Our modern computing power is vastly insufficient to model biological

This sounds like a bad movie.

>why can't some monkey technlogy compete with the work of 4 billions years of evolution of millions of billions of animals and genetic mutations that led to an extreme complexity

>>56156907
We've only had lightbulbs for 200~ years, about 150 years for ones actually in production.
Humanity is still taking its first baby steps with complex logic. Total power per op is still absurdly high for our most efficient devices.

We learn to walk before we run.

>>56156907
Thats probably incorrect. The raw computing capacity is there.
The software/hardware isnt

>>56156907

Humanity's lack of autism, but clearly you're doing your part to help the cause

>>56156907
do you know why it's hard to emulate a console on a computer ?
it's basically the same concept, well to a certain degree

How do we fix this? 2 options:
1. High level simulation. Instead of simulating the ants on molecular level, we simulate what the brain would do instead of simulating molecules so that interact with each other to get to a result.
2. Get bigger computers and/or other architectures. I'm not a quantum computer expert, but quantum computers might be able to simulate the interaction of molecules with each other in O(sqrt(n)) time instead of O(n) time.

>>56156907
>unperforming
The truth is that actually nature is bloated and doesn't follow the unix philosophy

>>56156907
>Why is modern computing capacity so underperforming and how can we fix this?
You are witnessing the gap between special vs general purpose computing.

Ant brains are essentially custom-made hardware designed solely for the purpose of simulating ant behavior

If you design a dedicated chip based on the same principles, you can get orders of magnitudes of speedup compared to trying to simulate an ant brain using a general-purpose CPU.

Also, biological systems don't operate on global clocks or global current. If a neuron doesn't fire, it doesn't use power. CPUs still have to activate every transistor in a subsystem to use a single instruction of that subsystem, and it has to feed a clock signal to them all to keep them synchronized.

At a fundamental level, I think the biggest difference between biological computers and artificial computers is the level of connectivity exhibited. In a biological computer, every component is interconnected with multiple other components forming a big, dense graph. In an artificial computer, every component is hooked up to a single bus or muxer, or shares a single input/output path in some other way.

The interconnectedness of biological computers is what allows all of its components to operate pretty much independently.

>>56157030
You just made me think about something. Is it possible to train a model on a supercomputer (non real-time), and then creating a custom chip that can execute that specific model in real-time? It would probably cost a lot of money though, but if we convince a billionaire it might be possible. It would be very difficult to get a short feedback loop though, development times would suck

File: 1435662444001.png (250KB, 649x616px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 649x616px

>>56156907
http://www.openworm.org

At least we're trying

>>56157025
wtf I hate nature now.

>>56156951
>why can't some monkey technlogy compete with the work of God
ftfy

>>56157025
We don't even understand how it really works. Dig a little deeper into biology and anyone can see this, it's just bits and pieces and educational guesses.

File: bait501.webm (680KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

680KB, 960x720px

>>56157224
>god

File: gee.png (138KB, 1854x516px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1854x516px

this is my /g/ just the way I know it

>>56157247
[tipping intensifies]

>>56157224
This

>Inb4 fedoras

>>56157244
That's a little off- we understand how a lot of it works, but the very base levels of life are mysterious. The function and properties of DNA and its role in producing cells and other functional parts is pretty hot research right now.
Hell, we didn't know about epigenetics a decade ago.
Biology is reverse engineering, really.

simulation is overrated

>>56156907
current approach is more like Direct solving of Navier-Stokes

>but MRI is fucking bullshit
>hurr we need simulate every particle is also fucktarded

most neuro ((((((((scientists)))))))) would be probably unable to reverse engineer basic 4-bit adder

File: 1464783761780.jpg (9KB, 225x224px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 225x224px

The human genome is about 3,120,000,000 DNA base pairs long, so half of that is in each spermatozoa. That gives us 1,560,000,000 base pairs in a single sperm cell.

Each of those base pairs can be an A-T bond or a G-C bond, and can be aligned in either direction. That means there’s 4 ways it can be aligned, and that can be represented in two bits of data: 00=G, 01=C, 10=A, and 11=T, for example.

Now, the average dude lets out about 50 and 500 million sperm with each go. Rough average says that it’d probably be about 200 million, right? If we take all this information and combine it with the wonders of mathematics, we have 1.560*10^9 * 2 bits * 2.00*10^8. Do all the equational shit, and we have 6.24*10^17 bits transmitted in a single burst.

That’s 78,000 Terabytes, in what amounts to a half-minute-at-most event.

We could fit a digitized copy of the Library of Congress into your spooge. It’d only take about 20 terabytes.

So your dick has a higher bandwidth than any Internet connection that ever existed, and is likely to exist any time soon. Now, imagine a machine that used your saltshaker to surf the Internet.

Of course, god knows most of you would only use that power to surf for pr0n.

>>56156907
you are a retard OP.

Animals and any biological life are molecular systems. We exist on a molecular level, we produce energy on a molecular level, we store energy on a molecular level, we construct and degrade on a molecular level.

Wanting to simulate a living organism therefore means wanting to simulate molecular interactions on a gigantic scale.

Modern computers struggle to make quantum-accurate simulations of small molecules.

An average animal protein contains 110 thousand atoms. An average cell contains 10 billion proteins. An ant brain alone has 250 thousand cells.

Wanting to simulate an ant is like wanting to simulate reality on a quantum level.

It's ridiculously difficult and simply stupid.

Your lack of basic understanding is testimony to your ignorance and you should give a serious thought to ending your simple mundane life.

>>56158340
So what your saying is, my floppy has more storage than my dongle can get?

>>56157224
>People still believe this fairy tale
Jesus christ.

>>56157025
I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're referring to as Nature, is in fact, God/Nature, or as I've recently taken to calling it, God plus Nature. Nature is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning God system made useful by the God corelibs, DNA utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by the Genesis.

Many universe users run a modified version of the God system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of God which is widely used today is often called Nature, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the God system, developed by the God Project.

There really is a Nature, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Nature is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the universe's resources to the other life forms that are alive. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Nature is normally used in combination with the God operating system: the whole system is basically God with Nature added, or God/Nature. All the so-called theorems of Nature are really theorems of God/Nature!

>>56158317
Its coming in battlefield 40

File: HgNVBC1.jpg (274KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 800x1200px

>>56158637
wew

Do ants breathe?

>>56156907
The fuck would you want to simulate an ant on a molecular level for?

We can't even figure out ants at molecular levels

>>56159191
gee i can't wait to install it on my trillion qubit server farm

>>56156907
>Why is modern computing capacity so underperforming

Most men would rather spend their time begging cunty barsluts for hole time.

>and how can we fix this?

More autists and aspies, perhaps?