Simulation theory

[maydrakin]

Is it a simulation or are we sitting in a school kid’s Petrie dish and just a science experiment that will at some point just be washed down the sink of oblivion?

Or are we just tiny bacteria living our whole galaxy in a bubble that has just been blown at a garden party and whole lives and civilisations are living and dying in that microcosm before the whole things eventually implodes?

[Stive Pesley]

19 hours ago, GboroRam said:

So the stars are like the mountains at the edge of Skyrim, just for decoration and you can't actually get there?  

Yeah exactly! What is the point of the universe being so vast if the laws of physics mean you can never actually ever travel to it.

It's all entirely designed to have us stay in our lane. We're giddy about the idea of colonising Mars - which, despite it being the stupidest, most impractical, doomed to failure idea mankind has ever had, is universally akin to kicking your football into next door's garden

[Broderick]

I don't think there's much basis for thinking that we live in a computer simulation. It's not falsifiable, so it's more akin to a fun philosophical thought experiment than science.

[angieram]

On 29/09/2023 at 13:43, richinspain said:

August 1970 should be a good reset point.

That was my last carefree summer. I was thirteen. I agree! 

[Broderick]

5 minutes ago, angieram said:

That was my last carefree summer. I was thirteen. I agree! 

I'd say 1976 would be better. Derby would still have two championships in the bag, and maybe this time forest don't win Europe. 😃

[Eddie]

On 29/09/2023 at 09:58, Archied said:

And the one that mother gives you ?

Don't do anything at all.

[Highgate]

If this is a simulated universe, then why make it so detailed and so vast? There seems too much redundancy and complexity in this universe for it to be a simulation.  Seems far more likely to me that this universe is the real deal and simulated universes are merely an interesting philosophical idea. 

[maxjam]

2 minutes ago, Highgate said:

If this is a simulated universe, then why make it so detailed and so vast? There seems too much redundancy and complexity in this universe for it to be a simulation.  Seems far more likely to me that this universe is the real deal and simulated universes are merely an interesting philosophical idea. 

Sailing over the horizon seemed a long way off once.  Assuming we don't ruin it all in the meantime I'm convinced that we'll be a space fairing civilization one day. 

If anyone has been following the UFO disclosure stuff over in USA there are a number of theories springing up about our origins and potential place in the galaxy, along with the Simulation Theory its all interesting stuff and food for thought and debate.  

[Stive Pesley]

49 minutes ago, Highgate said:

If this is a simulated universe, then why make it so detailed and so vast? There seems too much redundancy and complexity in this universe for it to be a simulation.  Seems far more likely to me that this universe is the real deal and simulated universes are merely an interesting philosophical idea. 

As per my earlier post - if you're designing a simulation, where one of the fundamental features that makes it interesting is that the playing characters have absolutely no idea (or at least proof) that they are anything other than "real" then you have to design into the simulation an environment in which the laws of physics (aka the rules of the game) prevent anyone from ever categorically proving that it isn't real. Because then the simulation would cease to be interesting

In that respect the vastness and the unexplorability of the universe is the perfect design

 

[Highgate]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

Sailing over the horizon seemed a long way off once.  Assuming we don't ruin it all in the meantime I'm convinced that we'll be a space fairing civilization one day. 

If anyone has been following the UFO disclosure stuff over in USA there are a number of theories springing up about our origins and potential place in the galaxy, along with the Simulation Theory its all interesting stuff and food for thought and debate.  

Interesting certainly, although I'm not buying any of the alien disclosures either for the moment. It's not impossible of course, but I think there is a low probability that we've ever encountered aliens at this point. 

If there are no aliens at all, then we would still be living in a world where there are plenty of claims of alien sightings, and blurry inconclusive images and various witness testimonies.  Given human nature and our active imaginations, and the admittedly intriguing possibility of their existence...it simply couldn't be any other way, there will always be people claiming they have seen the evidence with their own eyes, but not their smartphone. 

However if there really are aliens then I think they would either choose they make themselves known, or be simply undetectable to us. The idea that they want to remain secret, but we keep catching glimpses of them seems odd to me, when you consider what sort of technology must be available to them.  Also, it seems far more likely, if we were to encounter an alien civilization that we would encounter their technology long before we ever met the beings themselves.  Look at our selves for example...we've only ever been to the moon and yet our technology has already reached interstellar space, far beyond the reach of any human. It should be similar for alien lifeforms...so the idea that people have actually seen alien lifeforms or been abducted by them or anything like that seems like fantasy or psychosis to me.  

1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

As per my earlier post - if you're designing a simulation, where one of the fundamental features that makes it interesting is that the playing characters have absolutely no idea (or at least proof) that they are anything other than "real" then you have to design into the simulation an environment in which the laws of physics (aka the rules of the game) prevent anyone from ever categorically proving that it isn't real. Because then the simulation would cease to be interesting

In that respect the vastness and the unexplorability of the universe is the perfect design

But in theory we can travel billions of light years to the edge of the observable universe (and presumably beyond), find a planet, break open a rock and examine it down to the subatomic level and see detail all the way down to the Planck length. And the same is true for anywhere we chose in the universe, almost inconceivable detail. The computational resources needed to create that would be astronomical, pardon the pun. A simple question has to be asked, why would anyone attempt such a colossal undertaking?  And if we do take the simulation idea seriously then don't we also have to take into account the possibility that there would be far more flawed alpha or beta simulations than the perfect finished article in existence.  Meaning, if we were to be in a simulated universe, we would surely be far more likely to be in a flawed universe riddled with mistakes and bugs...than in a seamless perfect simulation. That is unless we want to give the simulators God like powers.... which I don't think anyone here wants to do! 🙂 

[maxjam]

4 minutes ago, Highgate said:

Interesting certainly, although I'm not buying any of the alien disclosures either for the moment. It's not impossible of course, but I think there is a low probability that we've ever encountered aliens at this point. 

Oh I'm very much in the camp of incredible claims require incredible evidence, but I do find it all very intriguing. 

Whether or not Aliens have/are visiting us is up for debate but I think the theories surrounding the 'visitations' are interesting.  Rather than coming millions of light years to reach us, maybe they live in parallel dimensions - in which case, and to answer one of your points, we'd have no way of detecting their technology before we detected them.  Alternatively, and to get back to the Simulation Theory idea, maybe its just the creators dropping in and out of their creation from time to time to see how we're all doing.

12 minutes ago, Highgate said:

The computational resources needed to create that would be astronomical, pardon the pun. A simple question has to be asked, why would anyone attempt such a colossal undertaking?  And if we do take the simulation idea seriously then don't we also have to take into account the possibility that there would be far more flawed alpha or beta simulations than the perfect finished article in existence.  Meaning, if we were to be in a simulated universe, we would surely be far more likely to be in a flawed universe riddled with mistakes and bugs...than in a seamless perfect simulation. That is unless we want to give the simulators God like powers.... which I don't think anyone here wants to do! 🙂 

Wasn't it Elon Musk (or someone similar) that hypothesised once you get to the point of being able to create a Simulation, why wouldn't you? And once you do, the chances of you being the original species to create the Simulation drop dramatically.  In 30 years of playing computer games I have seen the gameworlds grow dramatically in both terms of scale and detail, who knows where we'll be in another 30 years.  Or 300 years...  Any maybe despite the best programming there are built in error correctors such as deja vous and the mandela effect.

Its fun to look into and chat about, but we'd probably never want to know the actual truth.  Depending upon what we found, it might doom us all.

[angieram]

7 hours ago, Broderick said:

I'd say 1976 would be better. Derby would still have two championships in the bag, and maybe this time forest don't win Europe. 😃

No thanks. I would already be an orphan by then.

Anyway, I want to nobble Sam Longson before he forces Cloughie out! 

[Highgate]

18 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Oh I'm very much in the camp of incredible claims require incredible evidence, but I do find it all very intriguing. 

Whether or not Aliens have/are visiting us is up for debate but I think the theories surrounding the 'visitations' are interesting.  Rather than coming millions of light years to reach us, maybe they live in parallel dimensions - in which case, and to answer one of your points, we'd have no way of detecting their technology before we detected them.  Alternatively, and to get back to the Simulation Theory idea, maybe its just the creators dropping in and out of their creation from time to time to see how we're all doing.

Wasn't it Elon Musk (or someone similar) that hypothesised once you get to the point of being able to create a Simulation, why wouldn't you? And once you do, the chances of you being the original species to create the Simulation drop dramatically.  In 30 years of playing computer games I have seen the gameworlds grow dramatically in both terms of scale and detail, who knows where we'll be in another 30 years.  Or 300 years...  Any maybe despite the best programming there are built in error correctors such as deja vous and the mandela effect.

Its fun to look into and chat about, but we'd probably never want to know the actual truth.  Depending upon what we found, it might doom us all.

I agree entirely...but as of yet the evidence is far from convincing so I remain extremely doubtful of any alien stories.

Yeah, that sounds like something Elon would say, he is certainly an advocate of the simulated universe theory.  But I think the answer to his question 'why wouldn't you'? is pretty straightforward. Because it would be an enormous drain on resources, even if it were possible. Computer games are getting much better no doubt, but what is their resolution really, when compared to the complexity found within even a single human cell for example?  

[Stive Pesley]

40 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Wasn't it Elon Musk (or someone similar) that hypothesised once you get to the point of being able to create a Simulation, why wouldn't you? And once you do, the chances of you being the original species to create the Simulation drop dramatically.  In 30 years of playing computer games I have seen the gameworlds grow dramatically in both terms of scale and detail, who knows where we'll be in another 30 years.  Or 300 years...

Slightly related to the concept of the "technological singularity" whereby the hypothesis is, that as computers become more intelligent, they reach a runaway point where they become self-improving and very quickly surpass all of human intelligence. It's certainly easy to see that as the logical end-point, and perhaps these simulations are created as the outcome. Like it's the goal of the game  - to have your simulation reach the singularity. At which point, you get rewarded with being able to fire up another simulation 

[maxjam]

12 minutes ago, Highgate said:

I agree entirely...but as of yet the evidence is far from convincing so I remain extremely doubtful of any alien stories.

Yeah, that sounds like something Elon would say, he is certainly an advocate of the simulated universe theory.  But I think the answer to his question 'why wouldn't you'? is pretty straightforward. Because it would be an enormous drain on resources, even if it were possible. Computer games are getting much better no doubt, but what is their resolution really, when compared to the complexity found within even a single human cell for example?  

Maybe not now, but at some point in the future when we have the power to run such a complicated simulation it would give some school kids the chance to 'go back in time' and simulate life from the big bang for a history project.  We'll probably just get scraped into the garbage when they're done!

[Highgate]

46 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Maybe not now, but at some point in the future when we have the power to run such a complicated simulation it would give some school kids the chance to 'go back in time' and simulate life from the big bang for a history project.  We'll probably just get scraped into the garbage when they're done!

I think we might have to file that under 'speculative', but who knows. I'd dispute the notion that we can create a computer simulation of this universe, in all it's complexity, from within this universe. I think it would have to be from outside in some larger universe to achieve that, ...and thinking about that sort of thing is too much for my puny brain.  Maybe the aliens, when they eventually show up, will be able to explain all this to us 😄   

[Archied]

15 hours ago, Eddie said:

Don't do anything at all.

Me and you Eddie , just me and you🤷🏻‍♂️😂

[TigerTedd]

So I call this the widower paradox, and it’s about the idea of heaven.

the classic idea of heaven is that when you die, you’re reunited with your loved ones, presumably to spend the rest of eternity in peace and happiness.

but what if you’re a widower. You’ve had 2 wives. They’ve both died before you. When you die, which one are you reunited with? You’re favourite? Both? That might be heaven for you, but it’s not heaven for them.

So it stands to reason that heaven must be a simulation for each individual. The sad truth of that theory is that you’re not reunited with your loved ones, just a simulation of your loved ones.

but as long as your happy and at peace, does it really matter. In fact heaven could just be a massive injection of endorphins, it doesn’t have to be people and places and things, just a feeling.

anyway, point is, if we could create a simulation, why not create several simulations, I digitally tailored for each person? To link in with the eternal life thread, why not upload our brain into the simulation at the moment of our death, and live in perpetuity inside the machine in our own individual heaven?

[ramit]

8 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

So I call this the widower paradox, and it’s about the idea of heaven.

the classic idea of heaven is that when you die, you’re reunited with your loved ones, presumably to spend the rest of eternity in peace and happiness.

but what if you’re a widower. You’ve had 2 wives. They’ve both died before you. When you die, which one are you reunited with? You’re favourite? Both? That might be heaven for you, but it’s not heaven for them.

So it stands to reason that heaven must be a simulation for each individual. The sad truth of that theory is that you’re not reunited with your loved ones, just a simulation of your loved ones.

but as long as your happy and at peace, does it really matter. In fact heaven could just be a massive injection of endorphins, it doesn’t have to be people and places and things, just a feeling.

anyway, point is, if we could create a simulation, why not create several simulations, I digitally tailored for each person? To link in with the eternal life thread, why not upload our brain into the simulation at the moment of our death, and live in perpetuity inside the machine in our own individual heaven?

Heaven would eventually turn to hell I think.  No challenges, no self improvement, no new experiences, no growth in an endless frozen smile?  That does not appeal to me in the least.  Happiness is not something that can exist for long without it's opposite being known and kept for reference.

[Archied]

4 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

So I call this the widower paradox, and it’s about the idea of heaven.

the classic idea of heaven is that when you die, you’re reunited with your loved ones, presumably to spend the rest of eternity in peace and happiness.

but what if you’re a widower. You’ve had 2 wives. They’ve both died before you. When you die, which one are you reunited with? You’re favourite? Both? That might be heaven for you, but it’s not heaven for them.

So it stands to reason that heaven must be a simulation for each individual. The sad truth of that theory is that you’re not reunited with your loved ones, just a simulation of your loved ones.

but as long as your happy and at peace, does it really matter. In fact heaven could just be a massive injection of endorphins, it doesn’t have to be people and places and things, just a feeling.

anyway, point is, if we could create a simulation, why not create several simulations, I digitally tailored for each person? To link in with the eternal life thread, why not upload our brain into the simulation at the moment of our death, and live in perpetuity inside the machine in our own individual heaven?

Heaven could be that move on to the next level or that loved one who meets you and leads you to the light could just be big bowser in disguise and he tricks you back into another round back down at the level you’ve just escaped , snakes and ladders like 😂