Just because something can be true does not mean it is true. Until someone provides compelling evidence we are living in a computer simulation I will ignore such sensationalist speculation.
Shoot—I remember having a conversation about this recently. For all the claim that it’s a new argument, I think it’s basically the Cartesian Demon al over again.
I have thought about it before and I see two problems here: 1.) It may explain “a” crator but it certainly doesn’t explain “the” Creator, since those aliens (and their laws of physics) playing the game would have to come from somewhere as well. Back to square one. And 2.), if our universe is but a computer program, one should be able to play it backwards. What would that look like? I have no problem walking backwards, but what would happen to our consciousness? What would consciousness in reverse feel like?
And don’t forget the underlying assumption: the computer never suffers a hardware failure and the programmers made no mistakes.
Also, the processing power to simulate the universe requires a computer with more storage capacity than the matter in our universe.
Agreed, but IIRC it’s a bit more complex; the simulators might for all we know live in a completely different universe from ours, with different laws of nature, etc.
I have thought about it before and I see two problems here: 1.) It may explain “a” crator but it certainly doesn’t explain “the” Creator, since those aliens (and their laws of physics) playing the game would have to come from somewhere as well. Back to square one. And 2.), if our universe is but a computer program, one should be able to play it backwards. What would that look like? I have no problem walking backwards, but what would happen to our consciousness? What would consciousness in reverse feel like?
Another thing is, what sort of a “creator” is the deity if s/he forces the creation to live like rats in a maze? Would someone please let the rat out of the Skinner Box?
Agreed, but IIRC it’s a bit more complex; the simulators might for all we know live in a completely different universe from ours, with different laws of nature, etc.
PALO ALTO, CA—A report released Tuesday by physicists at Stanford University has revealed that the entire known universe—including the whole of human civilization and the totality of all existing matter and energy—is actually the fictional setting of a police-procedural television series called Hard Case.
Scientists studying the properties of light from exploding supernovae confirmed their research has conclusively demonstrated that existence as we know it was created solely to provide the framework for a prime-time drama that airs in a parallel universe and is centered around a brash New York City police detective named Rick Case, his partner Michelle Crowley, and the other members of Hard Case’s fictitious Homicide Division.
This makes more sense than the crap Brian Greene and Michio Kaku promote.
Agreed, but IIRC it’s a bit more complex; the simulators might for all we know live in a completely different universe from ours, with different laws of nature, etc.
Something i wonder about, mainly that the guy supporting the SA did not think about it, is that if we are the focus of the sim, why is there nothing there to prevent us from finding out about it?
In such a case i simply would write a piece of code which eliminates the knowledge or the person asking the question , and if we are not the focus, why bothering with giving us consciousness at all, if the focus is the “life” of suns and galaxies, a complex but emotionless class or some sort of array would do the same, right?
(Not so off-topic):
Another thing, such models and religion itself seem some how to serve our way of thinking, or pattern recognition very well.
We see a face but there are only two dots and a curve, we see the work of god, but its only a hurricane…
Iam interested to find out if the imaginary friends (at least a part of that aspect) children have, could be traced back to some sort of misinterpretation in the childs direct surrounding/life, like if something happens they will attribute it to some sort of intelligence acting in the hidden.
And 2.), if our universe is but a computer program, one should be able to play it backwards. What would that look like? I have no problem walking backwards, but what would happen to our consciousness? What would consciousness in reverse feel like?
Given the physical model of consciousness, you would not experience consciousness in reverse since that would require normal functioning of consciousness (i.e. running forwards). You would just be un-experiencing things. You wouldn’t feel anything or even notice anything happened. You would just be reverted to an earlier state
And don’t forget the underlying assumption: the computer never suffers a hardware failure and the programmers made no mistakes.
You don’t know that . There could have been hardware failures and resets. We, of course, wouldn’t notice it since our universe is not running while the hardware failure is occurring and thus we couldn’t be conscious of it.
Also, the processing power to simulate the universe requires a computer with more storage capacity than the matter in our universe.
The “superverse” could be much much bigger than our universe.
Something i wonder about, mainly that the guy supporting the SA did not think about it, is that if we are the focus of the sim, why is there nothing there to prevent us from finding out about it?
Well, there are those who theorize that it is impossible to find out the most fundamental physical laws of the universe. That could be considered something that is preventing us from finding out we are in a simulation.
In such a case i simply would write a piece of code which eliminates the knowledge or the person asking the question ,
No need!
and if we are not the focus, why bothering with giving us consciousness at all, if the focus is the “life” of suns and galaxies, a complex but emotionless class or some sort of array would do the same, right?
The amount of computation would be the same. After all, our consciousness boils down to physics doing its thing.
And don’t forget the underlying assumption: the computer never suffers a hardware failure and the programmers made no mistakes.
You don’t know that . There could have been hardware failures and resets. We, of course, wouldn’t notice it since our universe is not running while the hardware failure is occurring and thus we couldn’t be conscious of it.
Also, the processing power to simulate the universe requires a computer with more storage capacity than the matter in our universe.
The “superverse” could be much much bigger than our universe.
Yeah, and the mice might be controlling our experiments to find the ultimate question about life, the universe and everything.
And 2.), if our universe is but a computer program, one should be able to play it backwards. What would that look like? I have no problem walking backwards, but what would happen to our consciousness? What would consciousness in reverse feel like?
Given the physical model of consciousness, you would not experience consciousness in reverse since that would require normal functioning of consciousness (i.e. running forwards). You would just be un-experiencing things. You wouldn’t feel anything or even notice anything happened. You would just be reverted to an earlier state
If I am aware of being hungry at time X when the program runs in one direction I don’t see why I wouldn’t be aware of the same feeling at the same time X when it runs in the opposite direction.
The Onion: #1 in news.
, and if we are not the focus, why bothering with giving us consciousness at all, if the focus is the “life” of suns and galaxies, a complex but emotionless class or some sort of array would do the same, right?
