# Simulated life



## Tezcatlipoca (Jun 6, 2014)

I have begun playing a game called Species that is designed to simulate evolution (more info: Welcome to Species: Artificial Life, Real Evolution | Species: Artificial Life, Real Evolution ) but it got me thinking about Life simulation in general and questions related to it. First of all, the earliest simulation I know of is Conway's Game of Life: Conway's Game of Life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia










Another really interesting one is Karl Sim's evolved virtual creatures:






So how long do you think it will be until we create artificial life on a computer with the complexity of say a small terrestrial bioshpere? I think in a way a computer virus could be a considered a form of life, but it has no consciousness and misses a lot of the features that we associate with higher cognitive functions and also does not interact to create collective interaction like colonies of microorganisms. When do you think we will achieve this? Do you know of any other interesting life simulations? 

The most advanced version I know of is called Grandroids which was created by Steve Grand who designed Creatures in 1996. You can read more about Grandroids at it's kickstarter page: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1508284443/grandroids-real-artificial-life-on-your-pc


----------



## Sherlock4869 (Sep 9, 2014)

Tezcatlipoca said:


> I have begun playing a game called Species that is designed to simulate evolution (more info: Welcome to Species: Artificial Life, Real Evolution | Species: Artificial Life, Real Evolution ) but it got me thinking about Life simulation in general and questions related to it. First of all, the earliest simulation I know of is Conway's Game of Life: Conway's Game of Life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow... I haven't actually come across the concepts of simulated life in a long time.. Thank you for that. However, I believe it is a matter of understanding that we lack in creating a complex intelligent program that has self corrective features. We are succesful with simple self corrective tasks and worms (not viruses) would be a closer example for that. If you find any more information on this topic, please do share here. It is an area of interest for me.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@_Tezcatlipoca_

1. I've heard of Conway's game of life, and it is quite impressive how with a few basic rules life-like behavior can form out of it

2. Regarding Species: I'm not sure how much they can evolve...

3. I remember seeing Karl Sim's evolved virtual creatures awhile back -- I guess 20 years back. I remember it being quite fascinating at the time: I'm curious as to whether these "creatures" have any intelligence, or the computer program itself does.

4. I don't know what the first Grandroids program in 1996 looked like and what it's specs were: However the version I'm looking at on the screen seems morally dubious

If you can create an entity that has thoughts, the "I think therefore I am" comes into effect; I'm not sure how the program structured: Does each entity have a file?


----------



## CaptSwan (Mar 31, 2013)

But, this simulated life, given that it develops in an artificial mean; be bound by laws of some kind? Or, are programs now so sophisticated that logical laws aren't required?


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@CaptSwan

I don't understand


----------



## CaptSwan (Mar 31, 2013)

RobynC said:


> @_CaptSwan_
> 
> I don't understand


I mean, wouldn't this type of simulations be bound by some sort of inner regulation? Like, Asimov's "3 Laws of Robotics"; wouldn't the programming of that system require some sort of logical regulations that keep things in check?


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@CaptSwan

In what way? With robotics it was to not cause harm -- with the simulation what would the criteria be?


----------



## CaptSwan (Mar 31, 2013)

RobynC said:


> @_CaptSwan_
> 
> In what way? With robotics it was to not cause harm -- with the simulation what would the criteria be?


I mean... What would be done with humans in the case of entering that simulation? Would there be any kinds of restrictions like coma, death or things like that? Or, it'd be like on The Matrix?


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@CaptSwan

I wasn't thinking about people being put into the simulation: I was thinking more about the ramifications of creating sentient life with a desire for freedom that has no prospect of freedom.

I don't know if we're at the stage where a matrix type scenario can be possible, but who knows -- maybe it happened (and for all members who think I've gone round the bend -- I'm being silly)


----------



## Tezcatlipoca (Jun 6, 2014)

I think you guys are misunderstanding. These are replicating mathematical patterns and they might fit a definition of "life" using a measure like this:

https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/information-theory-and-the-origin-of-life-4cf6b93d156c

Ie difference of information between organism and the system's equilibrium, but they do not have thoughts, feelings, or identity by any means. If you are truly curious about this subject I recommend Christof Koch's video "hacking the soul"

Hacking the Soul | EmTech 2014 | MIT Technology Review


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@Tezcatlipoca

As i understand it consciousness is a function of the ability to gather sensory information, memory, and feedback loops between all of these and probably sensory integration. It doesn't matter if a computer does it or a human brain.


----------



## Tezcatlipoca (Jun 6, 2014)

Yes, however these computers are not doing it yet. No one has. 

fMRI Data Reveals the Number of Parallel Processes Running in the Brain | MIT Technology Review


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@Tezcatlipoca

That's a logical fallacy: You're assuming because it hasn't been done, it cannot be


----------



## Tezcatlipoca (Jun 6, 2014)

I did not assume that, you assumed that I asssumed that. I am telling you, we have not created artificial consciousness yet not that it is impossible. These word descriptions that you are using are insufficient to explain how these processes work


----------



## Bahburah (Jul 25, 2013)

The thing is. Robots are just numbers.

The 3-D images are just reflections of these numbers, so it's not really travelling around in a 3-D environment.

Yet more simulating it with mathematical equations.

It's not thinking "I can block them from getting the cube" but more narrowing down all the possible ways of doing it with the numbers it's given. So really they are limited to what the study has given them and what they understand in there programming. They still act quite creative though.

The thing robots would need is to have is the ability to recognize abstract things that are totally new to them and that don't necessarily involve math or logic.

This looks like a good start.

There really no different that humans in some ways.

This is a really cool video.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@_Bahburah_



> The 3-D images are just reflections of these numbers, so it's not really travelling around in a 3-D environment.


However it is very close, and depending on how close it is -- it reaches a level where it becomes "good enough" for accuracy purposes in theory.



> It's not thinking "I can block them from getting the cube" but more narrowing down all the possible ways of doing it with the numbers it's given. So really they are limited to what the study has given them and what they understand in there programming. They still act quite creative though.
> 
> The thing robots would need is to have is the ability to recognize abstract things that are totally new to them and that don't necessarily involve math or logic.


Our brains don't use computer code per se, but our brains are effectively meat computers



> There really no different that humans in some ways.


Correct, and surprisingly few people seem to realize this: There's actually a project in Switzerland aimed at effectively duplicating a human brain. I think it's horribly unethical as it would be creating a sentient being for intellectual curiosity.

Furthermore, the purpose of the experiment would be to determine how the brain works, and how mental illnesses, neurological disorders and the like affect us. When you consider how much suffering in the world occurs on it's own, we'd be creating it from scratch.


----------



## Bahburah (Jul 25, 2013)

RobynC said:


> Correct, and surprisingly few people seem to realize this: There's actually a project in Switzerland aimed at effectively duplicating a human brain. I think it's horribly unethical as it would be creating a sentient being for intellectual curiosity.
> 
> Furthermore, the purpose of the experiment would be to determine how the brain works, and how mental illnesses, neurological disorders and the like affect us. When you consider how much suffering in the world occurs on it's own, we'd be creating it from scratch.


Thats really interesting to think about.
Since it would be creating life right? Would it even work? Would it have a personality?
Would it have a soul?


----------



## Quercetin (Dec 5, 2012)

Tezcatlipoca said:


> If you are truly curious about this subject I recommend Christof Koch's video "hacking the soul"


What a fascinating field to be involved in! Your links are fulfilling my need for mental stimulation, so thanks! If you have any more on the field or a book to recommend let me know.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

Bahburah said:


> Thats really interesting to think about.


It is, isn't it?



> Since it would be creating life right?


Yes it would



> Would it even work? Would it have a personality?
> Would it have a soul?


A soul isn't really something that actually exists. What we'd attribute to a soul is basically the properties of a properly functioning sentient intelligent being -- functions of the brain.


----------



## Bahburah (Jul 25, 2013)

RobynC said:


> A soul isn't really something that actually exists. What we'd attribute to a soul is basically the properties of a properly functioning sentient intelligent being -- functions of the brain.


It should have a personality at least, since that would effect things like dopamine in the brain.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@Bahburah

Dopamine is a neurotransmitter -- that is a substance that facilitates the transmission of signals across the synapses. That's particular to our brain but not a computer. Regardless, the functions of emotion could be duplicated without chemicals.

We're all machines, simply machines of a different type: A machine would be electromechanical, and we're electrochemical


----------



## Quercetin (Dec 5, 2012)

RobynC said:


> @Bahburah
> 
> We're all machines, simply machines of a different type: A machine would be electromechanical, and we're electrochemical


I don't know how technical you want to get, but our brains are just as dependent on mechanical forces to operate as robots, our brains just happen to be far more efficient. Operating on an average of 20 watts, as opposed to what would be needed to run a computer as powerful as our brains, 10 megawatts. There are noteworthy experiments that explore the mechanical forces within the brain of mammals (mechanobiology). 

We don't understand the brain is my point, it's fascinatingly more intricate then anyone imagined.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@Quercetin

I was trying to point out how we're all machines, merely machines of a different type. The point of the matter is a sentient android with human intelligence, or a human is theoretically the same.


----------



## Pifanjr (Aug 19, 2014)

That video was great! And I remember playing the Creatures game when I was little, although I didn't really understand what I was supposed to do. 

Another game with some great learning AI is Black & White from Lionhead studios. See also this paper written about it.

An interesting novel about uploading your entire brain to a computer is Robert J. Sawyer's 'The Terminal Experiment'.


----------

