Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8676560" data-attributes="member: 82106">No, a movie of a car is not a car simulation. It ILLUSTRATES the car, so it is a DEPICTION of the car, but there is no substance here. No properties of the car are mapped to any properties of a simulation such that there is a single mathematical/logical MODEL which describes the behavior of both of them. Without that, you simply have a depiction. A SIMULATION must be an ANALOGY. It has to contain some essential features which stand in for essential features of the simulated thing. Without that, its something else.I think the 'granularity argument' does have some essence of truth in it. That is to say, if a simulation only corresponds with the thing it simulates at a very few points, then it is likely that the ways in which we want it to be an accurate analogy will fail. Still, as you point out, its circumstantial.</blockquote>