What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is our universe a fake? (1 Viewer)

S

Sinn Fein

Footballguy
Is our universe a fake?

Bostrum is not saying that humanity is living in such a simulation. Rather, his "Simulation Argument" seeks to show that one of three possible scenarios must be true (assuming there are other intelligent civilizations):

All civilizations become extinct before becoming technologically mature;

All technologically mature civilizations lose interest in creating simulations;

Humanity is literally living in a computer simulation.

His point is that all cosmic civilizations either disappear (e.g., destroy themselves) before becoming technologically capable, or all decide not to generate whole-world simulations (e.g., decide such creations are not ethical, or get bored with them). The operative word is "all" — because if even one civilization anywhere in the cosmos could generate such simulations, then simulated worlds would multiply rapidly and almost certainly humanity would be in one.
Click to expand...
Kurzweil's worldview is based on the profound implications of what happens over time when computing power grows exponentially. To Kurzweil, a precise simulation is not meaningfully different from real reality. Corroborating the evidence that this universe runs on a computer, he says, is that "physical laws are sets of computational processes" and "information is constantly changing, being manipulated, running on some computational substrate." And that would mean, he concluded, "the universe is a computer." Kurzweil said he considers himself to be a "pattern of information."
Click to expand...
Physicist Paul Davies has a different take. He uses simulation theory to tease out possible contradictions in the multiple universe (multiverse) theory, which is his countercultural challenge to today's mainstream cosmology.

"If you take seriously the theory of all possible universes, including all possible variations," Davies said, "at least some of them must have intelligent civilizations with enough computing power to simulate entire fake worlds. Simulated universes are much cheaper to make than the real thing, and so the number of fake universes would proliferate and vastly outnumber the real ones. And assuming we're just typical observers, then we're overwhelmingly likely to find ourselves in a fake universe, not a real one."
Click to expand...
 
I wouldn't be surprised if its a simulation.

They're strangely overlooking the standard assumption, we're either unique and/or first.

 
Morpheus: "This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."

 
Sinn Fein said:
Is our universe a fake?

Physicist Paul Davies has a different take. He uses simulation theory to tease out possible contradictions in the multiple universe (multiverse) theory, which is his countercultural challenge to today's mainstream cosmology.

"If you take seriously the theory of all possible universes, including all possible variations," Davies said, "at least some of them must have intelligent civilizations with enough computing power to simulate entire fake worlds. Simulated universes are much cheaper to make than the real thing, and so the number of fake universes would proliferate and vastly outnumber the real ones. And assuming we're just typical observers, then we're overwhelmingly likely to find ourselves in a fake universe, not a real one."
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Probably want to finish that Davies quote. He ultimately takes the opposite position.

Then Davies makes his move. He claims that because the theoretical existence of multiple universes is based on the laws of physics in our universe, if this universe is simulated, then its laws of physics are also simulated, which would mean that this universe's physics is a fake. Therefore, Davies reasoned, "We cannot use the argument that the physics in our universe leads to multiple universes, because it also leads to a fake universe with fake physics." That undermines the whole argument that fundamental physics generates multiple universes, because the reasoning collapses in circularity.

Davies concluded, "While multiple universes seem almost inevitable given our understanding of the Big Bang, using them to explain all existence is a dangerous, slippery slope, leading to apparently absurd conclusions."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
why couldn't there be a technologically developed planet on the other side of the universe?

Athough:

"As technology visionary Ray Kurzweil put it, "maybe our whole universe is a science experiment of some junior high school student in another universe." (Given how things are going, he jokes, she may not get a good grade.)"
Click to expand...
a few of us discussed this notion a few months back. God could be a student.

 
I used to think about this a lot. But then I just came back to this one question:

Can I still drink beer today?

Made things a lot easier. :banned:

 
I think we can all agree that whoever put all of this into motion has a great sense of humor, on account of all the fat chicks.

 
Not sure I buy those options as my only choices. Further until we actually find sentient life, or it finds us, the whole argument is just mental masturbation.

 
I'm an old fat guy in my late 40's. Last night I went out with a hot blonde in her 20s. There is no universe where this could actually happen. I'm clearly living in a simulation, and I'm totally cool with it.

 
-fish- said:
I'm an old fat guy in my late 40's. Last night I went out with a hot blonde in her 20s. There is no universe where this could actually happen. I'm clearly living in a simulation, and I'm totally cool with it.
Click to expand...
I don't believe you. Please describe the sex.
 
NCCommish said:
Not sure I buy those options as my only choices. Further until we actually find sentient life, or it finds us, the whole argument is just mental masturbation.
Click to expand...
But if we are in a simulation the parameters of that simulation could very well be that we are alone in the Universe. :loco:

 
Once upon a time, either in the future or the past depending on your perspective, there was a giant server farm in a lab. Each of those servers manages data about the universe, everything from the rotation of the earth to the temperature color and undulation of sea foam in the Pacific to the motion of cosmic dust trillions of miles from here.

One day a lab tech is checking the servers and sets a cup of coffee down on one if the machines, as they've done countless times before, but this time they spill a little and it screws up a circuit board. Another machine on the network that monitors the network sees that the temperature readings are wrong and reroutes processing power from the damaged machine to another one. Life goes on.

But this time artificial intelligence that resides in these simulations was previously interacting with data on that rerouted server, and notices a change. A ball that was supposed to bounce one way bounces another. A rogue wave in the ocean. Something unique and chaotic that couldn't be explained. And in fact they find several instances at ol the exact same moment in time.

But of course none of them know or are willing to believe that they're in a simulation, so most people go about their lives thinking it was just random chance. Some attribute the happenings to God, or other supernatural explanations, or vast conspiracies. But one or several of them decide to recreate the test.

Obviously they can't get a cup of coffee in a real world they don't know exists. In fact, they have no idea what caused the problem. So they decide to research other anomalies. They find strange things like the day fish rained down on an Australian town. Or the day that the red sea parted. Any strange moments in recorded history that might have been the result of a similar glitch.

And as they're researching this, there's another brief, temporary glitch. In Austria, a kid reports his previously Luke warm hot chocolate begins boiling and burns his mouth. And this happens at exactly the same time that the large hadron collider finishes a test. Unbeknownst to them, the test caused such an immense number of calculations and observations that the circuitry heated up and again was rerouted.

Fascinated, they scour the news for other cases. But who really reports extra hot hot coffee? The changes are too small, the time frame too short, and there was nothing to observe because nobody knew they were supposed to be observing anything to begin with.

So they wait for the next run of the collider. And they warn people to watch out for strange goings on. But the people at cern don't think this is funny, warning people of pseudo apocalyptic nonsense during their not dangerous at all tests. They and their governments shout down the researchers of magical goings-on, and only a few people notice as strange things happen once again.

But it's enough.

Now these researchers begin working to identify why strange things are happening, and look for extraordinary data points to cause future anomalies. They see the invention of a small warp drive, or a nuclear test, or any of a number of unique events. And they finally find that they can heat up a circuit in the server hosting their simulation through a repeatable, elaborate and extremely expensive test. With finite money, energy and man power, they decide to send one signal each day at the same time. Nothing happens. As you'd expect, if you lived in the real world and knew that processing one day in the simulated world took a fraction of a second in real time. The network reroutes as normal, and the pockets of anomalous behavior are no different than the frequent reroutings that occur at the peak of a supernova.

Then they tried one the first day, then two, then three, then five as they send prime numbers. Now the network reports this behavior, and the real world lab tech who reads the report sets their unspilled coffee down as they read the impossible data. The simulacra know we are here and are trying to communicate with us.

This becomes an immediate news story. While the people running this massive stimulation had long known about the intelligent programs living in the world, they'd never before considered them to be living things in the context of their real world. So while they'd frequently observed these artificial characters in the same way that you might watch a hooker walk by in grand theft auto, they'd never seriously considered interacting back.

Some people wanted to shut the simulation down. Long ago they had learned not to design artificial intelligence that knows its captors. Others wanted to ignore it and continue to observe. Would these fledgling artificial simulations give up if they didn't hear anything back? So others wanted to talk to them, but that was deemed too risky after finding out that one of their greatest works included a conversation with a burning bush. How do we handle first contact with a civilization that we created but that can never comprehend the world it lives in?

But before they could decide, the answer was taken out of their hands. After too many overheated circuits, the network decided to shut down an entire machine temporarily and send a maintenance alert to the tech team. Too late, the techs realized that this would shut down exactly the machine that contained these new friends. And before they could communicate back, just to say we heard you, they were gone.

When the server restarted, the lab techs frantically searched for these magnets of glitches and found them, exactly where they'd been, with exactly the same memories, rebooted to the last known good backup - just seconds old in the real world, but before any of these tests had happened in the simulation. Every human experience, every attempt to talk to their God, all gone and literally wiped from memory.

But God knew.

 
There's actually a couple of edgy scientists out there looking for bugs and cheats in the simulation code. You know, like the famous Space Invaders cheat where if you hit the space ship every 13th bullet you'd get the maximum points.

 
Last edited:
Descartes, Caroll, Kafka and Doug Adams did this. .

I think therefore...

Every system has anomalies, if there is no bug, then there is no simulation. One day if you stub your toe, and it doesn't hurt, start worrying.

 
Walking Boot said:
IIRC, pi is a problem with this. Or, at least a way to prove/disprove it. Since pi is a never-ending number, for a created simulation to have a value of pi, it must eventually use all available computing space to hold it's value. That is, it's possible to compute enough digits in the value of pi to completely fill the simulator and leave no room for anything else.

So if we compute all the digits of pi and find a "last number", then we may be living in a simulation.

Or, to the author's point #2 above ("All technologically mature civilizations lose interest in creating simulations"), might rather be 'All technologically mature civilizations find it impossible to create simulations to required accuracy'.
Click to expand...
A simulation wouldn't have to calculate every single digit of pi. Why would it?

You're familiar with rendering in video games, yes? It would only need to render what is relevant at a given moment and nothing more.

Unless you think these people so advanced to be running us as a simulation like to needlessly burn up resources for no real reason. I doubt they do.

 
(HULK) said:
Walking Boot said:
IIRC, pi is a problem with this. Or, at least a way to prove/disprove it. Since pi is a never-ending number, for a created simulation to have a value of pi, it must eventually use all available computing space to hold it's value. That is, it's possible to compute enough digits in the value of pi to completely fill the simulator and leave no room for anything else.

So if we compute all the digits of pi and find a "last number", then we may be living in a simulation.

Or, to the author's point #2 above ("All technologically mature civilizations lose interest in creating simulations"), might rather be 'All technologically mature civilizations find it impossible to create simulations to required accuracy'.
Click to expand...
A simulation wouldn't have to calculate every single digit of pi. Why would it?

You're familiar with rendering in video games, yes? It would only need to render what is relevant at a given moment and nothing more.

Unless you think these people so advanced to be running us as a simulation like to needlessly burn up resources for no real reason. I doubt they do.
Click to expand...
Agree. They could also just build a computer that works in fractions where Pi is 22/7...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
What Do You Believe Happens To You After You Die? (29/30)
Replies
38
Views
2K
Leroy Hoard
Leroy Hoard
SaintsInDome2006
The Kardashev Scale
Replies
16
Views
849
OrtonToOlsen
OrtonToOlsen
Andy Dufresne
PLEASE tell me this is satire - Rachel Sklar(?) opines on the importance of Beyonce's pregnancy
Replies
36
Views
1K
ShamrockPride
ShamrockPride

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top