Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Living Earth Simulator Aims To Simulate Everything

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the why-didn't-the-mice-think-of-that? dept.

Earth 241

H3xx writes "An international group of scientists is aiming to create a simulator — nicknamed The Living Earth Simulator — that will collect data from billions of sources and use it to replicate everything happening on Earth, from global weather patterns and the spread of diseases to international financial transactions or congestion on highways. The project aims to advance the scientific understanding of what is taking place on the planet, encapsulating the human actions that shape societies and the environmental forces that define the physical world. Perhaps this is Asimov's concept of Psychohistory come to fruition."

cancel ×

241 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Break out your towel (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696634)

Will the lab mice still study us?

Re:Break out your towel (0)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697016)

AC FAIL!

The LAB mice were NOT studying *anything*.

Planet Earth was a calculator, Dent Arthur Dent was the final output, his Brain therefore contained The Result (cue trumpet fanfare).

more (1)

chibiace (898665) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696644)

not enough data!!

Let me guess.... (0, Offtopic)

balaband (1286038) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696648)

It is controlled by a bunch of mice?

Re:Let me guess.... (1, Offtopic)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696816)

If you see the Dolphins leaving Earth, try to keep up.

Re:Let me guess.... (0)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697024)

Nobody saw the dolphins leave.

Just like: Nobody Expects The Spanish Inquisition!

Though some of us have this delightful memorial fishbowl.

Re:Let me guess.... (1)

Carnivorous Vulgaris (1964964) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696876)

When will this recession end, and we can get back to building custom-made luxury planets.

Re:Let me guess.... (1, Insightful)

ultranova (717540) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697126)

When will this recession end, and we can get back to building custom-made luxury planets.

Recession is too profitable to be ever allowed to end. You can keep on asking and receiving public financial support, then turn around and loan the public's money back to them at interest, setting them up for a lifetime of debt slavery.

Capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich. Isn't global economy fun ?-)

Wasn't this in a movie? (1)

warp_kez (711090) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696660)

IIRC wasn't the name of the computer WOPR?

Re:Wasn't this in a movie? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696678)

No, but I think it might have been made by Encom

Re:Wasn't this in a movie? (1)

PatPending (953482) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696782)

IIRC wasn't the name of the computer WOPR?

How about The General [wikipedia.org] ? Just ask it, "Why?"

Will they simulate themself (0)

S3D (745318) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696674)

simulating everything?

Re:Will they simulate themself (2)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696780)

simulating everything?

Yes. You only think you posted that. You are really part of the simulation.

Re:Will they simulate themself (0)

JamesP (688957) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696814)

Yes, they will even simulate the simulator itself, which will be running a simulation of everything, etc and so on...

Humm... maybe this is why the Matrix was simulating the past

Re:Will they simulate themself (1)

stms (1132653) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696848)

Yes the machine will simulate itself and the simulated machine will simulate the earth again with another machine on it which will simulate earth again this will go on infinitely. Shame the scientist missed this infinite loop it seemed like such a promising project.

Re:Will they simulate themself (1)

c0lo (1497653) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697312)

simulating everything?

Will simulate even the discovery of "the theory of everything"... have to tell you, that would be about time... I'm already sick of the super-string theories.

Everything? (2, Interesting)

ferongr (1929434) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696676)

Somehow I doubt that all the computing machines in the word combined have the necessary processing power to computationally simulate *everything* that happens on the planet, even when if we try to limit the variables. So I'll just go ahead and assume the science team will compromise on a flawed model which produces equally flawed results.

Re:Everything? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696788)

Somehow I doubt that all the computing machines in the word combined have the necessary processing power to computationally simulate *everything* that happens on the planet, even when if we try to limit the variables. So I'll just go ahead and assume the science team will compromise on a flawed model which produces equally flawed results.

The interesting bit comes when the simulation reaches the point that the computer simulation started. The computers then have to simulate themselves running the simulation.

Re:Everything? (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696834)

The interesting bit comes when the simulation reaches the point that the computer simulation started. The computers then have to simulate themselves running the simulation.

And this isn't just an academic point. If their predictions are of any value, they will be incorporated into major decisions made, and thus will be critical for the simulator to predict.

Re:Everything? (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696944)

But if the system converges to a fixpoint, the infinite recursion can be avoided, right?

Not that it seems likely to actually convege to a fixpoint. I'm just thinking aloud.

Re:Everything? (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697040)

Cue Heat-Death of the planet in

Five
Four
Three
Two
.

Re:Everything? (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697164)

And this isn't just an academic point. If their predictions are of any value, they will be incorporated into major decisions made, and thus will be critical for the simulator to predict.

Fortunately, the solution is (relatively) simple: when using simulations in decision making, they run what-if -scenarios. The Earth Simulator can simply save the current state in a checkpoint, then run these what-if -scenarios.

The real problem is predicting the likely parameters used in these simulations. That, and all other parts of the simulator modeling human behaviour, pretty much require either the simulator to be able to simulate human mind(s), or to be interactive.

Re:Everything? (1)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697488)

Don't worry; self-simulation doesn't really cause blindness.

Re:Everything? (1)

kaiidth (104315) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696800)

It's a safe assumption.

Actually, it's probably a safe assumption that this is just a way to extract $1.3 billion [popsci.com] of funding out of the EU in order to pay for a bunch of supercomputers and interdisciplinary research. It's apparently part of something called FuturICT [tgdaily.com] , a submission to the EU's Flagships initiative, which is to say that it is meant to be ambitious - here a codeword for 'infinitely improbable'. FET Flagships are long term initiatives on a budget of around 100 M€ Euros per year.

You can get a copy of the proposal from here [futurict.ethz.ch] . It's a bunch of hand-wavy maybes. Most of the proposal is taken up with the interesting observation that knowing stuff about stuff is a prerequisite to revolutionising education, understanding and fixing the world economy, identifying financial crises before they happen, identifying innovations before they catch on, solving transport problems, creating a whole new scientific paradigm ('science 2.0'), fixing energy consumption and making us all safer. However, they have letters of support from George Soros and various other luminaries [innovations-report.com] , so presumably the EU will assume (or already assumed) that they know what they are talking about.

A simplified version of everything... (2)

captainpanic (1173915) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697140)

Somehow I doubt that all the computing machines in the word combined have the necessary processing power to computationally simulate *everything* that happens on the planet, even when if we try to limit the variables. So I'll just go ahead and assume the science team will compromise on a flawed model which produces equally flawed results.

Every model is flawed according to that definition.

They'll try to simplify the earth, and model it... and hopefully it can predict future events with a certain degree of certainty.

I agree that the word "everything" is too strong... but it's just sad and silly that the entire Slashdot forum attacks these guys because they said this.

There is some value in this exercise. Just like you can model an ant colony, you can probably model the world. We're all awfully predictable anyway.

Re:A simplified version of everything... (1)

Demonoid-Penguin (1669014) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697398)

Somehow I doubt that all the computing machines in the word combined have the necessary processing power to computationally simulate *everything* that happens on the planet, even when if we try to limit the variables. So I'll just go ahead and assume the science team will compromise on a flawed model which produces equally flawed results.

Every model is flawed according to that definition.

They'll try to simplify the earth, and model it... and hopefully it can predict future events with a certain degree of certainty.

I agree that the word "everything" is too strong... but it's just sad and silly that the entire Slashdot forum attacks these guys because they said this.

There is some value in this exercise. Just like you can model an ant colony, you can probably model the world. We're all awfully predictable anyway.

If nothing else - the failures will be useful. It's likely there'll be other demands for large-scale modeling in the future.

some kind of constant (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696680)

I'm guessing they end up simply computing Pi.

Re:some kind of constant (1)

magic_fyodor (1453365) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696700)

Or 42.

Re:some kind of constant (1)

laejoh (648921) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696850)

Jokes in base (pi-2)/4 are funny!

Re:some kind of constant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696704)

--- /dev/null Wed Dec 29 11:26:08 2010
+++ /tmp/pi.c Wed Dec 29 11:25:50 2010
@@ -1,0 +1,2 @@
+int main(int argc, char** argv)
+ return 3;

Apply patch, await bug reports.

Re:some kind of constant (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696896)

I found the sub for simulating politicians:
If (Public == Distracted)
  Gosub StealMoney()
Else
  Gosub DistractPublic()

Optimistic... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696708)

The term 'yeah, right' comes to mind.

Starting from a few semi-structured sources of data, they expect to come up with a simulation of how everything affects everything else? Starting from a belief that Google Maps, data.gov.uk and Wikipedia are 'real-time data sources' they will:

1. Collect all sorts of data real-time, including sensitive personal data like medical healthcare records
2. 'create a framework to turn that morass of data in to models that accurately replicate what is taken place on Earth today'
3. ???
4. Profit

Either they have excessively high expectations of the Semantic Web ('While the LES will need to be able to assimilate vast oceans of data it will simultaneously have to understand what that data means. Semantic web technology will encode a description of data alongside the data itself, enabling computers to understand the data in context.') or the designers of this thing have been egregiously misquoted by the news media.

The Semantic Web (to the extent that anybody has made it work at all) does not generalise very well - 'understanding' the data, no matter how it is encoded, requires a lot of background knowledge about the domain. Within specific usage domains that is often achievable. Across domains it is very problematic.

Re:Optimistic... (1)

Demonoid-Penguin (1669014) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697420)

The Semantic Web (to the extent that anybody has made it work at all) does not generalise very well

If the Semantic Web is even partially written by the sort of people who post comments on youtube - we are royally fucked.

Not Asimov, but rather Daniel Francis Galouye (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696710)

In the Science Fiction novel Simulacron-3, published in 1964, Daniel Francis Galyoue describes a huge analog electronic computer designed to simulate the world for modelling social, psychological, commercial, and political processes.

The BBC article mentions gathering googlean amounts of data and vast computing resources, but not really what to do with them.

Re:Not Asimov, but rather Daniel Francis Galouye (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697048)

"googlean" ??

Is that even a WORD?

(Hint: it is NOW)

Re:Not Asimov, but rather Daniel Francis Galouye (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34697066)

Good reference. That's also how our brains create consciousness and what we call "selves" (which are actually self-models) if Metzinger [scholarpedia.org] is right. This could be a primitive start toward Earth itself becoming a conscious entity.

Name it Second Life (2)

lul_wat (1623489) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696714)

or would it be Third Life? Maybe it'll name itself.

Re:Name it Second Life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696774)

Civilization Live!

Re:Name it Second Life (2)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697058)

Q: Is There A God?

A: There is NOW!

Re:Name it Second Life (1)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697484)

Dwight: It's called 'Second Life', it's a game without losers.

Jim: Oh, there's losers.

Is it just me or... (1)

Atmanman (1651259) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696716)

Is it not getting increasingly obvious that we ourselves are living in a simulation and that it is actually the year 1 million and a half? That blatant clue's have been cast in the sky; the most obvious being the same apparent magnitude of our primary satalite and that which we satalite? That once in the know the keyboard is plainly all around us merely plastered with posters of sensible looking people saying 'Do not press the buttons!' and wild eye'd colourful strange men who smile, 'Hack away!'? Madness surely; but keep turning reality inside out Mankind and I assure you this is will become the dominant suspicion that will unsettle us to the end of time. Like the bearded dragon shall we tap our nose against the glass until perhaps our owner takes us out of our tank to play in the garden before returning us once we realise the eternal truth that it is infact... cold outside.

Re:Is it just me or... (1)

AndGodSed (968378) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696744)

wait.

What?

Re:Is it just me or... (1)

PotatoFiend (1330299) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696820)

Someone get the thorazine.

Heed me (1)

Atmanman (1651259) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696864)

When we do build the matrix thorazine could be used as currency

Re:Is it just me or... (1)

Bucc5062 (856482) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697184)

Now this is art...very tasty. May I have some more pudding sir?

 

Re:Is it just me or... (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697356)

Philip K. Dick sent a message through a spirit medium. He wants his novel plots back.

Too late (2)

beef623 (998368) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696728)

They could save themselves a lot of work and just get Dwarf Fortress...

what about good enough socio-economic model? (1)

azgard (461476) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696736)

I am not sure if having everything in a single model is a good approach. Certainly seems too computationally expensive.

I would much prefer if people start looking into socio-economic modeling. We now have pretty good climatic models, and this started in the 50s, when there computers had almost no power. Now we have such power, and we could feasibly simulate social (i and economic behavior of whole country on a home PC.

We could start like this: Each person in simulation would have possible actions (these would be predefined), and decide on which action to use based on habit, previous experience and copying from friends of its social network. Actions could range from economic (produce something of value) through social (meet someone) to political (enter contract with someone).

Re:what about good enough socio-economic model? (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696832)

It's just another model at another scale.

Sometimes you need alrge scale models, and sometimes you need small scale models.

This would be nothing more than a very large scale model, just not in a spatial sense, as the sub-models in use there are already on a globale scale.

Yes, it's computationally expensive, but if you have the hardware to throw at it - just do it.

Re:what about good enough socio-economic model? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34697412)

Yes, it's computationally expensive, but if you have the hardware to throw at it - just do it.

Half of the point is that they don't have the hardware to throw at it.

The European Commission has a lot of funded research [europa.eu] going on and the red line is pretty much "If you aim for the stars you may reach the sky" oslt.
All of those projects have a "visionary" goal that is very close to things you read in sience fiction and pretty much no-one involved beleives that you will reach that goal.
The idea is that when you reach for that vision you will create new technology and find new methods that will benefit humanity in other ways.
Take for example a look at CERN. While the LHC is created to look for the Higgs boson the building of it required a lot of research in data management and superconductors.

Even if they never get as far as getting the simulation running they will probably improve a lot on current models on the way.

Job security? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696740)

Not only will this project not end well, it won't ever end, period. Prerequisite: read the prologue to Jurassic Park by Michael Crichton [scribd.com] . In summary: We've been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we're gone tomorrow, the earth will not miss us.

Fools. (1)

santax (1541065) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696742)

Just buy a copy of sims 3 and be done with it.

I hope... (2, Funny)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696750)

I hope they've put some deep thought into this....

Re:I hope... (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696794)

The psychiatrists are not going to be happy.

Re:I hope... (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697054)

Since when have psychiatrists ever been happy?

Re: Psychiatrists Happy (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697370)

Citation:

Feeling Good - David D. Burns, M.D.

Re:I hope... (1)

HyperDrive (985043) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697224)

Not really, we already know what the answer would be...

Simulation or recording? (1)

LordNacho (1909280) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696766)

Suppose you start the simulator, and it veers off. You'll want some kind of corrector mechanism, no? So you get some feedback from the real world. The trouble is, if you don't have a plausible model of how "eveything" works, you end up having to correct an awful lot.

Also, isn't the only way to calculate something so complex as "everything on Earth" to uhm, have an Earth to run? And isn't the point of modelling to look at a small part of the whole, to abstract the bits you're interested in? I wonder if this project is going to be tell us anything other than "there's a lot of complexity of there, dude".

Re:Simulation or recording? (4, Interesting)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696870)

And isn't the point of modelling to look at a small part of the whole, to abstract the bits you're interested in?

No. The point of a model is to create a simplified version of something that is to compilcated to understand.

Modelling and concentrating on only a small part is a valid approach to that, but using simplifications (even the ones known as inaccurrate) is another one. (i.e. Atoms as pool balls, earth as an exact sphere, even internet as tubes.) You only need to know which simplifications you made, so you know on which scale your results out of that model are valid.

Re:Simulation or recording? (2)

LordNacho (1909280) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697012)

I suppose I worded it badly, but in essence, what is the meaning of "a simplified version" of "everything"? There isn't a specific aspect of "everything" that seems natural to simplify, given the scope of the project. "Atoms as pool balls" makes sense for certain contexts. There doesn't seem to be a context for this simulator.

Re:Simulation or recording? (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697302)

I may have interpreted to much into the summary, but i was expecting the context of this "model" to be to find out about the relations between other, seemingly unrelated (sub)systems.

Name it Matrix (2)

Parker Lewis (999165) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696778)

Name it Matrix.

simulate what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696786)

maybe they can simulate the next major discoveries we will make too?

Social engineers at work (0)

ZDRuX (1010435) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696796)

The only reason for simulating earth and all of its inhabitants and interactions, is to see what would happen if factor X + Y and introduced into the mix and factor Z removed. Or any combination of those.

I bet they will have hundreds of top sociologists and anthropologists on hand to lend their "expertise" to figure what they can or cannot get away with by manipulating the outcomes of this simulation until they get what they want.

What happens when all money is gone?
What happens when all food is removed?
What happens when there is world war 3?
What happens when people revold?
...now what can we do so we're immune to all of this and any blowback?

Sure, they'll release some research paper on how genocides spread, or how animals migrate from one place to another, etc... but having a "toy" like this would prove to be a loss if you really didn't use it to its full use.

If you don't agree with what I say, just keep in mind this is already happening. You don't think governments and people in power have social engineers that crunch numbers and process data to determine all the possible outcomes of something like going to war in Iraq? You think they didn't have 500-page reports on the possible riots that would take place all around the world, the money lost, gained, lives saved, lost, etc.. etc..

Now imagine all those resources pooled into this one tool, do you REALLY think it's going to be used to determine when the next eclipse is going to be or the gas price of hot dogs in 5 years? I think not.

Think of it as a global version of The Sims (1)

Sparx139 (1460489) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696854)

I did horrible horrible things to the people in that game - swimming pools with no ladders to get out of, setting off fireworks inside so that they burned to death, shutting them in a 1x1 square of walls so that they had so sleep in their own urine as they starved to death... I can't imagine that this would be any different. If I had a global simulator, after I'd done any real work I'd start seeing how many different ways I could cause the world to burn.

Does this make me a bad person? =P

Re:Think of it as a global version of The Sims (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34697046)

No, not really, it does indicate severe psychopathic tendencies though. You'll become a good manager.

The last guy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696806)

who tried that was killed by his friend's user...

might be tough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696810)

because they will have to simulate their own system that is simulating Earth, on which there's a system simulating Earth...

Yesterday (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696852)

Wake me when they can accurately predict yesterday's situation with just the data from up to 3 days ago for more than 1 month in a row.

Re:Yesterday (1)

Demonoid-Penguin (1669014) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697456)

Wake me when they can accurately predict yesterday's situation with just the data from up to 3 days ago for more than 1 month in a row.

It's been done already. I can't remember the economists name - but he correctly predicted the last market crash.

I checked him out at the time - turns out he correctly predicted thirteen of the last three economic downturns.

ho8o (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696868)

is it written in BASIC? (1)

cstacy (534252) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696882)

Yes but is the simulator written in BASIC?

Missing tags (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696892)

matrix simulacron-3 weltamdraht thirteenthfloor

Here's a thought (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696916)

Run the simulation in reverse and we should be able to take a look at the past, no?

Re:Here's a thought (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696938)

Put a marble somewhere on the inside wall of a bowl, let it loose and wait until it has stopped moving. Now simulate this process in reverse to tell me where on the wall you set the marble loose.

Why? (1)

jobst (955157) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696922)

Things that came to mind:

1. It will show us what a lot of us already know, we're fucking up the place.

2. It would be more sufficient to actually do sth. about stopping stuffing up the place instead of thinking about stopping the stuffing up and collecting data about what we are actually stuffing up so we can stop stuffing up the place.

3. make a cup of tea and have a minced pie, after all its xmas.

Chaos (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696924)

Weather is a chaotic system, and weather affects living things in very significant ways. I'm sure there are plenty of other chaotic non-linearities in what they're trying to simulate as well.

Doesn't such instability doom any world simulator to crappy fidelity?

Re:Chaos (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34697000)

While it's not going to be accurate enough to predict our future, presumably you could simulate a disease breakout in Southern Australia a million times and see if the effects commonly converge to a common outcome.
The problem would be collection enough objective data on mob mentality to find patterns in it to program in I would think.

Psycho-Whut? (0)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696970)

Psycho Killer
Qu'est-ce que c'est
fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
Run Run Run Run Run Run Run Run Away
Oh Oh Oh
Ay Ay Ay Ay Ay Wooooo

Matrix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34696976)

why is this not tagged matrix?

En Attendant Laplace! (2, Interesting)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34696990)

Clearly this is an attempt to invoke Laplace's Demon [wikipedia.org] .

Apologies to both Arthur and Douglass (2)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697002)

Any sufficiently accurate simulation is indistinguishable from reality. Corollary: Any simulation distinguishable from reality is insufficiently accurate. Phil P

Re:Apologies to both Arthur and Douglass (1)

Smidge207 (1278042) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697330)

So...you're saying that if I were to plug my senses into this...matrix...I could live my entire life there and not know it was just a simulation?

Could there be a movie in this somewhere you think?

Mice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34697144)

Isn't the earth a simulation created by mice anyway.
Or did I missunderstand Douglas Adams.

The important question is (0)

FauxPasIII (75900) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697154)

Will the simulation completely model the effects of the Living Earth computer itself on the Earth? That is to say, will it contain a complete Living Earth Simulator simulator ?

Re:The important question is (1)

kperson (771747) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697246)

And would the Simulator it contains contain another complete Living Earth Simulator. And so on...? The ultimate case of self-similarity.

Everything ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34697172)

Everything ? Including myself ? Will I be able to meet myself then ?

Yeah, but can it simulate (0)

Issarlk (1429361) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697180)

... Linux ?

Start The Loop! (1)

idlewire (1901130) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697234)

Understanding -> New Predictions -> Changed Behavior -> Failed Predictions

To take an easy example, they mention the economy and financial markets. If we achieve greater understanding and greater predictive power, we will alter our behavior in the markets, thus leading to a different outcome. This goes for any area in which it is our behavior creating the data that we are using to gain understanding, where that understanding will also impact our behavior.

SGTA? GTAV? (1)

lunchbox134 (1932364) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697264)

Dude! It's like "Super Grand Theft Auto"!!!

Not going to wear furs made from simulated seals (1)

abies (607076) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697298)

I think that it is very important we will start the campaign against killing the baby seals in the simulated environment. If we all start boycotting LES products, maybe we can all make simulation a better place for cute, furry animals.

Will it be able to predict that.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34697318)

that I am having sex right now? Oh yeah oh yeah

Redundant (1)

Idou (572394) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697326)

How do we know we are not already living in one of these things? If so, this seems a bit redundant . . .

International? European! (2)

andersh (229403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697358)

The simulation is a European project, part of the FuturICT-programme, a part of the European Union research framework programme [europa.eu] .

It intends to unify hundreds of the best scientists in Europe in a 10 year 1 billion EUR program to explore social life on earth and everything it relates to. The FuturICT flagship will produce historic breakthroughs and provide powerful new ways to manage challenges that make the modern world so difficult to predict, including the financial crisis.

The FuturICT Knowledge Accelerator is a previously unseen multidisciplinary international scientific endeavour with focus on techno-socio-economic-environmental systems. The three main achievements of the FuturICT flagship will be the establishment of
- a Living Earth Simulator (global-scale simulation of techno-socio-economic systems),
- Crisis Observatories (for financial instabilities, scarcity of resources, emerging risks and conflicts, epidemics, etc.), and
- an Innovation Accelerator (identifying innovations early on, evaluating them across disciplines and supporting co-creation projects between different scientific disciplines, business, and governance).

Why not (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34697364)

Just simulate every single atom etc? That should do it.

Would you... (1)

warGod3 (198094) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697374)

... Like to play a game?

Really? Everything? (1)

Cocodude (693069) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697384)

Does this mean that the Living Earth Simulator will attempt to simulate itself? malloc(): error: recursive call

Aren't they overreaching? (1)

Nyder (754090) | more than 3 years ago | (#34697472)

Are our super computers even capable of doing the calculations for, well, everything on earth?

I'm going to say, no.

You'd have to do too many shortcuts to get accurate results, let alone we don't know how most the crap works in this world anyways. Sure, we know some, and learn more, but enough to simulate it?

I'm going to put this up there with Duke Nuke'm coming out before 2010 is over.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>