So, if Elon Musk is right and we basically live in a simulation, a computer program...

So, if Elon Musk is right and we basically live in a simulation, a computer program, would it be possible for us to mess with the physics of it from the inside? Is there a console we could possibly hack into?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well_World_series
youtu.be/YjuKP3rwz0c
reddit.com/r/DebateAnAtheist/comments/21oc48/tom_campbells_theory_of_everything/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Process
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Do the characters in the CoD games you spend all day playing ever hack into your computer?

Of course.
Didn't you see The Matrix?

How is that a fair comparison? They're not self aware.

yes they are

Neither are you

Rly makes you think, huh...???

Elon Musk is a nutcase that has money.

Yes, I performed a SQL injection with a piece of paper and doubled my penis size

oof

Why would anyone ever listen to a businessman talking about metaphysics ?

Rlyeh makes you dream.

I too watched S04E01 of Black Mirror.

OI M8, WUT IF UR LIFE WAS UR LIFE BUT IT WAS REALLY A SIMULATION LIKE UR MUMS A COMPUTER, THAT'D BE FUCKING MENTAL, INNIT?

hair-plugs do wonder

humans are extremely prone to anthropomomorphing, hence the original big picture idea of gods / god who created man in "his" image, obviously in retrospect that happened the other way around, and now we live in the information age so some people imagine the universe as a simulation, but we are still probably a long, long way away from understanding why the universe exists instead of not, if that's even possible to understand from inside the universe. Anyway I'll go ahead and tip my own fedora, thanks, and yeah the earth is flat and its fucking turtles all the way down, too.

lmao

If it took you black mirror to make you think about this for the first time you must be pretty retarded

Whats Black Mirror? I've had this idea for years, but i didnt know anybody shared it

>Sup Forums in 2018

...

Only if it's running on Intel processors

That's what magick is for, OP.

if we're in a simulation then why's my dick so big?

Ask an NPC in Skyrim to create mods.

No, I can BSOD the main computer than.

Doubled in volume? Length?

...

Here you go, do this.

>tfw no qt negress to BREED

> about half the Star Trek Voyager episodes
> t. photonic life forms
> t. Unimatrix Zero

You're ready for Jack Chalker's Well of Souls universe
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well_World_series

We are all just expressions of the Master Equation. Not the most epic, deep sci fi series EVAH! But, a rollicking good read with a lot of brain candy thrown about the place.

The first trick is proving it. The second trick is altering it. If you don't just collapse everything into chaos on the second trick, the third trick is fine manipulation & micromanagement of detail.

>I will never turn myself into a hawt centaur chick
> the universe will accept that as perfectly normal expression of reality

What if you had a computer capable of simulating the entire universe from its beginning, with a seed value of initial configuration, then it ran through seeds until it reached a reality that approximates ours 1:1, up to the present? All information that had ever existed would be available to the user, possibly even people's thoughts.
>what if it already exists

Read the Magic 2.0 series if you like this.

she was so hot, too bad no rape scene

A serie in the future where technology passed a point where it doesn't help humans anymore, but more so dictates its life. Each episode is a different story

Yeah, I heard of the double slit experiment, how the fuck do we explain that?

I like this idea, it is reasonable to think that is how we would adjust our "God" vision

The common "accepted" theory right now is that any measuring instruments influence the experiment and are responsible for the effect
Here's some professor who thinks it's because we live in a subjective virtual reality:
youtu.be/YjuKP3rwz0c

Well we do know that the everything came from a singular source and that certain truths are universal.

It's not farfetched to know certain things because they are inherent in all of us. Things have a tendency to repeat and loop in the universe like a fractal.

A simulation is just another description of a soul having a human experience.

Zazen can allow you capabilities such as this.

>console

You mean a terminal? If you could find some thing like that or what their version is of it. For all we know there "computers" could run on some sort of syfi thing with living cells and shit. and if they have people on the inside I would only assume they have some sort of terminal like connection to make changes or view something. But hacking it is probably impossible. It would be in its own language.

hacks are rare at this point in time. maybe we need more knowledge. dunno if it's knowledge of physics or things parapsychology-related.

Elon Musk proved that we're in a simulation by creating the ultimate hack: himself

That room. Hyatt Regency in Long Beach.

> soul
there is no such a thing desu

0x2=0

That the true greatest question of the matrix.
Nobody would want to go out of it, everyone only want the gameshark.

>he didn't play ddlc

What if this simulation is created only for you? I mean... how can you be sure anyone is self aware just like you're? What if others are just programmed to act like humans? How can you be sure others has consciousness just like you?
I don't know if I do, I might be programmed to act like I do. I might not be real for what I know. Are you?

>can we mess with it
Well it's not the right perspective to take.
What you should be asking if the rules for our physical verse is distinctly discontinuous in some way. For instance if we had a bug like specter we'd have unexpected side effects from certain actions. It'd still be within our universe.
But as we gain sufficient scientific knowledge we'd either have to assume what we consider inconsistencies to be beyond our reach or that to be confirmation of this being a simulation.

>if Elon Musk is right and we basically live in a simulation
nigger it wasn't kiss butt cheek god elon who said that, it was a physicist

>anthropomomorphing

you mean isn't

he's not a professor tho
he's an applied physicist

I already know why the universe exists.

Hey guys. God here. The first thing you see when you die will be "Simulation Over". Then you wake up and your ancestor simulation vacation is over. Almost everyone you know is a turing test program, unless you agreed to enter the simulation with your family.

the fedoras over at radditz had some smug condescension to throw at the guy and his supporters:
reddit.com/r/DebateAnAtheist/comments/21oc48/tom_campbells_theory_of_everything/

That episode was trash. I had more sympathy for the incel Matt Damon than those computer simulations.

>tfw i am probably a masochist outside this simulation, i;ve picked the hardest mode ever. male asian

Savage.

Moriarty couldn't get out of his. Even if you knew you lived in a simulation you couldn't escape.

That achievement/trophy will be sweet once you're done though

>ywn hack into reality's code to make a qt girl fall in love with you
>ywn have her love you so much she'll cut herself thinking of you
>ywn have her steal your pens so she can masturbate to it
>ywn have her give you a love poem written in a paper stained with her blood, urine and vaginal fluids
>ywn accept her love which leads to her killimg herself put of happiness
>ywn stand still staring at her body slowly decomposing during the weekend

Thanks so much for reminding me fampai.

>melting the flash drive destroys quantum information
Is this a /sci/ meme I don't know of?

What is everything? Did you just indulge in some pop sci shows and accept their insinuations as dogma? Our current (decent) model suggests that the observable universe was the size of a walnut 14 billion years ago. What happened before that and what goes on outside of the known universe we do not have a way of working out atm and may never. However estimates for the actual size of the universe have a lower bound of at least twice that of the observable universe and have no upper bound. It is possible that there is an infinite amount of space-time and matter/energy in the universe. Read some books on relativity before you even regurgitate some shit you heard once.

that's a concept in elder scrolls lore already. look up chim.

The point is the universe came from a singularity, which in religious terms translates to we are one. Something we inherently are aware of.

That's the exact point I'm telling you is wrong. The matter of our universe took up a finite amount of space before inflation. When space-time is that compressed the concept of time is a little more wobbly. However there is little reason to view it as the "beginning of time". The details matter when you're trying to say something about nature.

thats racist.

this

it pissed me off so much everybody carried cellphones everywhere even when they did not want to be noticed

I didn't even mention time. It has nothing to do with that

Do you even know what relativity is?

>singularity
>nothing to do with time

This is a pointless conversation until you learn a bit more.

Relativity is about spacetime. Which is a measure of distance.

No one knows how time works.

No. Spacetime is a measure of space-time. They are the same thing. "I haven't bothered to learn what physicists have worked on over the past hundred years so no one knows how it works."

It doesn't really matter when it came to be with everything else. You're just trying to steer the conversation into a whole different direction just because the thought of spirituality makes you uncomfortable.

No you're trying to steer science into nonsense because you don't understand that space and time are variable but the speed of light is constant. Spirituality is for people who have given up on trying to actually understand things and can't accept not having an answer right now.

It's God we don't live in a simulation jackass.

Go on a mission to Afghanistan jackass.

Theoretical physics are as much a science as scientology is a religion. It's barely based on the scientific method.

>It's barely based on the scientific method.
Theoretical physics takes care of making predictions for experiments and explaining experimental results, which is literally part of the definition of the scientific method. Of course, there are some wolves in sheep hides (mathematicians) who pretend to be theoretical physicists and try to steal funding, but these do not count.

>he hasnt found the console yet

No theoretical physicists waste our taxes colliding plasma and trying to prove things we can't see.

Observation comes first in science, not the theory.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Process
>The overall process involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions from them as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments based on those predictions to determine whether the original conjecture was correct.

>They're not self aware
Prove it.

We can make use of spectre and meltdown to pull a Schrodinger and then rowhammer the fuck out of out destiny.

Yeah mean they really wasted society's resources by making GPS possible. They totally fucked up the 20th century by being the literal people to invent nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors and to explain astronomical observations before they were made.

Did you even read it yourself? The first step is to make an observation. Einstein was imagining being a lightwave lol.

Science is pretty much destroying this planets environment as we speak and we're all going along for the ride.

Same. Killing him was incredibly shoehorned and made no sense at all. They just decided that somebody has to die because it's Black Mirror.

Nah that's not science doing that.

Also
>destroying our planet
Like it belongs to someone else. If you anthropomorphized mother nature she'd be the first to tell you might makes right. However it's prudent to not shit in the bed we'll be laying in for the foreseeable future. There's also value in documenting rather than destroying other lifeforms to answer questions about ourselves.

...

>The first step is to make an observation.
This observation is not yet part of the proper experiment though, but reflects our current state of knowledge about the universe. From this, you come up with predictions, then you devise an experiment which would indicate if these predictions are right. Afterwards, you check how right you were. It's not like you do random stuff and then try to explain it, there is a constant stream of communication between theorists and experimentalists, which ultimately leads to a mostly agreed upon understanding of how the world works, which is then used for the next iterations to understand the parts which are still fuzzy.

At my wonderful chinese university I always make sure to make my hypothesis after the experiment.

Extremely limited interactions available inherent in their construction.

So it's ok to forgo asking why, when we saw something is happening and just go straight to thinking that something happens because we think something is happens and try and gather biased

It's a very fundamental concept that social scientists and theoretical phycisists love to ignore. They just got this gut feeling you know.

If I may I'd like to go back to how fucking wrong this is. Relativity was made based on limited observations on earth which was then applied to space where the model fit the data perfectly.

There is a starting point in every cycle of the scientific method that requires having made previous observations. The observations that matter are the ones that you made without knowing the outcome in advance that either prove or disprove your model.

>So it's ok to forgo asking why, when we saw something is happening
That's not what I said. But you don't just go ahead and try to explain something you observed, because it was not likely in an controlled environment. If you walk through nature and observe something interesting, you of course gather all the data you can on the spot, but it might not be feasible to do so (e.g. the path of lightning). You then go home, sit at your desk, research what you know about the phenomenon in question, and try to make a prediction about what is going on. This step is important, because based on this you decide how you plan to set up your experiment, i.e. in which environment, which observables you measure and what environmental parameters are important to control for. Then you perform said experiment, and based on the result, you prepare the next experiment until you arrive at a coherent understanding of the phenomenon.

>I always make sure to make my hypothesis after the experiment
I heard that even this can be difficult, so sometimes students deliberately mess with the equipment during measurement, so that they get a wrong result they can perfectly explain in the lab report.

No the next step is to try and replicate the observable in a controlled environment.

Try again.

>there might be things we cant detect (yet) besides their interactive disturbance of things we can detect
>conjure up 'quantum' anything that explains everything we cant explain
>0 proof
>0 working quantum computers
>i believ this