Jump to content

Scientist believes we could be living in a computer simulation


Sheaf Saint

Recommended Posts

What if we are not the first level though? Think about it... If we are living in a simulation, and we are close to discovering how to generate our own simulations, how many layers back does this go? We could be living in a simulation of a simulation of a simulation... ad infinitum.

 

Neuroscientists have identified areas of the brain that fire a tiny fraction of a second before we make conscious decisions, which brings into question the whole idea of free will.

 

Do you think I could successfully argue against a speeding ticket if I can demonstrate that my car doesn't actually exist as matter and is in fact just pixels in a computer program over which I have no control?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if we are not the first level though? Think about it... If we are living in a simulation, and we are close to discovering how to generate our own simulations, how many layers back does this go? We could be living in a simulation of a simulation of a simulation... ad infinitum.

 

Neuroscientists have identified areas of the brain that fire a tiny fraction of a second before we make conscious decisions, which brings into question the whole idea of free will.

 

Do you think I could successfully argue against a speeding ticket if I can demonstrate that my car doesn't actually exist as matter and is in fact just pixels in a computer program over which I have no control?

 

Let us know how you get on with that one....

 

tumblr_m6lda5Lcqa1rtgnjjo1_500.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if we are not the first level though? Think about it... If we are living in a simulation, and we are close to discovering how to generate our own simulations, how many layers back does this go? We could be living in a simulation of a simulation of a simulation... ad infinitum.

 

Big fleas have little fleas,

Upon their backs to bite 'em,

And little fleas have lesser fleas,

and so,ad infinitum.

(The Siphonaptera, by Augustus De Morgan, 1872, after Jonathan Swift'sOn Poetry: a Rhapsody, 1733)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw this theory on a TV show a while back.

 

These quantum physics shows get me all the time. They start off with basics, muddle your brain a bit, then end up on the really dumb stuff like this.....Then you realise that you just wasted that hour when you thought you were going to learn something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone read the article? Logically, the premise is one of the three is true:

 

1) Our civilization goes extinct before it gains the ability to run very advanced and detailed large scale simulations to explore its origins, OR

2) The advanced civilization that we become (assuming by definition of advanced, has the ability to perform large scale simulations to explore its origins) doesn't want to do these simulations, OR

3) As there will be an advanced civilization that wants to perform these simulations, the probability is that our existence is one (I guess because you can run gobs of simulations to try to decipher what went on) rather than being in the one actual existence that began it all.

 

Its a pretty tight argument, not sure exactly where I'd attack it off the top of my head. Depending on my mood, I may try it out down the pub, which is in many ways where it belongs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading this thread, I'm reminded of the time my mates and I spent on magic mushrooms in Southampton (infinitely more interesting place, btw :D). An odd characteristic of the hallucinations is that your brain really seems to notice ( and perhaps even create ) patterns. I remember being in Hoglands Park, looking at different patches of grass. No matter where I looked, the grass had exactly the same pattern, as if it were a tiled graphic stretching out into infinity.

 

Told my mates; they looked and saw the same thing. Whether or not they saw the exact same pattern, I don't know. At the time, I briefly considered the notion that it might actually be like that full time, and our optical systems just did a job of generating visual entropy.

 

Shortly afterward, I was dismayed to learn that the Hoglands public bogs had no loo roll, and had to wipe my arse with a sock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone read the article? Logically, the premise is one of the three is true:

 

1) Our civilization goes extinct before it gains the ability to run very advanced and detailed large scale simulations to explore its origins, OR

2) The advanced civilization that we become (assuming by definition of advanced, has the ability to perform large scale simulations to explore its origins) doesn't want to do these simulations, OR

3) As there will be an advanced civilization that wants to perform these simulations, the probability is that our existence is one (I guess because you can run gobs of simulations to try to decipher what went on) rather than being in the one actual existence that began it all.

 

Its a pretty tight argument, not sure exactly where I'd attack it off the top of my head. Depending on my mood, I may try it out down the pub, which is in many ways where it belongs.

 

The running of a computer simulation doesn't imply the creation of sentience.

 

In the case that it doesn't, we're left with the original actual existence as the only possibility.

 

This leaves the probability that we're a simulation tied to the probability that sentience can be created in a computer simulation, rather than the probability that an 'existence' is either the original, or one of an almost unlimited number of simulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is exactly right, the end of the world this Friday is actually a scheduled reboot after a firmware upgrade. The Mayans somehow got hold of the upgrade schedule and put it in their calendars, after the IT guys realised what they'd done they deleted them from the face of the earth so as their program corruption couldn't spread to the rest of us. Unfortunately they only moved them to the trash can and never completely deleted them which is why there are remnants of their programs that we have found and interpreted as the end of the world. It's all so clear now, I just hope the person in charge has backed us all up properly so we can be restored in the event of a firmware upgrade failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope that when the data is analysed by the programmers they recognise that artificial intelligence can be created and also that we wonder about them, in terms of existentialism and quantum physics. These are theories that they may not have yet considered themselves, so as cyber guinea pigs we may yet hold the key to life, somewhere up there rather than out there. It would be fairly crap if we got a drongo computer scientist analysing us. I'd be a bit ****ed off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The running of a computer simulation doesn't imply the creation of sentience.

 

In the case that it doesn't, we're left with the original actual existence as the only possibility.

 

This leaves the probability that we're a simulation tied to the probability that sentience can be created in a computer simulation, rather than the probability that an 'existence' is either the original, or one of an almost unlimited number of simulations.

 

Of course, the running of most simulations does not imply sentience. (Although I could swear that some of my code not only has sentience, but actual malfeasance.) I think in the theory though, the definition of "advanced simulation" does require sentience. (If the ancestor simulation is not sentient, then the civilization is not advanced yet. Sentience is the (a?) lynchpin of advanced.)

 

Can sentience be created artificially? I think, to some degree, it will be. Still an excellent point to attack the argument. Of course, then I would ask, where does our sentience come from? Is it organic, or metaphysical?

 

The way, I think may be best to attack it? The writings of some of the proponents say that time scales don't matter, that "advanced" can be 50 years, or 5 billion into the future. Still, if the universe is 12-15 billion years old, perhaps there has not been time to develop sentience in simulations of this scale, or the space to perform them. They hypothesis assumes infinite time and space, which we do not seem to have. Of course, one could just read this as the simulated universe is that old, or even say our definition of sentience is held within this simulation.

 

At the end of the day, if there's not a testable hypothesis, it is a just an intellectual plaything. I'm sticking to the belief its elephants all the way down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was a simulation, then teleportation would be a cinch. Any object in a 3D game has a set of xyz co-ordinates. Imagine if travel was as simple as saying "yep, not actually here. I'm there" by messing with all your vectors :)

 

Does anyone have cheat codes for this thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...