The Problem of the Missing Workload
The enormous computational capability of space-time is totally squandered by what we see and know. If we assume that the radius of the Universe is 20 billion light years, then the number of cells (at Planck's Distance) is about 10^184. Insofar as the computational model, almost nothing is being done. Most of space is empty, except for a little radiation (photons) passing by. The space that is not empty, such as the space occupied by an atom, is also mostly nothing. Given the likely computational resources of space, it is like coming upon the worlds largest super computer and finding it spending years on the task of doing nothing but trying to count from 1 to 10 just one time.
There are many other ways in which we can see that what we think of as the Universe may be totally incidental to the main purpose. For example, let's assume our universe is a sphere 20x10^9 light years in radius, so that its volume is about 3x10^124 cubic fermis. If we make the generous assumption that we will give an automaton 10^12 cells per cubic fermi to simulate the essential physics that the operation of our macroscopic universe seems to require, the simulation will need a total of 3x10^136 cells. If the unit of length in our world is at Planck's length, 1.6x10^-33cm, then the volume of space needed for 3x10^136 cells at Planck's length would be a sphere 30,000,000 kilometers in radius (the size of a large star). In 100 seconds, the sphere could faithfully simulate the entire macroscopic evolution of our universe from the big bang to the present. The space-time volume of the Universe is 10^63 times larger than that sphere for 100 seconds. It seems that a tiny fraction of the Universe may have all of the computational resources to run all of the essential macroscopic physics we know of, from the big bang to the present in a couple of minutes.
We can think of this as the case of the missing workload. Unlike the missing neutrinos from the sun (perhaps a factor of 3) and unlike the missing mass from the heavens (perhaps a factor of 50), the amount of missing workload seems to be a factor of 10^63 times the workload that appears necessary. The idea that we will find quantum mechanics to be continuously interesting as we look at finer and finer detail seems unlikely. The degree of quantization of our current understanding of the most microscopic things we know, does not allow for finding useful quantum mechanical gears and wheels at ever more microscopic levels. We certainly might find something else that's interesting and that lies under quantum mechanics. It is also obvious that the physics we have discovered in the last 20 years seems dimly related to what most of us would consider to be the main macroscopic workings of the Universe.
Either something else is going on (other than what we know about), the important action is what's happening down at Planck's length or something more subtle is running things not too far below a fermi. The only remaining alternative is to admit that God was incompetent on a scale that boggles the mind.
