simulate something. They can't be black boxes. A black box that only spits out results isn't a simulation. But, these aspects DON'T MIMIC REALITY. If it's a black box, and you seem to be agreeing that it is, then it's not mimicking reality. You can keep harping on this idea of "academic definition" all you like, but, it's not really helping your argument. I'm using the basic definition of simulation. The character standing at the bottom of the hill ---->cloud of completely unknowable probabilities---->character is at the top of the hill is NOT a simulation. [/QUOTE]

Verification