2 mice = 42 ;D
Because the numbers are impossible large and the only solution to that problem is a massively more complex universe than our own. Occam’s razor.
May be there is no “our universe”, other guys and other stuff ^))) … only your AI and lazy computation of all you see or think about at that time. This is much more simple than big “our universe”. Occam’s razor.
Exactly. You’re description is drastically more complex therefore is drastically less likely to be correct.
I’m being a “bump on a log” here because science fiction (light on science & very heavy on fiction) is fine for amusement. However as computer scientist it’s quite important to grasp the scale of thing before attempting a find a solution.
Just an observation from my AI course.
Simulation of a natural system is a model that captures the functional connections between inputs and outputs of the system.
Replication of a natural system is a model that captures the functional connections between inputs and outputs of the system and is based on processes that are the same as, or similar to, those of the real-world system.
Emulation of a natural system is a model that captures the functional connections between inputs and outputs of the system, base on processes that are the same as, or similar to, those of the natural system, and in the same materials as the natural system.
Simulacrum is an imitation… something having merely the form or appearance of a certain thing, without possessing its substance or proper qualities.
Simulation has a purpose to model a system on a certain level of detail. So depending on what level of detail you want to get into you could simulate the universe.
Estimated number of galaxies in the observable universe: ~227.
Ok for this LOD we’re talking a very lossy compression ratio of… :point:
1 … 2… skip a few… 99 100 ;D
So you think generate data for AI is more complex than universe? Did i missed something? You even no need to generate random events. AI can think he is decide by himself, but “we all know” this is only simulation. 
You said it right: “Estimated” and “observable universe”, even the observable part of our universe is so immense we can’t possibly simulate it. Forget trying to simulate things we don’t even know they exist.
@hwinwuzhere: This is not a thread about ‘lets do it!’ but about ‘is it even theoretically possible?’. The core problem is not that the universe is really big.
Actually the scale ‘is’ the problem.
Well if you look at it from a theoretical point of view you could say that if we had an infinite amount of resources (or at least enough resources) and we assume that the universe would be finite AND we don’t have to simulate our simulation within our simulation (and so on and so on), then it would be possible to simulate our universe.
So in other words: it is (in my opinion) theoretically possible if we assume things that we cannot prove or that are not real.
No but people try anyways:
Well, these guys tried:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap140512.html
Not the entire universe, but a big chunk of it, to a certain degree of precision.
Simulations of this nature are “statistical modeling”.
Yay… statistical modeling is my day job. I simulate the universe. Oh wait i only simulate evolution in finite populations. 
On a completely different topic: hopscotch – played with? if so any feel for vs. cuckoo?
Given the quantum nature of the universe, aren’t all simulations statistical modeling?
I think the chief problem you guys are having with this thread is that you are using terms without defining them. For example, ‘universe’ - do you mean everything that there is, or something else? This is important. If you mean the former, then there is no ‘getting out of the universe’ to simulate ‘this’ universe. The whole idea of a meta universe doesn’t work on that basis. If you mean something else: then what? A many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics? If so, that’s infinitely branching so in principle impossible to simulate every branch though perhaps possible to simulate one path.
kaffiene: Everyone’s talking about different things and virtually all variants fall into the impossible due to scale.
There’s no reason to suppose the nature of the universe is “quantum”…QM is just a model. It’s seems unlikely that an exact model of the universe will be one which relies on Real numbers.