Arguments for and against reality (as we know it) being a computer simulation

[Al Doggity]

In order for a simulation to exist there must be something concrete to simulate. "reality" is a concept we don't understand so how can we know if something we don't understand is a simulation?

 

   Theoretical simulations in OUR reality happen all the time. The video game industry is almost entirely made up of theoretical simulations.

[mr.turbo]

   Theoretical simulations in OUR reality happen all the time. The video game industry is almost entirely made up of theoretical simulations.

you actually need to understand something to simulate it. whatever it is that's being simulated in a game must have some intelligible properties that allow it to be processed by a computer.

asking if the world is a simulation is just like asking if the the big bang was god farting. There is no there there to discuss.

Good luck defining "reality", quite a few smart guys have tried and given up on it.

 

[FREAKgeek]

you really think there are ET's out there simulating men in pink thongs flexing their shaved, oiled up glutes to crowded schmoes?

Is that what they are bothering with in this vast universe?

[Necrosis]

The simulation argument is both philosophically compelling and testable, in an indirect fashion.


I think that the when James Gates found doubly-even-self dual linear error correcting block code was found in the math of superstring theory I started to consider the idea more strongly.

The assumptions that we won't reach a singularity seem more far fetched then the inverse to me. His argument is simply Bostrom's boiled down, if you think life like simuations are possible given enough time (even 100k years) then once this occurs, simulations will outnumber real reality as reailty is primal.

[El Diablo Blanco]

So are the Kardashians a Virus gone rogue?  Can't be stopped?

[loco]

So are the Kardashians a Virus gone rogue?  Can't be stopped?

If you put your key into one of their keyholes, you will get a virus.

[mr.turbo]

The simulation argument is both philosophically compelling and testable, in an indirect fashion.


I think that the when James Gates found doubly-even-self dual linear error correcting block code was found in the math of superstring theory I started to consider the idea more strongly.

The assumptions that we won't reach a singularity seem more far fetched then the inverse to me. His argument is simply Bostrom's boiled down, if you think life like simuations are possible given enough time (even 100k years) then once this occurs, simulations will outnumber real reality as reailty is primal.

How precisely do you test this argument?

 

[Necrosis]

How precisely do you test this argument?

 

If computer code is embedded in the math we use to describe the theory that ultimately explains everything, that's pretty solid evidence.

if dark matter is behaving like virtual matter and increasing, as would in a simulation, we have more evidence.

[Raymondo]

If computer code is embedded in the math we use to describe the theory that ultimately explains everything, that's pretty solid evidence.

if dark matter is behaving like virtual matter and increasing, as would in a simulation, we have more evidence.

That isn't computer code though, is it? I think the term code has a different meaning in the context of physics.

[titusisback]

void newResponse() {
    if (serious) {
        sunglassesEmoji++;
    } else {
        System.out.println("Go Fuck Yourself!");
    }
}

int[] myIntArray = new int[1];

while (1==1)
{
   myIntArray = Arrays.copyOf(myIntArray, myIntArray.length + 1);
}

[Raymondo]

int[] myIntArray = new int[1];

while (1==1)
{
   myIntArray = Arrays.copyOf(myIntArray, myIntArray.length + 1);
}

You just made a good argument as to why simulation is unlikely.

This code would run forever, eventually causing an out of memory or similar exception in any finite system. You would need infinite computing resources to run it, just like you would with a simulation.

[mr.turbo]

If computer code is embedded in the math we use to describe the theory that ultimately explains everything, that's pretty solid evidence.

if dark matter is behaving like virtual matter and increasing, as would in a simulation, we have more evidence.

so it's dependant on string theory going somewhere. hmmm the author has not published these findings and describes the material as "technical gobbeldy gook".  like I said, you can claim god farted to create the universe as long as you attach enough hypotheticals to it.  ie. if this if that.  don't let this dissuade the conversation, we may be living in a simulation, OR  we may be living in a crock pot of chicken soup, both are equally likely!

[240 is Back]

getbig++

[DanM]

[Master Blaster]

It fails what I call the Cute Test.

It's too cute. the idea that we are in an elaborate computer simulation is very complicated and much too cute. And why us? Why not some other simulation? We were "chosen" to exist in this particular (infinite) simulation. So then we are, in a sense, special.

And how do you power a simulation that maps every proton? It would take a near infinite amount of power to model an infinite universe.

It's another strange example of how dumb smart people are. Someone like me, who is kind of dumb, has to really scrap and think in a more three dimensional fashion to cognitively exist in the same playing field as people who come up with these theories. But that doubt and effort creates a mental toughness forged by constantly questioning my own assumptions.

[Al Doggity]

You just made a good argument as to why simulation is unlikely.

This code would run forever, eventually causing an out of memory or similar exception in any finite system. You would need infinite computing resources to run it, just like you would with a simulation.

Once again, if we were in fact in a simulation, it's unlikely that it's running on something we would recognize as a computer or utilizing code we are familiar with.

[Al Doggity]

It's too cute. the idea that we are in an elaborate computer simulation is very complicated and much too cute. And why us? Why not some other simulation? We were "chosen" to exist in this particular (infinite) simulation. So then we are, in a sense, special.

And how do you power a simulation that maps every proton? It would take a near infinite amount of power to model an infinite universe.

There is no "specialness" implied. Actually, Musk's theory implies lack of specialness.

As for near limitless computing power, the strong likelihood of this happening one day is the foundation of Musk's theory. As for me, as I've said over and over again, if this is a simulation, there's not even really a need to simulate base reality. I had lasix surgery about 6 years ago. Up until shortly before getting the procedure done, I didn't even realize how bad my eyesight was. You could take a real human and make them satisfied with a low def virtual world in a relatively short period of time. We could basically be living in a game of minecraft and outside of the simulation could be far more detailed.

[Necrosis]

That isn't computer code though, is it? I think the term code has a different meaning in the context of physics.

The math of string theory has a built in error code that sends extra 1's and 0's to similar to how our computers work.

[el numero uno]

Just to be clear, the simulation thing is not a theory, not even a hypothesis. Before those 2 you usually have speculation but I'm not sure if people even consider this speculation.

[mr.turbo]

Just to be clear, the simulation thing is not a theory, not even a hypothesis. Before those 2 you usually have speculation but I'm not sure if people even consider this speculation.

thank you

[mr.turbo]

so it's dependant on string theory going somewhere. hmmm the author has not published these findings and describes the material as "technical gobbeldy gook".  like I said, you can claim god farted to create the universe as long as you attach enough hypotheticals to it.  ie. if this if that.  don't let this dissuade the conversation, we may be living in a simulation, OR  we may be living in a crock pot of chicken soup, both are equally likely!

in the spirit of clarification it's in fact much more likely that we are living of a pot of soup given that human understanding of chicken soup far exceeds human understanding of "reality" let alone human understanding of an imagined simulation of reality.  Nevertheless carry on, you never know we could be living in a computer simlulation, ya anything is possible!