from Hacker News

The Last Question - Isaac Asimov

by lisperforlife on 3/11/12, 7:58 PM with 41 comments

  • by ars on 3/11/12, 8:28 PM

  • by Jun8 on 3/12/12, 3:12 AM

    Some comments:

    1) I've heard many (non-physicist) people argue/think that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a law in the sense that, say, General Relativity or Conservation of Energy is a law. That is not true. As explained here (http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/4201/why-does-the...) the basic laws of physics are time-symmetric, i.e. there's no currently known fundamental reason that entropy behaves the way it does.

    2) I've read this story 20+ times, yet each time it gets me. I think the force of the story comes not from the scientific predictions but from the poignant depiction of humanity's futile fight against oblivion. Aren't all monuments erected for this purpose? The fact that the story is very light on the tech details paradoxically increases its punch.

    3) The described technology is a curious mix of far-sight and ridiculous backwardness: In describing harnessing the power of the Sun, Asimov may have had in mind something like a Dyson sphere, which Dyson described in 1960. However, the technicians still use a teletype to communicate with Multivac in 2061!

    4) One thing that I think Asimov got wrong fundamentally is that researching the "final question" should have taken all of Multivac's CPU capacity. It's stupendous that Multivac just runs that question on a separate thread while doing everything else. The Hitchiker's Guide gets this right: when Arthur asks a very powerful AI (the Nutrimatic Drinks Dispenser) to make tea it totally paralyzes the machine.

    5) I've never been able to find a good interpretation of Cosmic AC's response "NO PROBLEM IS INSOLUBLE IN ALL CONCEIVABLE CIRCUMSTANCES."

  • by abentspoon on 3/11/12, 11:04 PM

    Another favorite of mine: Learning to be Me - Greg Egan

    http://qwerjk.com/force-feed#learning-to-be-me

  • by iandanforth on 3/12/12, 1:46 AM

    Why do humans have to re-submit these? If a post is 1. Timeless and 2. Popular shouldn't this be automated?

    Surely this post adds to the experience of some as do many others like it. The first step in this trend would be a Hacker New reading list composed of posts that fit this profile.

    Secondarily you could have a way to inject each of the posts on that list into each users front page based on if they had seen it before (followed link checking or HN logs). If I'm new to HN perhaps my front page would have these scattered throughout.

    Next you could use them as content on slow news days in combination with the per user information above.

    I, for one, would love it if my local movie theatre re-ran Star Wars during slow months, and I wouldn't mind being (re)exposed to classic posts on Sunday afternoons :)

  • by PhilipDaineko on 3/11/12, 10:43 PM

    "Man, mentally, was one. He consisted of a trillion, trillion, trillion ageless bodies, each in its place...minds of all the bodies freely melted one into the other" Seems it's going to be true. When you google for something it's already some kind of thought of Man. For now connections between individuals are very slow, but it will be solved soon. I'll have a chip in my head which will allow me to share my thoughts immediately with anybody.

  • by thret on 3/12/12, 3:04 AM

    Twenty-odd years ago, a friend and I were discussing entropy with our physics teacher and my friend related this story. He couldn't remember where he had read it. I have wanted to read it ever since.

    However many times classics are resubmitted, they will still find new and appreciative readers. Thank you lisperforlife & HN.

  • by javajosh on 3/11/12, 10:29 PM

    We need to focus on inhabiting just one other world, first. The longer-term problem of universal heat death will work itself out.

  • by LiveTheDream on 3/12/12, 2:42 AM

  • by derefr on 3/11/12, 8:49 PM

    > Can entropy ever be reversed?

    I might not be understanding the science correctly, but due to the specific phrasing of the question, would "Sure--here's a schematic for an LED that converts waste heat back into photons[1]" be an acceptable answer?

    [1] http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-efficiency.html (Previously discussed on HN)