Garbage in garbage out, computer models are only as good as the guys writing them. The most powerful super ever created or ever will be created cannot model a system correctly if the programmers assumptions about that system are false. A comptuer is an increadiby fast and phenomenally accurate moron.
While I'm reasonably sure that what the OP suggests is not possible, because everything known suggests that such accuracy in a simulation is physically impossible, what you say is manifestly untrue. Genetic algorithms have already been employed to solve problems that humans did not know the answers to. Indeed that is the whole point of the practical application of genetic algorithms, to get quicker and/or better answers to questions where the answers are not yet known.
I wouldn't say that its not known, its just that man didn't have the time to run all the numbers. The computer isn't doing anything that a person cant do. Its just doing what the person would do faster and more accurately. But it is only doing what it is told and it will never have an epiphany of a better way to do it.
I do not believe we can hack the program we live in. We are still not able to send a rocket to some other galaxy, we can't think of something and make it appear out of thin air, we can't lift of like superman or breath under water etc.. On the other hand it is likely that one day humans can make their own simulation programs where everyone can live their private ideal life, i mean people would just work in this program and live their life in the other. i think we gonna be able to plug ourselves into a computer we might have to pay people in this program to program the items etc.. we need in ow'r own program. The program we live in now is ower reality, we can't hack it, we are bound to the rules of the program we die, get sick, hurt, etc... we can't fly we grow old etc.... If this program is a private program of sombody else i haven't seen the proof of it or maby i can't, It could be that sombody wanted a program like this where this person can be rich, famous, a singer etc... or some pervert that uses this program for personal gain, a tool for his own pleasure, but it's hard to tell you could say that the people throwout histery and today are characters for potential buyers, I wanne be hugh Hefner, i wanne be that miljonaire, i wanne be tiger woods, Rihanna or some other character etc... Napoleon might be a character created for sombody that wanted to coquer the world etc... all for personal thrill, But that's all a little far fetched, There is also the lose data argument, maby programs aren't created by programmers but by the matrix itself, like the internet, i mean if you have an empty computer with no programs on it, no virus scanner etc... and you plug it into the internet you're computer is gonna be infested with all kinds off programs, viruses, worms, spam even harmfull programs will nest or try to use up as much memory space as possible, this world isn't the ideal world but maby it was programmed not to be the ideal world because people are intelligent they would have figered out the program they lived in was to good to make sense, i mean no hunger, no suffering, no polution i mean nobody would buy into that program, this program is made this way to be more realistic for the characters who live in it. I don't know the anser but i have to agree that one day we will be able to built simulations ourselves that are impossible to seperate from reality when pluged in, maby that's a good thing, if we just work 8 to 12 hours a day and spend the rest of the day pluged in living our dream wold this world might be a more peacefull place, religous people can have their own whahalla, people that wanne life in ancient egypt can do that to, i don't see why anyone would be unhappy with this it sound great, on the other hand it can also be cruel, If you look at GTA games most of the time you killing people with you're character, stealing cars, the gamers find it fun to play i can imagen some serial killer wanne build his own reality where he can rape, murder and torter, all day, or the sex addicted make a program where he is rich and uses the program for his sick and twisted mind if a program is built there is a come to mind so to say, in the GTA game when playing you can still see it's all grafics, the characters don't look real it's not convincing enough but i mean if the computing power was so great and the feeling of the character you shot can't be separated from a man being shot in real day life it will be difficult for the mental health of people, Or a less extreme example, you go to work in this program here you have no partner, no family you live in a small appartemt only a few friend and when you plug into the program at home after work you have this beautifull pregant wife you love with all you're hart and a dog, there it mental conflict deep inside you know they are not real that you bought this experience, they think it's real you don't wanne mess it up and say you not real prove it and let them deal with it, what if they terminate themeleves or they can't die and come to knowledge they are slaves for what it is you want. all reply's are welcome,
The human brain is comprised of a large, networked collection of essentially biological or gates with (potentially) multiple input gates and a potentially branching output gate. A neuron sends a signal along its (singular) axon if any (of perhaps many) dendrites receive an action potential; no matter how many dendrites receive an action potential at the same time, it is the same signal along the axon. That's a logical or gate. Fuzzy logic isn't nearly so impressive as that, and while it is inefficient to do so, it can be performed on existing hardware. The human brain does not involve quantum computing, so what would make anyone think it is required to simulate a brain? Human brains work just fine with electrical and chemical signaling alone, so obviously that's repeatable. That's certainly stretching things a bit. Brains are complex in total, but at a very basic level they're very comprehensible. It's understanding the network that's hard, not the physical substrate of it. I think the reason that no one has successfully simulated a brain is that no one wants to devote money or effort to researching machines that operate with intentionally faulty logic.
Computers with access to huge amounts of data have a perspective that human beings lack. There's no way that a human being could identify relationships by hand in a few million elements of a large database, for example. It's just beyond our capability. This limits the scope of human perspective on many problems involving a large number of variables. Or on a scope far larger than a human being could meaningfully attempt, as in the case of big data. That's not strictly true. At kmisho pointed out, genetic algorithms can definitely find better ways to solve optimization problems.
