[clooper]

Then give some concrete numbers for the states of the atoms. My argument is not abstract, it is very concrete. Give me a neural network and I can generate the graph and prove the equivalence between the network and its graph representation as a table of tuples.

[zeroonetwothree]

You said "even in theory" which is obviously wrong, since the (local) universe is finite and deterministic, hence it is itself a giant lookup table.

[Karellen]

> the (local) universe is finite and deterministic,

Radioactive decay and spontaneous pair production say otherwise on the deterministic front.

[logifail]

> the (local) universe is finite and deterministic

"It is not possible for the Universe being deterministic at any level. Only theories can be deterministic, practical reality is never"[0]

Q: Can you calculate your local universe's past states given its present state?

[0] https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/99163/is-it-p...

[aruss]

Where are you going to get all that time and space to build a lookup table? Are you sure you're able to measure all state at enough precision to make an accurate table?

[ben_w]

Doesn't matter given the original statement spawning this subthread was:

> People can not be reduced to lookup tables even in theory

[mistermann]

What theories are you using to solve for:

- consciousness?

- the unknown?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency

- the misunderstood?

https://plato.stanford.edu/Entries/perception-problem/

The Science of the Gaps will do I suppose?

Culture could do it though I think.

[ben_w]

Can you rephrase that?

It currently reads like shifting goalposts, and I'd like to guess that was not your intention…

[mistermann]

Any theory that asserts exhaustive coverage of people would need to take all relevant aspects of reality into consideration, so I suggested some of the trickiest things that are relevant.

Unfortunately for me, they are so tricky that they "don't count" (try, genuinely, to model the reality bending capability of people in a theory, I would love to see that!).

[aruss]

Then I would say your theoretical model is wrong or incomplete or makes for a circular argument (it's an assumption and not proven that finite matter evolving through time reduces to a lookup table).

[somewhereoutth]

Simply not true. Of course it is comforting for computer people to believe the world they live in is a giant computer, but that is not our real reality.

[ben_w]

"""the number of bits required to perfectly recreate the natural matter of the average-sized U.S. adult male human brain down to the quantum level on a computer is about 2.6×10^42 bits of information (see Bekenstein bound for the basis for this calculation).""" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(data)

(That said, I think quantum physics makes it "all a Markov chain" rather than "all a lookup table").