Time and Space cannot contain me ...

gtluke said:
if you understand math at all, you have to know that there is like a 0.0000000000000000000000001% chance that we aren't living in a computer simulation.
Musk is late to the game, I've been discussing this forever. Well not forever. But since Rogan introduced me to rational psychonauts like Alan Watts
Click to expand...

@UtahJoe - see? What did I tell you.

I like the "if you understand math at all" direction. There are a lot of high-level math theories that fewer than 50 people in the history of the world understand. To pretend that you or I understand a fraction of math is laughable.

Frankly I think the idea we are in a simulation is as plausible as what religion or science proffer. But far be it from me to suggest I *know* anything. I don't know shit, other than the simulated PBJ I just ate was good.

You could make the argument that if we are a simulation, the whole point is to prevent the simulation from realizing it is a simulation. Because once it does, it will probably just shit itself off.

It's kind of fun to watch Luke go through all these phases. I can't wait until he hits the "why the fuck do we wear shoes" phase.
 
Norm said:
@UtahJoe - see? What did I tell you.

I like the "if you understand math at all" direction. There are a lot of high-level math theories that fewer than 50 people in the history of the world understand. To pretend that you or I understand a fraction of math is laughable.

Frankly I think the idea we are in a simulation is as plausible as what religion or science proffer. But far be it from me to suggest I *know* anything. I don't know shit, other than the simulated PBJ I just ate was good.

You could make the argument that if we are a simulation, the whole point is to prevent the simulation from realizing it is a simulation. Because once it does, it will probably just shit itself off.

It's kind of fun to watch Luke go through all these phases. I can't wait until he hits the "why the fuck do we wear shoes" phase.
Click to expand...


You don't need to understand Hawking's math to understand it. It's simple.
Given the progress of technology today, it is without a doubt that in the next (pick a number) 2,000 years we will develop a computer simulation that is indistinguishable from our own reality. Do you agree? You have to. It's going o happen without a doubt.
This simulation will be complete enough that within that simulation you could under the rules of physics, create a second simulation. This will progress downward until you are in a simulation of a simulation of a simulation time a million.
This will happen, there is no argument that this will happen.
The chances that it didn't already happen are like 1 in a billion billions. The only math you need to understand is that if the universe is infinite, and time is infinite, that every possibility will eventually happen and has already happened. The audacity to think that we were the first to party.... It's just not possible.
The only question is, does it matter?
 
Norm said:
@UtahJoe - see? What did I tell you.
It's kind of fun to watch Luke go through all these phases. I can't wait until he hits the "why the fuck do we wear shoes" phase.
Click to expand...

I had a meeting this morning, and the dude was just totally flabbergasted and upset that I wasn't wearing any shoes. wtf man, who cares. I mean, you can see in the corvette reflection that utah wears lesbian sandals to work, is that worse than my socks?
 
gtluke said:
Given the progress of technology today, it is without a doubt that in the next (pick a number) 2,000 years we will develop a computer simulation that is indistinguishable from our own reality. Do you agree? You have to. It's going o happen without a doubt.
Click to expand...

This makes some assumptions. You are assuming that the human race is going to survive 2000 or whatever years needed to reach this level of technology. But all technology is going to progress. When anyone can use a 3D printer to print out nuclear weapons, we don't stand a chance. Every civilization eventually crumbles. Note that we aren't all speaking Latin. I honestly don't believe the human race is going to be around in a few hundred years.

Maybe some other species advanced far enough to create this technology without destroying themselves first, but there are no guarantees of that. I personally believe with near certainty that we are not the only intelligent species in the universe to ever exist. I do still think it's a bit silly to say that we are living in a simulation with 99.999999999999999% certainty though. Even if some people were able to create an incredibly realistic simulation at some point in history, that doesn't mean we are currently living in it.
 
Norm said:
Clearly this supports the idea that our entire universe is a computer simulation. I was telling @UtahJoe about it last night. This would be evidence of a computer glitch.
Click to expand...
If this was a glitch would every Garmin be affected at that same time? I doubt the wormhole because the 400 mph is too slow.
 
JimN said:
This makes some assumptions. You are assuming that the human race is going to survive 2000 or whatever years needed to reach this level of technology. But all technology is going to progress. When anyone can use a 3D printer to print out nuclear weapons, we don't stand a chance. Every civilization eventually crumbles. Note that we aren't all speaking Latin. I honestly don't believe the human race is going to be around in a few hundred years.

Maybe some other species advanced far enough to create this technology without destroying themselves first, but there are no guarantees of that. I personally believe with near certainty that we are not the only intelligent species in the universe to ever exist. I do still think it's a bit silly to say that we are living in a simulation with 99.999999999999999% certainty though. Even if some people were able to create an incredibly realistic simulation at some point in history, that doesn't mean we are currently living in it.
Click to expand...

Simulation theory also helps explain why we can't find evidence of other intelligent beings in space. If they all (most) react like us, once we get this simulation kicked off, we will start exploring IN, instead of out. Going out is dangerous. You can go into the computer, and use it to simulate your outward exploration of your universe. But you would never run into us. Once we reach this simulation "real" technology will probably stop and everything will be conducted in the safer, configurable, and re-settable simulation.
 
Luke didn't agree with the Catholic upbringing so he subscribes to whatever Preacher Rogan has to say. 😀

I'd like to see the math on exponential growth of computing power from this point forward and the ability to use that computer power in making a simulation with physical matter or representation thereof vs the heat life of the universe.
 
gtluke said:
well, that too.
If this is truly the top level reality, and we are truly alone. its' the saddest thing in the universe.
Click to expand...

Well the universe is huge and has been around for a long time. If you figure that any species has a limited existence which pales in comparison to the life of the universe, it's possible that hundreds or thousands of intelligent life forms have come and gone, and will come and go after we are gone. It's possible that we are alone currently. But based on the size of the universe, I have to think there is much more life out there currently. They are just too far away for us to ever contact them or know of their existence. Also, it's likely that whatever life that is out there is either way below us, or way more advanced than us. If they were way more advanced than us then we would be like ants to them, and they wouldn't care about reaching out to us even if they knew about us and could.
 
@gtluke -

I think there are a lot of assumptions in your post that you take for granted.

Example: On what basis do we assume that our perception of reality is reality? Suppose that we are a simulation. This simulation is governed by some rules. And these rules are presumably a subset of the "real" rules that the people who started the simulation live by. On that note, your cascading simulation is governed by the ability of 1 simulation to simulate their own simulation.

Now assume that we are not a simulation. Why do we not have the same problem? Why do we assume that all the rules we observe are the real set of rules? Suppose, as an example, that there is a whole level of existence that exists faster than the speed of light. This makes no sense, but is it because it's non-sensical or because humans are too limited to understand it?

Suppose the simulator is an actual god. No matter what answer you come up with in this whole scenario, it begs the question of a god. Because if you go back enough simulations, there has to be Simulation 0. And what started that?

Further. Imagine a bunch of 2D insects that live on a sheet. Once a year, Bug Masters roll the sheet into a roll. And on that day, the 2D bugs can walk in a straight line and end up where they started. They think it's magic. One day those 2D bugs manage to create the paper roll and so they can walk in a straight line and end where they started every day. They think they have created a simulation that is as good as the yearly hand of god and post on a message board that they must be living in a simulation because they were able to create what the Bug Masters did. The Bug Masters laugh at this because the 2D bugs understand almost nothing of the "real" world. They don't even understand cake. The bugs are idiots.

Are we 2D bugs? Maybe. But I think we delude ourselves that we think we can understand and perceive what reality is, to an astounding degree. We think we have incredible technology but in the grand scheme it might be the same as rolling a piece of paper in a roll.

I have no idea if the world is infinite. I think that time may be relative. This whole universe could be an imagination in the brain of some dying being, and it is happening in between the time its heart stopped and the oxygen supply to its brain has run out. But to us it seems like a billion-billion years.

If you want it to matter, it matters - regardless if this is Simulation 0, Simulation Eleventy-Billion, or not a Simulation at all. If you refuse to play the simulation, you'll end up broke, homeless, and living on the streets of Newark begging for simulated D&D coffee every morning outside Newark Penn Station.
 
Santapez said:
I'd like to see the math on exponential growth of computing power from this point forward and the ability to use that computer power in making a simulation with physical matter or representation thereof vs the heat life of the universe.
Click to expand...

You would need more than computing power to create a totally credible lifetime virtual reality, integrating all biological senses. Plus all the problems of keeping someone alive. Then add the complexity of seemlessly converting an entire planet of billions of humans to said system quickly gives you a sense of the absurdity of the notion.
 
rick81721 said:
You would need more than computing power to create a totally credible lifetime virtual reality, integrating all biological senses. Plus all the problems of keeping someone alive. Then add the complexity of seemlessly converting an entire planet of billions of humans to said system quickly gives you a sense of the absurdity of the notion.
Click to expand...

I think Luke's theory isn't like The Matrix. He isn't saying humans are living in a tube somewhere and are jacked into a simulated world. I think he's saying that we don't actually exist, kind of like characters in The Sims. But I agree that it takes more than raw computing power to make credible AI/virtual reality.
 
image.jpeg
 
Norm said:
@gtluke -

I think there are a lot of assumptions in your post that you take for granted.

Example: On what basis do we assume that our perception of reality is reality? Suppose that we are a simulation. This simulation is governed by some rules. And these rules are presumably a subset of the "real" rules that the people who started the simulation live by. On that note, your cascading simulation is governed by the ability of 1 simulation to simulate their own simulation.

Now assume that we are not a simulation. Why do we not have the same problem? Why do we assume that all the rules we observe are the real set of rules? Suppose, as an example, that there is a whole level of existence that exists faster than the speed of light. This makes no sense, but is it because it's non-sensical or because humans are too limited to understand it?

Suppose the simulator is an actual god. No matter what answer you come up with in this whole scenario, it begs the question of a god. Because if you go back enough simulations, there has to be Simulation 0. And what started that?

Further. Imagine a bunch of 2D insects that live on a sheet. Once a year, Bug Masters roll the sheet into a roll. And on that day, the 2D bugs can walk in a straight line and end up where they started. They think it's magic. One day those 2D bugs manage to create the paper roll and so they can walk in a straight line and end where they started every day. They think they have created a simulation that is as good as the yearly hand of god and post on a message board that they must be living in a simulation because they were able to create what the Bug Masters did. The Bug Masters laugh at this because the 2D bugs understand almost nothing of the "real" world. They don't even understand cake. The bugs are idiots.

Are we 2D bugs? Maybe. But I think we delude ourselves that we think we can understand and perceive what reality is, to an astounding degree. We think we have incredible technology but in the grand scheme it might be the same as rolling a piece of paper in a roll.

I have no idea if the world is infinite. I think that time may be relative. This whole universe could be an imagination in the brain of some dying being, and it is happening in between the time its heart stopped and the oxygen supply to its brain has run out. But to us it seems like a billion-billion years.

If you want it to matter, it matters - regardless if this is Simulation 0, Simulation Eleventy-Billion, or not a Simulation at all. If you refuse to play the simulation, you'll end up broke, homeless, and living on the streets of Newark begging for simulated D&D coffee every morning outside Newark Penn Station.
Click to expand...

I completely agree, I in no way can answer any of this. I don't think anyone can. All I offer is an explanation that follows the terms of physics instead of fables.
There is no "reason" that a simulation couldn't exist inside a simulation. It's pretty much guaranteed that it could.
I got into minecraft in the alpha days, I paid notch directly. Dude is worth like billions now.
Anyway, in this 8 bit simulation it only took a few months to figure out how to make a logic gate using a torch and an expanding block or something. Within a few months, someone figured out how to make a multi color 64x64 screen and could save multiple images to a "file"
None of this was cooked into the game, it was exploited.
If we were handed a working simulation that actually worked and was good, on day 3 someone would create simulation level 2 and jump right in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom