Physics Study uncovers evidence of holographic universe, scientists say

[Total Power]

Maybe we are an Artificial Intelligence ourselves and were placed inside a sim as a way for our creator to confine us?
That would be a clever ploy as I'm sure you would agree you wouldn't want AI out there running wild,it could cause damage to the base reality.
Maybe the AI that was created sometimes gets angry, or does things the base reality considers dangerous or doesn't do itself.
I believe people sometimes get angry,so this idea I could understand.

This is sci-fi stuff, maybe we were created by aliens. Maybe its just god, or maybe we are an accident. This is not an answer i am looking for. An infinite amount of energy will actually make the universe bust. Krauss in his book the universe from nothing, gave a fascinating example. If you have 1m dollars in your bank account then you are rich and well off. If you have an infinite amount of money in your bank account then your bank account is useless cause the account will never balance itself and the system will crash. Infinite amount of money would mean that money is actually worthless. This is true for energy as well. It's impossible to hold a sim to such a magnitude without it crashing into a black hole or exploding like a supernova.

My point is that much of the argument about simulations relies on the belief that the larger universe or container universe must obey the same rules and follow the same laws as our individual simulated universe. Hence, the idea arises that must be levels and that each lower level must have diminished resolution and detail. (read Bostroms original idea). If we are in a simulation we have no way to know whether the limitations of our simulation apply to the container universe or other simulations in it.

And your argument about AI? An "infinite" being would need an AI? Are you suggesting our creator is "finite" then? if indeed our creator is "finite" then it puts the simulation theory in grave danger.

 

[darthbards]

This is sci-fi stuff, maybe we were created by aliens. Maybe its just god, or maybe we are an accident. This is not an answer i am looking for. An infinite amount of energy will actually make the universe bust. Krauss in his book the universe from nothing, gave a fascinating example. If you have 1m dollars in your bank account then you are rich and well off. If you have an infinite amount of money in your bank account then your bank account is useless cause the account will never balance itself and the system will crash. Infinite amount of money would mean that money is actually worthless. This is true for energy as well. It's impossible to hold a sim to such a magnitude without it crashing into a black hole or exploding like a supernova.

My point is that much of the argument about simulations relies on the belief that the larger universe or container universe must obey the same rules and follow the same laws as our individual simulated universe. Hence, the idea arises that must be levels and that each lower level must have diminished resolution and detail. (read Bostroms original idea). If we are in a simulation we have no way to know whether the limitations of our simulation apply to the container universe or other simulations in it.

And your argument about AI? An "infinite" being would need an AI? Are you suggesting our creator is "finite" then? if indeed our creator is "finite" then it puts the simulation theory in grave danger.

Now your just being silly with this alien talk. I'm somewhat disappointed TP and I'm not sure the talk of Aliens is really appropriate.

We cannot know or understand the rules and laws that govern our creators universe until we have some understanding of the rules that govern base reality. You seem to be mix and matching in a slightly confused fashion.

One in a billion chance we are not living in a sim seem extremely long odds to me,and pretty hard to argue with.

 

[Total Power]

Now your just being silly with this alien talk. I'm somewhat disappointed TP and I'm not sure the talk of Aliens is really appropriate.

We cannot know or understand the rules and laws that govern our creators universe until we have some understanding of the rules that govern base reality. You seem to be mix and matching in a slightly confused fashion.

One in a billion chance we are not living in a sim seem extremely long odds to me,and pretty hard to argue with.

I am not talking about aliens, that was just a "probability" as well. You cannot prove me wrong.

So you arent willing to answer my questions or concerns and you are not willing to disclose why you think we live in a simulation or the math behind your 1 in a billion chance we arent living in a sim but still claiming to be so? you realise you are on science board not conspiracy.

This is why its useless to hold a discussion with you. Might as well go and talk to the Catholics about Jesus walking on water.

Its simply not possible to have infinite energy to hold a sim of this grand scale with energy and matter without crashing. Please try to disprove me. Also tell me why would an infinite being need AI?

 

[darthbards]

I am not talking about aliens, that was just a "probability" as well. You cannot prove me wrong.

So you arent willing to answer my questions or concerns and you are not willing to disclose why you think we live in a simulation or the math behind your 1 in a billion chance we arent living in a sim but still claiming to be so? you realise you are on science board not conspiracy.

This is why its useless to hold a discussion with you. Might as well go and talk to the Catholics about Jesus walking on water.

Its simply not possible to have infinite energy to hold a sim of this grand scale with energy and matter without crashing. Please try to disprove me. Also tell me why would an infinite being need AI?

Ok fine,if you think sims is a conspiracy good for you

Have a good day man and try and stay happy.

 

[Total Power]

Ok fine,if you think sims is a conspiracy good for you

Have a good day man and try and stay happy.

You fail. You parrott Elon Musk's statement as if he is the keeper of truth.

Elon also said we will be visited by aliens in 10 to 20 years from now.

Let me guess, you believe the first but dismiss the 2nd right?

You cannot post any defence to your sims theory. I asked you fair dinkum questions over and over again. You refused to answer any of these. Elon Musk made many ridiculous statements in open press. You parroting him on something that fits your belief system goes to show you are biased.

if we were living in a simulation, all that you state would be facts/laws that are only (with certainty) true in our simulated universe. We would have no idea what the world of the "creator" is like, and any - no matter how educated - guess, would be an unprovable assumption, and for the same reason, the hypothesis that we are living in a simulation is one that cannot be proven, nor disproven, very much like many philosophical theories. So while an interesting idea, it's not a scientifically sound hypothesis, because the very premise of it assumes that we know something about the "creator" (that they evolved like we did, to create computers like we did) which, as of now, is an impossibility.


its an idea that in fact does not differ from philosofical/religious beliefs, as it is based on assumptions that cannot be verified scientifically (as of 2017).

 

[bontshow]

Without commenting on the metaphysical aspects of this, I'll just go ahead and say that anyone who believes we're living in a simulation is clearly a theist by any reasonable definition of the term.

I guess, but without management or interference after setting the parameters. No prayers, miracles, judgment etc. as in religions

Since according to QM nothing can exist without an observer, does the simulation exist without consciousness?

Not sure that exist is the right term. More that something but can be in multiple states until it is observed

 

[bontshow]

the hypothesis that we are living in a simulation is one that cannot be proven, nor disproven, very much like many philosophical theories

Musk's approach was that given the recent rate of improvement in technology, he believed that one day we would be capable of creating such a simulation ourselves. If we got to that point, it would show that the world we live in is possible to create in a simulation, and we may be able find a way to tell whether our world is the same as a simulated one

 

[Total Power]

Not sure that exist is the right term. More that something but can be in multiple states until it is observed

My bad, yes thats what i meant. So what is a simulation like when no one is observing it from outside?

 

[Total Power]

Musk's approach was that given the recent rate of improvement in technology, he believed that one day we would be capable of creating such a simulation ourselves. If we got to that point, it would show that the world we live in is possible to create in a simulation, and we may be able find a way to tell whether our world is the same as a simulated one

VR is already here but it doesnt validate his hypothesis at all. It's easy to say you're living in a simulation if you've got unlimited cash like Elon Musk, but what about a starving baby in a poverty stricken country that dies at 3 months old and doesn't know what it's like to not be in pain?

Also, his argument seems to jump from "We'll one day be able to develop simulations indistinguishable from reality" to the conclusion "We're definitely in a simulation" without giving me any reason to think it's true.

 

[bontshow]

VR is already here but it doesnt validate his hypothesis at all. It's easy to say you're living in a simulation if you've got unlimited cash like Elon Musk, but what about a starving baby in a poverty stricken country that dies at 3 months old and doesn't know what it's like to not be in pain?

Also, his argument seems to jump from "We'll one day be able to develop simulations indistinguishable from reality" to the conclusion "We're definitely in a simulation" without giving me any reason to think it's true.

Yeah that's fair. I guess what got my attention was what can be implied from assuming the recent rate of technological change continues. I've seen it mentioned before when forecasting future pricing for say solar panels & battery systems, but not so much for theoretical future developments

 

[bontshow]

My bad, yes thats what i meant. So what is a simulation like when no one is observing it from outside?

Like the tree that fell in the woods when no-one could hear it

 

[Total Power]

Like the tree that fell in the woods when no-one could hear it

I mean do we exist in all different states at the same time? like lets say AFL match between Port vs Dogs.So is it a win/loss/draw for Port at the same time? and who and what determines the result then considering no one is observing out from outside the simulation other than the creator?

 

[bontshow]

I mean do we exist in all different states at the same time? like lets say AFL match between Port vs Dogs.So is it a win/loss/draw for Port at the same time? and who and what determines the result then considering no one is observing out from outside the simulation other than the creator?

You're conflating Schrodinger's Cat, Quantum Mechanics and Simulation Theory a little

Schrodinger's Cat is the one where a cat on a box had a 50/50 chance of being poisoned and is considered both alive and dead until you open the box and check on it. Almost a philosophical one

Quantum Mechanics observed that light functions like a wave unless you observe its path, in which case it functions like a particle. This is a repeatable experiment which is the basis for many theories regarding the observer, consciousness and multiple universes

Simulation theory states than the parameters of the universe were defined by a creator

To your questions - multiple universe theory would suggest all possible outcomes exist in different universes. Simulation theory doesn't really provide an answer, though it may imply the result is somewhat predetermined based on the parameters of the universe deciding our fate. Schrodinger's Cat provides that the game is won, lost and drawn until the result is known

 

[Total Power]

To your questions - multiple universe theory would suggest all possible outcomes exist in different universes. Simulation theory doesn't really provide an answer, though it may imply the result is somewhat predetermined based on the parameters of the universe deciding our fate. Schrodinger's Cat provides that the game is won, lost and drawn until the result is known

I understand what you mean,but my question so who and what determines the result in a specific universe? and what is the purpose ? in some universe Port wins, in others Port loses and in another there is a draw? What's the grand "plan" in all this? I just dont see the purpose in all this when you have all possible outcomes in a magnitude of different multiverses.

 

[bontshow]

I understand what you mean,but my question so who and what determines the result in a specific universe? and what is the purpose ? in some universe Port wins, in others Port loses and in another there is a draw? What's the grand "plan" in all this? I just dont see the purpose in all this when you have all possible outcomes in a magnitude of different multiverses.

I don't think anyone knows mate. Who knows whether these theories are true, let alone the reason why things are that way

 

[Total Power]

I don't think anyone knows mate. Who knows whether these theories are true, let alone the reason why things are that way

Fair enough, but i would like to say that is the results and "parameters" are determined in a specific universe that invalidates all religions immediately which preaches the concept of free will and Karma. I personally just think the amount of energy required to simulation all possible outcomes of a same event in millions of different multiverses is unthinkable. To say someone is running the simulation for 12 billion years without the computer overheating is impossible. Even if its operating at 70 percent its an issue. I remember when i play computer games, my computer overheats when i play graphics intensive games. So i cannot play the game 24 hours straight and not expect my computer to have no wear and tear? Imagine a chess board. Our life is like a chess board. How many permutations and combinations could there be from every "option" presented to us? A chess board alone can produce over a billion different scenarios. To make sure all these scenrarios play out in a billion different multiverses is madness, its not something we can get our head around and to be honest i just dont see the point of it? so there are billion different boydshows in a billion different universes? Well why for starters? these are the problems posed in a simulation hypothesis. Why does an omnipotent omnipresent good need a computer in first place to create us? can't he just "create" us? I think what Elon Musk said is pretty much his own "belief" at this point. He has no evidence to prove his hypothesis. He may very well be right but we have no way of knowing this at this point of time.

Well atleast good to have a discussion with you mate. Unlike some know it all people like darthbards you admitted the problems with the above hypothesis. Cheers

 

[CM86]

You're conflating Schrodinger's Cat, Quantum Mechanics and Simulation Theory a little

What do you mean? How are they not conflated?

Light travels in wave form and particle form, until observed.
The cat is alive and dead, until observed.

 

[The Dice Man]

This thread is really over my head but the ideas interest me. I kind of stopped thinking too deeply in my mid 20's as it just lead me nowhere... being a potheaded busker at the time having no education in science or mathematics. But the Elon Musk theory is just an extension of The Truman Show, unless we 'lift a veil' we will never know.

Interesting thread.

 

[Total Power]

What do you mean? How are they not conflated?

Light travels in wave form and particle form, until observed.
The cat is alive and dead, until observed.

Well said, so a Port vs Bulldogs game, all results are true until observed. Is it correct?

 

[Total Power]

This thread is really over my head but the ideas interest me. I kind of stopped thinking too deeply in my mid 20's as it just lead me nowhere... being a potheaded busker at the time having no education in science or mathematics. But the Elon Musk theory is just an extension of The Truman Show, unless we 'lift a veil' we will never know.

Interesting thread.

I wonder if Richmond are winning finals elsewhere in a different universe

 

[The Dice Man]

I wonder if Richmond are winning finals elsewhere in a different universe

How do I get a ticket there?

 

[CM86]

While we are on this thought experiment of life being a simulation.
Why should I (or we) abide by laws or rules? Morals or instinct?
What's stopping me from killing myself or others?

 

[M Malice]

I don't think anyone knows mate. Who knows whether these theories are true, let alone the reason why things are that way

I understand what you mean,but my question so who and what determines the result in a specific universe? and what is the purpose ? in some universe Port wins, in others Port loses and in another there is a draw? What's the grand "plan" in all this? I just dont see the purpose in all this when you have all possible outcomes in a magnitude of different multiverses.

mostly just read, enjoy and educate myself as a lot of the subject matter is ineffable to me on the science board. on the highlighted though, IMO there is no reason/purpose/meaning to existence, we just exist because the natural universe has made it possible. reason/purpose/meaning is an individual thing for each of us to decide.

 

[bontshow]

He has no evidence to prove his hypothesis. He may very well be right but we have no way of knowing this at this point of time

I could use the same argument to say we'll all be on hovercraft by 2030, just because technology is improving so quickly. It does need a much more thorough justification to be believable

 

[bontshow]

What do you mean? How are they not conflated?

Light travels in wave form and particle form, until observed.
The cat is alive and dead, until observed.

The difference being that light changes its behaviour based on whether or not it is observed. The cat doesn't, it's only both alive and dead theoretically or philosophically, nothing in that thought experiment suggests that observing the cat changes the outcome like it does for light in the double-slit experiment