Simulation Theory

ITT: we discuss the simulation theory.

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=e0_8qLj3ypw
youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM
topdocumentaryfilms.com/simulation-hypothesis/
youtube.com/watch?v=QE8dL1SweCw
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I'm starting to think that 'simulation theory' was just a covert way to talk about the red pill. Realizing that the modern world is predicated upon numerous false presuppositions is just about as jarring as believing that the world is a simulation.

I think a lot of people think that simulation theory means that you're perceived reality is the matrix or something like that and your body is in a tube plugged in to some wires. But properly construed, the theory posits that there is no physical reality and that you are a computer program - like an NPC in a video game.

Terribly sorry to whoever was watching my storyline all day since all I did was browse Sup Forums and do laundry.

Yeah, or a pointless thought experiment. It's nice and all but it's kind of idealism for 13 year olds.

Like the idealism of Berkley?

I don't buy it, but even if there is a simulation there's still a base level under it; ie. natural law

If our universe is simulated then surely it's possible to eventually create a simulator within the simulator, or break out of the simulator from the inside?

Yes, you're correct that there would be a base. But the point of the theory is that we could be very far from the base, i.e., we could be living in a simulation created by a simulation which was created by a simulation which was created by a simulation.... and so on towards infinity.

Even if the theory is true, though, I doubt it would really make a difference.

They probably limit our computing power needed

burden of proof is on those making the claim

Isn't quantum theory pretty much one big argument for the simulation theory?

If small particles only exist when observed wouldn't that pretty much be like in a videogame where only your field of vision is rendered to save computing power?

thats exactly what i believe.

If you know a lick of science, you realize the concept of living in a simulation is fucking ridiculous fro 2 reasons.

1) We can't even model a heavy element atom completely accurately with the best math and computers in the world, how the hell do you simulate the 10^23 particles in a grain of sand, let alone the roughly 10^80 particles that make up the universe. Symmetrizing that wavefunction would be a motherfucker. It's a motherfucker for even just a hand full of particles.

2) The simulation idea doesn't get you anywhere. Where does the simulation reside? If it resides in something akin to our universe, who is to say the simulator isn't being simulated itself. Eventually you have to hit bedrock reality. Due to the lack of predictive power of supposing we live in a simulation, nothing is gained from that assumption. Occam's Razor suggests then that we live in the base reality.

The Tower of Babel was a device to charge the sky with electricity. It worked, but caused mass amnesia, except for those that were inside the tower. Since then, they have played us all like rubes, and lied about everything.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=e0_8qLj3ypw

this question is easy to be answered when you look at videogames. things are only being rendered when needed. only when we look at them. which is how quantum mechanics work. its all an illusion. literally everything. when you eradicate the need for "substantial" things, you are only left with illusions. and computing illusions is way easier, especially for supercomputers that run our simulation in the real world.

I'm inclined to agree with you, generally.

As far as 1.) goes, I think the theory's proponents would just say that "just because we can't do it now doesn't mean we won't be able to in the future." Which isn't a great argument and is made by philosophers instead of physicists or comp scientists. But maybe you can take it at face value.

As far as (2.) I don't think it is supposed to get you anywhere. And I don't think the theory posits that "there is no reality." It just suggests that the probability is that we aren't living in it.

this desu

also notice how all complex natural phenomenon can be explained through simple mathematical equations, in fact 4 mathematical equations.

Sounds a lot like someone was trying to save space by reusing the same equations.

here are a few pics for ya'll.

No, it just doesn't work... think about the gpu required to run, "the world" and the amount of ram.. Not to mention the hard drive for the USA alone... simulation theory is what it is.. a fictional movie called the matrix

...

I will tell you what the Gnostic texts say.

Our realm is a Shadow of the Fathers Pleroma.

The Pleroma means the Fullness. The Universe is more then just the material realm that we know.

The Archons are in control of this Material Realm. The Chief Archon is the Demiurge and he is the abortion of the Aeon Sophia.

Aeons are Emanations of the One. The Supreme god. The Monad. But Sohpia and Aeon made a copy of her Fathers Pleroma without his permission and it was a corrupted creation that she tried to destroy or hide from the other Aeons.

The Demiurge is in control of this Material realm. He is the Blind, Ignorant and Jealous god that thinks he is the only god.

Think of the Demiurge like the Architect of the Matrix

Also, where the fuck are all the alien signals? A simulation would help explain that.

Simulation Theory/Hypothesis etc is the perfect way to pacify young white men(the only people who would even entertain such a thing).

t. Samuel Hydeberg(pbuh)

gnosticism is a satanic lie designed to corrupt men and blind them from the truth

One question to simulation theory

If we are being simulated and the people who simulated us are being simulated, how did it all begin?

As in who where the first to make a simulation and how did they come to exist?

When a video game entity is frozen to save computer cycles, it's state does not change. That is emphatically not true for quantum systems; they evolve per Schroedinger's equation when you aren't looking at them.

t. a hacker and physicist

>"just because we can't do it now doesn't mean we won't be able to in the future."
It's been mathematically proven that one can't even solve the 3-body problem in closed form.

>As far as (2.) I don't think it is supposed to get you anywhere. And I don't think the theory posits that "there is no reality." It just suggests that the probability is that we aren't living in it.
I'm not saying there isn't a reality. However, unless you can test for the simulation, then it isn't science, it's philosophy. Maybe someone clever will come up with a test (I know some people have tried), but at present there is no evidence to support such a hypothesis.

>1)
Moore's law
every 2 years our computing power roughly doubles
with the advent of quantum computing it doesn't seem as impossible to me, google increased their quantum computer from 128qbits to 512qbits and found a 200.000x increase in computing power, instead of just 4

think about how short a timeframe we had computers, in the grand scheme of evolution, previous human lifespan and - hopefully long - coming human lifespan there's no way computing power won't PISSFUCKTUPLE to unimaginable heights
I'm saddened that I won't see any of it

>2)
the idea is that reality doesn't operate like our simulation whatsoever, on any level

much like videogames or AIs don't operate on our perceived reality
it's a language and chain of commands covering as many possible events as necessary, not actual physics

but maybe that very evolution is just part of the illusion?

From my perspective it is you who is Satanic and is trying to defend the Demiurge who is an alien false god.

pretend you're a videogame character with a conscience
re-read your post

Can't be answered. Like all good religions simulation theory is unfalsifiable.

We are living inside an alien MMO.

Kikes are the admins and the bogs are the gms. Rich people are simply neet fags on autismbux that purchased the season pass.

POLITE SAGE BECAUSE WIKILEAKS BUT ILL TLDR IT FOR YOU

it is logically flawless in that it cannot be refuted, likely cannot be proven but it may be possible. id sugest getting into topology, group theory, linear algebra, quantum shit, planck length...

all very tantalizing ideas. thinking of the universe as being le child's computer game is not very based, though there are isomorphic conceptions that can make senses

you have to ask why a simulation would be created in the first place

the answer may be that it is part of the evolution of information where environments get created that facilitate more evolution, you need rule based environments for information (our consciousness) to evolve into more order and not retreat into disorder

>millennials are so poorly educated they are only just now encountering René "give her the D"escartes Evil Demon thought experiment for the first time

Goyim, did you know you aren't even real?

I think if you're asking that question there is literally no end to it, theres always a simulation within a simulation - i guess the only true answer would be "god"

LE WHITE PEOPLE HAHAHA XD
HOW DO I UPVOTE YOUR COMMENT?
kill yourself.

who the fuck knows
we might just be some interdimensional simulated pokemon game that some higher being created for his middle-school science project

Isn't that a misinterpretation? I'm pretty sure they change because of the necessary method of observation.

>I'm pretty sure they change because of the necessary method of observation.
I'm not sure I'm following

did you guys notice that we are all simply empty energy?

the smallest known component of the universe is the string and basically everything around the string is just empty void. we are literally just empty energy. we wouldnt even technically exist. its all just mentally. this is the big yoke. we are all living in an illusion.

Unless this theory is dis-provable, it is not science.

Quantum theory is garbage.

Look up Luminiferous Aether, Ken Wheeler's theory on Magnetism and prepare to have your mind blown.

here is a theory. when we expect this to be simulation, we assume there is so much more outside of it we cant even think of. but what if it is a dream or thought?

a dream is everything of this world, + what we can imagine. what if the reality this one is based upon is much more dull and boring as this world already springs from the imagination of the beings in the upper reality. further more the reality above us could just be a dream or thought too, making the reality that reality is based upon even less vast and complex. this could go on until there are beings living in a 2D world imagining the 3rd dimenstion. which in turn was imagined by an enthity living in a 1 dimensional world dreaming of the 2nd dimension. now one dimensional would be a line, or a sequence of something being there or not, 0s or 1s, binary code. however what if that thought, of something being there, is imagined by an entithy living in complete nothingness (the source) imagining how it could be if there is something. that enthity dreams of something more, the 2nd dimension, that of the 3rd, those beings then think of different senses you could have until we reach this reality.

however it probably goes then the other way too. our dreams are also dreaming of more and more, imagining things we cant.

free will would be explained by the thoughts that randomly pop up sometime "i could easily jump to my death here" "i could just take this knife and push it in that guys back" "i could just throw him in front of the bus and noone could stop me" all these trigger a rection in us, even if its just the thought "wow, where did that come from?" if we are effected it effects the realms we are based on as well, and the realms that are based on us. as above, so below.

Yeah and think of the hard problem of consciousness. Not try and figure out how it can arise from computer code. Beyond retarded.

>
as soon as this theory is dis-provable its not real anymore. im sure you meant "provable"

Dude, the people on the other side of my lab are at the forefront of quantum computers.

Pro Tip: QCs are going to be at most a perphiery device akin to a GPU or FPU designed to solve specific mathematical tasks quickly. If you think that you are going to be running an OS on a quantum computer, you have no understanding of the operating principles nor applications of QCs.

Btw, Moore's law is dead. Computers will marginally improve from here on, but we actually have some of the best hardware we ever will have right now on our desktops. The next engineering direction after exhausting sped up clocks, pipelines, and multicore, is compute fabrics like FPGAs.

>it's a language and chain of commands covering as many possible events as necessary, not actual physics
Actually, physics is the business of predicting how reality evolves in time and space, believe it or not.

youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM

I don't think they change simply because they're being observed. Rather, our technology can't detect them without physically effecting them.

This is /x/ tier.

>theory
What evidence is there for this in the first place?
Remember that unfalsifiable "we're all imagining everything like in matrix flmlm" isnt worth a fuck.

fuck off to /x/

What am I looking at here? Is that particular flower an example of the Mandela effect?

You're just an idiot who has no idea what materialism or realism is let alone the double slit experiment in quantum physics

Observation is not limited to human consciousness like the memers will have you believe, pretty much anything can be an observer in QM.

its fucking dumb

>waahhh but if material reality isn't real then ... !
>it feels like god stole all my shekels

No, dis-prove. Black Swan. You cannot prove a theory, you can only disprove a theory.

good to know
I guess we'll have to wait and see
not like we'll ever live to find out the truth anyway

regarding the double slit experiment
measuring the electrons before they pass through the slit and measuring them after they pass through the slit makes no difference whatsoever

same wave interference pattern

if it was the measuring device affecting the electrons there would be a difference because they'd still have to pass through the slits while the others don't

thats a post made by the reality-managers.

their beauriocratic arm calls itself scanners and they possess the ability to edit the real world like a video game editor. including actual persons. saw it myself. deep shit.

You are fucking dumb

topdocumentaryfilms.com/simulation-hypothesis/

Like most religions it's honestly an escape. Just an excuse a bunch of people tell themselves because they can't believe life is as bad as it is and that some external force is responsible for. Mostly druggies.

What board is this from

8 chan /scanner/

The theory is true for these reasons:
>there's a logical order to the universe, e^(pi*i)+1=0
>there are "constraints" consistent with the rules programming, little tells so to speak, such as a seemingly infinite size but a speed limit (speed of light)
>most significantly, we're going to get to the point in quantum computing where we can run a simulation in the universe with coscience beings. They will eventually get to the point in quatum computing to create a simulation etc. The odds that we are the FIRST universe is too slim. Odds are we're the simulation of a simulation etc.

It doesn't really change anything for me. We don't have any free will but it's okay, can still enjoy and we have the illusion of free will

not at all
a perfect simulation will give its "players" a consciousness and lets them act freely within the simulation's boundaries

i.e. if your computer program starts consciously writing its own code, it's the computer program's if it decides to make the wrong/bad code

im not sure about you, but i CANT enjoy my life knowing we have no free will.

That is Doktor Popper. Good read.

neckbeards spend too much time inside their basement and start thinking they're stuck inside the matrix because they imagine the outside world like a video game

its a hypothesis not a theory

fucking retards

>im not sure about you, but i CANT enjoy my life knowing we have no free will.
refer to

I used to think as a kid nothing existed unless I was directly interacting with it. If I thought of it at twelve thinking it was an original thought then I can safely assume it's retarded.

They are some very interesting interpretations of quantum physics that fit very nicely with a simulation theory. If you take what they say at face value it makes much more sense than a new universe being created every time an electron "makes a choice." I'm not a quantum physicist, though, but I do know the quote about radical shifts in science only coming with the death of the previous generation.

It's a theory as to why particles do this when left unobserved , instead of behaving like particles they reveal themselves to be probabilities . When observed they behave like particles, begging the question of if reality is tied to conscious observation

...

which makes us question WHAT IS CONSCIOUSNESS?

If this wasn't a simulation, I wouldn't get this kind of digits.

It's time to wake up.

Also, this is generally interpreted divinely, as opposed to some super-civilization creating a computer program and watching the universe suffer.*

My question: assuming it is real, how do we escape the simulation?

death

It's the base of reality and you're experiencing it right now, even when you dream a reality is created for you by consciousness. Material reality is a 'product' or illusion created by consciousness. People used to believe materialism was the base and consciousness was somehow derived from the interaction of atoms etc. we now know this is not the case

The way we can test whether or not we are living in a simulated universe is by attempting to create one ourselves (once we achieve a higher level of technological development.) If we can, it is more likely that another intelligent species created the universe we live in as a simulation. If we cannot, it is more likely that we are living in base reality.

The reason meme magic works is because you ... we are an active player(s) in conscious reality.

>most significantly, we're going to get to the point in quantum computing where we can run a simulation in the universe with coscience beings.


They always slip this in. It's bullshit. I studied computer engineering and artificial life in college; consciousness is not even defined, and the mechanism of sentience is beyond anyone's comprehension. The "Singularity" was invented to sell books and procure grant money. It's bullshit.

We're just gonna have really good algorithms with really fast machines. That's it.

>Let teachers and priests and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this -- if life is an illusion, I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content.

-Conan the Barbarian

personally i think the simulation shit is the only thing that jives with the delayed choice eraser. that doesn't mean we're living out the matrix movies, or even in a deliberately created sim, could just be a facet of reality

>It's a theory as to why particles do this when left unobserved
No it's not. It just says that we live in a simulation.

Also, the wave-particle duality is rubbish. The only reason things look like "particles" is because the freespace eigenfunctions of the position operator are dirac deltas, a dimensionless spike, aka particle. When a measurement is made, a system collapses (arguably) to the corresponding eigenfunction of the value measured. Since no measurement is perfect, there is always a spread in position that you measure in freespace, such that the system doesn't collapse to a point, just a really tightly bunched spike. Schrodinger's equation takes care of the rest.

Does it have anything to do not casting your pearls before swine... ie Calvinists and their hard determinism.

youtube.com/watch?v=QE8dL1SweCw

You're making the assumption that programming other beings use is remotely similar to our own. Tomorrow our knowledge of physics might change forever, and lightspeed hasnt always been constant.

>delayed choice eraser
Honestly I think the concept the concept that the measurement process entangles your quantum state with what you are measuring is a lot more clean. The wavefunction collapse interpretation is something unique in physics, in that it is instantaneous. I can't think of any other thing like that.

That theory is wrong for those same reasons:

> There must be a logical order to the 1st, original universe, otherwise the laws of science wouldn't exist and you'd never be able to create a simulation.
> There must also be constraints like the speed limit of light in the 1st universe too, otherwise you'd see/hear everything happening everywhere all at once, because electromagnetic waves would have infinite speed and thus propagate everywhere instantly.

> Logical ordering and physical constraints aren't evidence for us being in a simulation, because the universe needs to already have those properties for beings in it to create a simulation.

We're not close necessarily, but we will create a simulation with beings that are """conscience""" just as we are. We think we have sentience but it's just a program. Yes, we will be able to create a simulation with beings that believe they're conscience, and, relatively speaking, they are (like us) just not conscience in the "real" or "first" universe

that which begs the question to fill the gaps in our world's "code"
a tool to avoid paradoxes within the simulation so the simulation can run by its rules

if the code fucked up and you suddenly stopped being conscious of the floor below your feet, you would fall

instead consciousness simply tells the "code": render only what I really need at this time, run more efficient background computing for everything I'm not conscious of
for all intends and purposes, a grain of sand can be simulated as a grain of sand when nobody is conscious of it, instead of a complex structure of billions of atoms

we don't
you could ask the same question about your waifu
how will you ever get her out of the 2D world?

the answer is: never
if we really live in a simulation this perfect then I never want to leave
it's fucking great in here

>there is always a spread in position that you measure in freespace,


Is this the Planck constant?

that's assuming the beings that "programmed" this world did so without limiting our access to their "reality"

if you were tasked to make a simulation with conscious beings within it
would you possibly give them the same powers and possibilites you have?
or would you severely limit them within their simulation so they can never achieve the same you did?

all I know is that we cosmically limit our videogames in relation to our reality

>Is this the Planck constant?
Naw, just regular old Uncertainty Principle as applied to space-momentum measurements.

You didn't address the most important point, that we're going to get to the point in quantum computing where we can run a simulation.

And, the first order may very well have had a logical order and physical constraints, no disagreements. But it's likely that they created a simulation, then those beings created a simulation etc

truth