The Matrix Can Be Tested: Do We Live in Computer Sim?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]It's a respectable hypothesis. If humanity is (or will be) able to create convincing simulations, statistically it's extremely likely we're already living inside one. Not that it's likely to have any practical applications, but that's philosophy for you.[/citation]
Proof we are not living in a simulation is if we could run a simulation. Why? Because no simulation would run that would allow itself to run a sub-simulation as that would end up causing a infinite regression and therefore infinite computational power.

Some scientists think too hard at times and don't look at the basics. Scientists vs programmers for you.
 
Whether you consider it or dismiss it, this hypothesis is here to stay. All of our senses are based on electric impulses deciphered by our brain. That important fact is the basis of this hypothesis and makes it possible, even if remotely so.
 
[citation][nom]SteelCity1981[/nom]it would be cool until the electric power grid goes out then we would be all screwed. lol[/citation]

It was the Mayans. But at the last minute, they opted for the better Duracell which added another 1K years to the expiration date.
 
This sure bridges the gap between evolution and creationism. Reminds me about that SG Atlantis episode where they played an RTS on Atlantis and it controlled real people on another planet or even the movie Gamer, where they had real Sims.
 
If this were true, it wouldn't make sense to create a simulation for 7 billion conscious people at once. You'd create a small simulation for a group of say 100 people and everyone else is just stimulus within that simulation. This means that people I meet in passing are just basic reactive programs with no consciousness, and only the people I actually know around me are possibly of the 100.

Since I am thinking for myself here, this must mean that I am of the 100 simulated consciousness and everyone else responding in comments are simply basic programs. I may have just figured out why there are so many retarded comments.


 
You know how I know we're living in a Sim? Because all you have to do is look around you, sims are everywhere. Everything I see on Tv is simulated. Video games are simulated. Hell, my fish are living in a simulated underwater enviroment that is really a fish tank. The rocks and the sand is man made so that is simulated too, with simulated sunlight to boot! And if I'm not!

I soon will be..
 
You know how I know we're living in a Sim? Because all you have to do is look around you, sims are everywhere. Everything I see on Tv is simulated. Video games are simulated. Hell, my fish are living in a simulated underwater enviroment that is really a fish tank. The rocks and the sand is man made so that is simulated too, with simulated sunlight to boot! And if I'm not!

I soon will be..
 
You know how I know we're living in a Sim? Because all you have to do is look around you, sims are everywhere. Everything I see on Tv is simulated. Video games are simulated. Hell, my fish are living in a simulated underwater enviroment that is really a fish tank. The rocks and the sand is man made so that is simulated too, with simulated sunlight to boot! And if I'm not!

I soon will be..
 
to prove we are in the simulation , tiniest particles which we know like quantum particles , bosons etc are all should be simulated by the guys who we think responsible for simulation .
 
[citation][nom]mazty[/nom]Proof we are not living in a simulation is if we could run a simulation. Why? Because no simulation would run that would allow itself to run a sub-simulation as that would end up causing a infinite regression and therefore infinite computational power. Some scientists think too hard at times and don't look at the basics. Scientists vs programmers for you.[/citation]

Well, I'm sure whatever device you're using while reading this would look like infinite computational power to someone in the 1940s, and that's less than one lifetime away, they had jets and nukes and cars back then.

Besides, who if we're living in a sim, who says it's a perfect sim? Maybe what we see around us are the lowest settings. Maybe only the Solar System is simulated in detail and everything else just projected? Maybe we're running at 1/1000th of realtime update cycles.

It's pointless really, if tomorrow they came out with a definite proof that we're all living in a sim, it wouldn't change a damn thing for me.
 
[citation][nom]mazty[/nom]Proof we are not living in a simulation is if we could run a simulation. Why? Because no simulation would run that would allow itself to run a sub-simulation as that would end up causing a infinite regression and therefore infinite computational power. Some scientists think too hard at times and don't look at the basics. Scientists vs programmers for you.[/citation]

I'm sure that by the time we are able to simulate the universe compilers will be able to optimise away redundant code like this. Then the simulation will only be simulating the simulation.
 
Whatever our world is, it is real because we have given it this definition. Sounds silly, but it is totally irrelevant if it is unreal from some other vantage point we don't share. It is possible there are higher realities. It is also likely we will never truly understand our own. We are not designed to. We are designed to live, to flourish, it does not matter if we can be perceived by entities in another reality or not, nor even if they are responsible for our existence. We are not designed to "know" anything. What we call "Knowing" is just an emotion. I am not saying it is irrelevant what actions we take, there are consequences to actions. What I am saying is that all we have is feedback in the form of sensory data, it serves us. We detect useful patterns. That is it...it should not be confused with some mythical "knowledge" stuff. As "knowledge" is not "real", there is nothing to let us down about the state of our "reality".
 
Let's face it, whenever we get close enough to finding out whether or not our life is a simmulation they will simply reboot the computer 🙂
 
I don't believe that it proves anything if we are able to create a simulation of some certain reality. Think like this, even if we are living in a simulation, we live in a so big universe that we even don't know the boundaries of it precisely. Also we see new galaxies forming in the universe. If we are living in a sim, the hardware(!) running this must have almost endless computational power already(at least so much power that we can't understand), supporting unlimited number of newly created(!) galaxies, black holes, suns etc. If we can simulate our galaxy, it wouldn't require endless computation and it wouldn't put so much stress on the said "hardware" because it already does this kind of computations
 
[citation][nom]mazty[/nom]Proof we are not living in a simulation is if we could run a simulation. Why? Because no simulation would run that would allow itself to run a sub-simulation as that would end up causing a infinite regression and therefore infinite computational power. Some scientists think too hard at times and don't look at the basics. Scientists vs programmers for you.[/citation]

That's why there is this: "1) The human species is likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage." If our "Gods" don't have enough computing power for the sub-simulations then our simulation will be shut down.

And if the following is not true: "2) Any posthuman civilization is very unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of its evolutionary history." That means that we will run a huge number of simulations. Let's say we simulate a 100 billion human minds, all of them unaware to the fact that they are simulations. Now we have about 110 billion human minds in our universe. A 100 billion of them are simulated and 10 billion are "real". If you asked these human minds if they thought they were real or simulations, and they responded real, then most of them wouldn't be right.

So if we get to a stage where we can simulate lots of conscious minds, it is safe to assume that:
"3) We are almost certainly living in a computer simulation."

Here is the original paper if anyone's interested: http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
It's not quasi-science, it's real philosophy published by Nick Bostrom of Oxford.
 
If you do not believe in the soul, the you are probably artificial and living in a computer simulation. If you do, the you are probably a living being that inhabits a living universe which may be the dream of a god. Choose your fate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom