Physicists May Have Evidence Universe Is A Computer Simulation

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/11/physicists-may-have-evide_n_1957777.html


Part of the message is hidden for the guests. Please log in or register to see it.

Apprentice Lesson wrote: Akkarin: What sorts of axioms do you think you believe in?

Gisteron: believe..
well, i think that there are some which can assumed to be true just because otherwise some things wouldn't have sense and purpose
for instance, the axiom that there is being and non-being which is essential for all of mathematics
or the axiom that our world isn't just a matrix but that things do indeed make a difference. otherwise we all might just as well die instead of living. which sure would then make no difference, but wouldn't make me particularly happy, y'know..

Akkarin: Hmm... funny you bring up the Matrix
What is real exactly? These are 'real' experiences
You are experiencing them

Gisteron: yea. and i assume that they are real without any proof.
because if i didn't assume that, all my life would be pointless and that wouldn't make anyone happy. in fact, since this belief, no matter if it is true or false, is at least not at all harmful, it is, while unjustified, still tolerable

Akkarin: Whether something is 'real' or not is something that cannot be answered from within that system
Gisteron: exactly
there is not even a point wondering
Akkarin: The question itself is pointless unless you have an outside perspective to look in from

Gisteron: see - same thought

Akkarin: So you're left with just getting on with living
Yes indeed

Gisteron: well we can just as well quit living. it just doesn't help answering the question and it does not at all make us any happier.

http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/Journals/45829-Gisterons-Journal?limit=10&start=50#77244

That just came to mind when I read it lol


EDIT: Here is the paper itself: http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.1847

http://www.simulation-argument.com/

This reminds me of a lesson I did in philosophy class in which we read a story about scientists creating a simulated universe then created a means of looking closely into it and discovering a room of scientists doing the exact same thing...

RyuJin wrote: This reminds me of a lesson I did in philosophy class in which we read a story about scientists creating a simulated universe then created a means of looking closely into it and discovering a room of scientists doing the exact same thing...

I have read the same one. I thought it was an Asimov short story...

Br John, do you have it stored anywhere or the name? I know you are fond of posting some Asimov stories from time to time

When I get a chance to rummage through my notebooks I'll dig it out and type it up...hopefully it's still intact somewhere since I've kept all my schoolwork from my first year in highschool (20+ years ago)

Akkarin wrote: Gisteron: believe..
well, i think that there are some which can assumed to be true just because otherwise some things wouldn't have sense and purpose
for instance, the axiom that there is being and non-being which is essential for all of mathematics
or the axiom that our world isn't just a matrix but that things do indeed make a difference. otherwise we all might just as well die instead of living. which sure would then make no difference, but wouldn't make me particularly happy, y'know..

Akkarin: Hmm... funny you bring up the Matrix
What is real exactly? These are 'real' experiences
You are experiencing them

Funnily enough whilst trying to flesh out my collection of potential Apprentice lessons with some different mediums to appeal to different types of learners, I decided upon a lesson based on The Matrix (as in the film) and the meaning of reality. I don't want to divulge anything much about my lessons in a general forum though, although I put up my entire plan so far for review in the Teaching section.

It's an interesting subject and one that boggles my mind slightly...and of course there are many different permutations of it, such as considering whether we are all part of someone's dream or some other such situation. What I always ask myself is...does it matter? If we are in a computer programme, or a dream or anything else, is there anything we can do about it? Or would we be better off just getting on with our lives?

I've read a story like that. I've been trying to find it. I'm not sure who wrote it.

http://qntm.org/responsibility

I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility

by Sam Hughes


Part of the message is hidden for the guests. Please log in or register to see it.

I admit, I didn't read the paper, or in fact the entirety of this thread. But to call something a theory that cannot be tested at all is clearly a misuse of word.

Besides: These are simulations we come up with using our minds which are limited to the world they are in and which we program into computers, which, too, work in the boundaries our universe provide. It would surprise me more if these simulations were significantly different from the world as it is rather than that they are close to it. Only because we can simulate a world, that doesn't imply that our world is a simulation, too. We can as well simulate swordfish and horses reproduce unicorns (within the boundaries of theoretical biology); it just won't work in the real world.

Now, not to say that the Matrix idea is impossible, but who claims to have found evidence, proof or even indication and comes up with an argument from analogy probably lacks a certain amount of understanding of conclusive reasoning.

Physicists say there may be a way to prove that we live in a computer simulation

by George Dvorsky

Back in 2003, Oxford professor Nick Bostrom suggested that we may be living in a computer simulation. In his paper, Bostrom offered very little science to support his hypothesis — though he did calculate the computational requirements needed to pull off such a feat. And indeed, a philosophical claim is one thing, actually proving it is quite another. But now, a team of physicists say proof might be possible, and that it's a matter of finding a cosmological signature that would serve as the proverbial Red Pill from the Matrix. And they think they know what it is.

The entire article with links:

http://io9.com/5950543/physicists-say-there-may-be-a-way-to-prove-that-we-live-in-a-computer-simulation

V-Tog wrote: I decided upon a lesson based on The Matrix (as in the film) and the meaning of reality......

.......What I always ask myself is...does it matter? If we are in a computer programme, or a dream or anything else, is there anything we can do about it? Or would we be better off just getting on with our lives?

Ever watched Inception? Why do you think *spoilers* he spins his token at the end but as soon as he sees his children he walks away before watching how it lands?

It's the whole reason there were a bunch of trains and train metaphors lol (at least how I interpreted it)

Inception - Film wrote: Mal: What are you doing here?
Ariadne: My name is...
Mal: I know who you are. What are you doing here?
Ariadne: I'm just trying to understand...
Mal: How could you understand? Do you know what it is to be a lover? To be half of a whole?
Ariadne: No...
Mal: I'll tell you a riddle. You're waiting for a train. A train that will take you far away. You know where you hope this train will take you; but you don't know for sure. But it doesn't matter. How can it not matter to you where that train will take you?
Cobb: Because you'll be together.

In response and in addition to what Gisteron said, yes you're right though (I haven't read the paper myself) it is the title of the article as opposed to the scientists that came up with it I think

This is not a scientific theory, because it does not provide and testable predictions that can be verified or proven wrong. This is just pure philosophy for the time being

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2afuTvUzBQ

hmmmm, I have had a feeling that this existance is a simulation, not neccassarilly a computer simulation, but like a concept or dream that we have to endure to find the meaning of experiencing what could be the real world.

The notion of the universe as a 'simulation' seems to assert that there might be a richer, more detailed version of reality; since a simulation is a model of another more complex system. So if we strip away the concept of a computer, and stick to simulation - then it could very well be true, where we are all limited in awareness to our tools of perception, and how well we use them. Then perhaps awareness itself might probably be a simulation inside our mind - of data provided by the senses.... and so perhaps that computer in the simulation is our own brain!!!

Seriously though, something constitutes what we call the physical reality. Unless there is some interface with something outside of that physical reality I wonder how can we know the answer!?

There could be literally anything beyond what we can know. From another perspective we all might be part of a cell membrane inside of a giant dog who is walking in an alternate world, or the same world just at another scale/dimension of size!!!

Seriously though, something constitutes what we call the physical reality. Unless there is some interface with something outside of that physical reality I wonder how can we know the answer!?

How can we know? Easy.

How do we experience reality? The brain, that has developed over eons of evolutionary strides, is a powerhouse computer, capable of rendering insanely detailed images. In the end, we work on electricity that our bodies create. We know that the combination of our senses renders the complete experience we have. Soooo... our perception of reality is a mish mash of things we experience from outside our body.

There is no "centralized" overview of how we experience life either. When I first realized that, it was extremely disconcerting. Then, I realized that I knew this all along. And, thus, Zen Buddhism.

Science. *sigh* Things would be so much better without it.

Connor Lidell wrote: How can we know? Easy.

How do we experience reality? The brain....

I don't understand what your saying differs to what I said, can you clarify? I was questioning how can we know what is outside our powers of perception to determine if the Universe is a simulation. It's a bit of a dead end question, and so I pointed out that the mind itself is probably a simulation of that reality we can perceive - which is what I think you were saying too.

Well, not a disagreement, but an expansion in another direction.

I believe you're correct to assume there is no way to know if there is something larger than our consciousness...

But, my argument is that any kind of consciousness in the first place is an illusion. It exists as something greater than the sum of all the parts we have because it can come up with ideas not related to the experiences we've had... such as imagining a universe larger than ourselves.

How does one create reality without a prior reality. By logic a created reality seems very illogical. Anyway even a perfect simulation of a universe wouldn't prove we are a simulation, It would only provide a possibility of it being true but that probability is as Schrodinger's cat in the box living.

If we were a computer simulation, well I call being able to flying around like superman/neo... it would save me loads in gas money.

Interesting point and knowledge of life as a computer simulation does nothing to change our current situation....but it would change our perception of death. Where do sim characters go when they die? is there a sim heaven? or maybe they get reborn? I think that aspect of the equation could send mankind into anarchy.

V-Tog wrote:

Akkarin wrote: Gisteron: believe..
well, i think that there are some which can assumed to be true just because otherwise some things wouldn't have sense and purpose
for instance, the axiom that there is being and non-being which is essential for all of mathematics
or the axiom that our world isn't just a matrix but that things do indeed make a difference. otherwise we all might just as well die instead of living. which sure would then make no difference, but wouldn't make me particularly happy, y'know..

Akkarin: Hmm... funny you bring up the Matrix
What is real exactly? These are 'real' experiences
You are experiencing them

Funnily enough whilst trying to flesh out my collection of potential Apprentice lessons with some different mediums to appeal to different types of learners, I decided upon a lesson based on The Matrix (as in the film) and the meaning of reality. I don't want to divulge anything much about my lessons in a general forum though, although I put up my entire plan so far for review in the Teaching section.

It's an interesting subject and one that boggles my mind slightly...and of course there are many different permutations of it, such as considering whether we are all part of someone's dream or some other such situation. What I always ask myself is...does it matter? If we are in a computer programme, or a dream or anything else, is there anything we can do about it? Or would we be better off just getting on with our lives?