iahwrites

Is it moot though? The uncertainty principle makes it impossible for us to _measure_ both speed and position, but if you're simulating it that's not necessary.

OP here... yeah it sure looks like it is!

I hadn't heard of it before, and will need to do some more reading, but at a high-level it does look to be the same line of thinking.

In response to your second point, at a high level I believe the calculation device would exist inside _one_ universe but calculate another one... the idea that you could calculate your own universe and use that to predict future events does seem covered in paradoxes. For one, the universe you're predicting would (recursively) have to include the computer you're using to predict it.

... but that's different to what I've argued here. I'm not claiming the states are physical objects, but just the existing of the pattern, even if temporary or intangible, would feel real to the humans/actors inside it.

Sure, but this argument is for simulation theory... not what is described here.

What I'm suggesting is that the calculation never needs to be done, which means the complexity of it does not matter. Whether it's O(1) or O(a^N) they're both far smaller than the infinite number of potential states.