Is there enough evidence to support "all this" as a mere simulation?

Is there enough evidence to support "all this" as a mere simulation?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/GZgBcRhGPqs
youtu.be/nnl6nY8YKHs
simulation-argument.com/
qntm.org/responsibility
youtube.com/watch?v=7KcPNiworbo
youtu.be/J0KHiiTtt4w
youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc
youtu.be/LJtP0Ep1_ds
youtu.be/pCofmZlC72g
youtube.com/watch?v=w8Q6CWv7IXo
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler's_delayed_choice_experiment
scribd.com/doc/403303/The-Revelations-of-an-Elite-Family-Insider-2005
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

This is something much more interesting.

No

Well you're never going to prove it. At least not today. However, the simple fact that our senses are just electrical signals in our brain suggests that our reality could be simulated. Look up the brain in the vat.

No.

digits confirm that our handlers outside the simulation are now afraid of their creation and what it is capable of

Does a bear shit in the woods?

Google: Nick Bostrom

Yes

No, but there is nothing proving otherwise either. Seems to be as logical as any other explanation of existence though.

digits for no

Also now they put your life in nightmare mode

It's practically a certainty.

Yes
This simulation was created by the bog twins

No.
Well, maybe.
If someone were to stumble upon the shit
Then it would be added.
But until then it's just probabilities

You can't even logically prove you exist

ABSTRACT. This paper argues that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage; (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof); (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. It follows that the belief that there is a significant chance that we will one day become posthumans who run ancestor-simulations is false, unless we are currently living in a simulation. A number of other consequences of this result are also discussed.

yes
nihilism is the answer

youtu.be/GZgBcRhGPqs

youtu.be/nnl6nY8YKHs

That's pretty fucking open ended.

simulation-argument.com/

Well, no. I can't logically prove YOU exit

Boltzmann brain is the most probable scenario according to occam's razor.

Not really- either:

> We go extinct before our technology reaches a level of being able to run a simulation of this complexity
>We reach a technological level capable of running simulations of this complexity but for some reason chose not to run simulations.
>We reach a technological level capable of running simulations of this complexity and do so. In that case the chances of us actually being in the base reality are pretty slim because the one base reality would be running millions or billions of simulations with varying variables...which in that you are much more likely to be in a simulation than the base reality.

Given our fascination with video games and all other forms of immersive entertainment, it seems unlikely we would chose not to run simulations if we had the capabilities.

every day things happen that force me to question whether we live in a simulation.

Its getting to the point of actual spooking me proper.

You can't prove that you exist either. At least not in the sense that you believe you exist. For all you know you could be a self-aware computer program. Or an aware portion of some other entities hallucination. Or a Boltzmann brain which will die within a few moments. You don't know shit. All you know is that you are perceiving something which you think is reality. Nothing is concrete.

This is literally heresy.

Same. I am almost certain that this world is not what it seems at this point, and given all possible scenarios, a simulation appears to be the most logical and probable.

I kind of like the idea anyway. It makes our failures in life seem even less significant than they already are, and it allows a window open for the possibility of a second chance, or another life, "reincarnation" if you will, if the simulation is run again after we die.

If you play the Sims here does it mean that you could be controlling someone ,while you are being controlled by someone somewhere else

This doesn't prove anything, but one of those 3 statements is almost certainly true. So it is pretty likely that humans go extinct or we are in a simulation, this theory goes well with the Fermi Paradox .

I wonder who is behind these rampant nuage "I fakin lav science" brainfart DUUUUUDE *simulation theories*.

It's definitely North China Buddhists, for fucks sake.

Simulation theory has been a popular topic on internet message boards for at least 15 years. Get with it.

Do you think we'll ever have the computing power to simulate a universe? I don't see why not. If we can do it, then there's a far greater chance that we're in a simulation. It's effectively a chain. The chance of any single link being the first in the chain is far slimmer than not being the first link.

>Rendered too early to travel through space
>Rendered just at the right time for a future society to run infinite number of simulations of existences to determine which is the best way to maximize their lifetimes

you can't disprove it

No.

It's an idea that predates computer technology entirely. The gnostics thought the same thing through a religious cultural filter, and Plato was working with the same notion through simple philosophy.

I believe all this "we live in the matrix" crap is an attempt to ground the tactile, real world around us in the essentially abstract and noncorporeal system of numbers that the secular humanist, material worldview might require to operate.

If an object is a reflection of numbers, then numbers are real somewhere. The idea of "information" actually existing physically as a component of the universe rather than as some ontological imaginary phantom is attractive for some people.

I don't think that that is true. Ideas aren't real, and numbers are just symbols for an idea, even if they can be used helpfully in a rigid language to describe real things.

If one simulated universe has been created, then it's a 99.9999999999999999999999999% recurring probability that ours is a simulation. There will be simulations within simulations within simulations within simulations. An endless cycle where the probability of ours being the real universe is impossibly small.

Would a real, host universe even need to exist in this scenario? Who knows. Perhaps reality only exists inside a computer and there's nothing beyond that. A computer is effectively God.

A more important question is, will Space Elevator ever come back?

Everything that happens in the universe can be calculated, measured, and explained with numbers. Our reality is very much like a computer program.

This is a good short story for this thread.

qntm.org/responsibility

but does our reality have any glitches? you would expect some of that in a computer program as well

This post is a simulation

black science man discusses this, another guy found the glitches

>glitches
The Bogs

But if the simulations haven't been run yet, then the chance that we are a simulation is 0%.

You have to prove that a simulation exists in order to posit that we are one.

That doesn't fucking mean that numbers are real.

A computer program resembling the moon is not the moon, and is not evidence that the moon is being created by some digital demiurge.

If I think of a universe/world in my mind, could it be said to exist?

The same as with alien life memers.

Alien civilizations may be common, but you first have to find one to prove it is even possible.

Information literally exists. See: entropy.

This video, surprisingly, talks about this in a quite serious manner.

youtube.com/watch?v=7KcPNiworbo

If my dick was in your ass, could it be said to exist?

That just seems like some kind of logical fallacy. That would be akin to saying that there is a 0% chance that humans will set foot on Mars because no humans have set foot on Mars before.

I'm definitely not saying to is any proof for simulation theory or every will be for that matter...but it is possibility.

If simulation is possible, there are millions or more simulations and only one 'real' or 'top-level' universe. Simulations are possible, because we create them ourselves. Therefore, it's incredibly unlikely that we are the top-level world. So yes, we're in a simulation.

I think one of the rules is that belief influences reality, or 'meme magic'. I also think that the simulation is limited by 'perception points'. That is, things that are not being perceived are not simulated until they are perceived.

I've been considering different purposes for this lately. For example, me might be trapped here as punishment for crimes committed elsewhere. It could be that we're here to gain experience and/or learn something, and that everything we experience here remains with our higher-level selves, and we regain access to our 'real selves' at 'death'. Maybe entertainment too. We could just be random occurrences in a physics simulation, too. Who knows.

>>We reach a technological level capable of running simulations of this complexity but for some reason chose not to run simulations.

Imagine the EU "rights for robot" legal discussion evolves.
>We can't run a simulation because we cannot guarantee that 'life' will not arise, and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to run the simulation through to end of life within it."

Very important for anyone actually considering this perspective -

Math is fatal. The output of any equation is wholly predetermined and calculable.

If you believe that the world is run by machine code, that means that there is no such thing as free will. There is no such thing as choice in a video game world.

The amount of mental gymnastics required to believe that humans don't have free will simply to support a simulation theory (or any determinist argument) is staggering.

We are an alien civilization, therefore it's possible.

No, it's like asking how many people live in Atlantis. First prove Atlantis exists, then we can posit the population. If it doesn't exist, it's a nonsense question.

If "all this" is a mere simulation, that would mean that the odds of a species in our universe eventually creating their own simulated universe is very high. In turn, that simulated universe has a very high chance of creating a simulated universe inside of their simulated universe. So on and so forth.
The same holds true for the supposed beings which created our supposed simulated reality, and the beings which created the simulated reality of our universe's simulators. So on and so forth.
Infinite bullshit is what it is.

Of course it is. Computer programs exist in reality. Holy shit.

this. The ability to create & run a simulation is a fundamental piece of this puzzle. The statistical argument relies on our ability to create one.

Until that point in time the statistical argument is missing one of its legs.

>meme magic
Thousands of people shitposting, one is bound to be right eventually. That isn't magic.

youtu.be/J0KHiiTtt4w

>>everything we experience here remains with our higher-level selves, and we regain access to our 'real selves' at 'death'

I love this concept.

ENTROPY ISNT MADE OUT OF DATA
THIS IS JUST SEMANTIC HORSE SHIT

A DRAWING OF A HORSE ISNT A HORSE

EVEN IF YOU CAN USE NUMBERS TO PERFECTLY PREDICT THE DATE OF THAT HORSE'S DEATH, IT DOESNT MEAN THAT NUMBERS WERE EVER REAL THINGS

YOURE JUST COPYING THE REAL THINGS USING REPRESENTATIVE SYMBOLS - NUMBERS.

No we aren't.

1. If 'free will' exists in the top-level universe, there's no reason it couldn't be simulated as well. You're claiming to understand all possible machines that could ever be created, even in universes with completely different rules, by making that claim. You do not actually have that knowledge.

2. If 'free will' exists in our world, then choices absolutely do exist in video games. It's just that you are choosing between pre-defined outcomes, just like the real world.

3. 'Free will' doesn't exist, and is a fundamentally incoherent concept that you do not actually understand.

4. You're extremely dumb.

It could be a minority report style thing where this world is a prison of the mind. We are put here in a matrix style existence for crimes we committed until we die or finish up our sentence.

It'd be a pretty humane way of removing people from the population of the real world when you think about it.

I used to think about this stuff as a kid, the possibility that none of this is real and there could be some external world that we are unaware of. It terrified me. It used to keep me up at night. This was years prior to the release of the first Matrix too. I often wonder if maybe someone on the outside was feeding me information somehow, maybe trying to help me break free.

You're right. But your argument is a straw man, because no one is claiming that is what meme magic is.

You literally cannot prove that free will exists. There is no mental gymnastics involved, just because you think you are master of your destiny does not make it so.

Here is the actual experiment that proves we are in a simulation, for anyone interested in it. No one has even attempted to disprove it - because the experiment was simple. Balls simple. The outcome was just unexpected. There is no other logical explanation.

Just watch it:
youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc

bretty gud

I hate to break it to you all, but this "simulation" was created by God who came down and was crucified by us. I would repent if I were you.

>implying it's not something closely related to a simulation but too complicated for our simulated minds and simulated physics to comprehend

Stop it

Have you looked up adinkras?

If you look up the mathematician responsible for organizing the research on Adinkras, and listen to him speak, you might enjoy it.

Furthermore, if it is a "simulation," it doesn't really explain what is doing the simulating.

The absence of free will can already be argued on a purely biological basis. Sam Harris makes this argument well.
Three formats:
Lecture Snippet: youtu.be/LJtP0Ep1_ds
Ful Lecture (Harris begins at 00:01:30): youtu.be/pCofmZlC72g
A 3 hour chat with Rogan where it's covered: youtube.com/watch?v=w8Q6CWv7IXo

almost 2 hours long? just tell us what it means faggot

>tfw you realize its all just a game of Roy

if we're getting eerily close to being able to make perfect simulations of the current world, what are the chances that were the first civilisation to do this? and not some simulation inside a million other simulations?

Yeah, I agree with you. This would explain 'original sin'. That is, they let us keep the knowledge or feeling of the crimes that we've committed, so we could atone for it.

The lives we lead here could also be directly related to our crimes. For example, we killed someone in some future version of this simulation, so our punishment is to live that person's life from their own perspective until its termination at your own hands, so you can see why what you did is wrong.

Or we became so powerful and advanced and long-lived that we forgot the subjective value of the sort of lives we lived before we became that way, so we're re-experiencing them to humble ourselves. Or punishing ourselves for treading on lower life forms.

Infinite possibilities, really. I don't see any feasible way to narrow them down, unfortunately.

Intelligent Design. Humans will never be able to replicate the same universe we live in now due to laws of physical constraints. A bee cannot be replicated in a simulation down to the atom level because of quantum limitations.

You are just suggesting doing away with theorization in general...

It's a discussion of the Aussies' validation of the Wheeler Delayed-Choice Experiment.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler's_delayed_choice_experiment

no because anti-gravity tech exists which is far better. Just one more thing that will eventually be disclosed

Give it 10 mins. That guy is one of the smartest humans alive right now. You've wasted 2 hours on lesser things. You'll come out of it much smarter.

posting Adinkras because nobody knows what they are

If you disagree with my first two arguments the third is most likely and you cannot disagree with it! HA HA, CHECKMATE!
If there's something more to that video I'd love to hear it, but the first 3 minutes was an incredibly flawed argument.

remote sensing could be a glitch/exploit

...

lets say we are in a simulation, therfore not real just 0's and 1's. they guys that made us how can they ever know for sure that they are not in a simulation too? and they guys that made them too. and so on.
Idk what to think about it.But i hope we are in a simulation, so that reality doesn't revolve around rocks floating in space and thats it.

...

We cannot measure or see anything past a certain level of detail. That could be evidence of what you're saying. The simulators of a a more complicated universe couldn't simulate things at that level of detail, though things exist there in their own world, so we cannot see it.

This /x/-tier rabbit hole implies exactly that:
scribd.com/doc/403303/The-Revelations-of-an-Elite-Family-Insider-2005

The entire universe is just a Dwarf Fortress style "world" that's yet to be killed off by FPS Death.
Eventually the player will get bored and start a new game.

What difference at this point does it make?

Do you not know about Space Elevator you fucking plebeian

SE was what got me into Sup Forums in the first place.
Came for the science, stayed for the white supremacy.

simulation theory is just athiests trying to fill the void of god

fucking hilarious in all actuality

'Simulation theory' is not a single theory - there are many different and conflicting theories as to how such a thing could be, and what it would mean. Many of these ideas, like evolution, are completely compatible with belief in many different gods, including the Christian God.

>2-dimensional projection from the outside ring of the universe
>once we are able to see one planck of the level of space we will be able to see a holographic hum or haze that will give evidence of a holographic reality
>GEO 600 discovers such noise in 2009
>lattice that forms the universe is discovered in 2012

>we're in a simulation of an advanced species

PUT ME IN A MEDIEVAL SIM YOU FUCKERS