1. Standard memberWoodPush
    Pusher of wood
    Los Gatos, CA
    Joined
    03 Mar '11
    Moves
    5710
    17 Dec '12 15:40
    Sounds like a ridiculous theory to me, but for a few laughs in our last few days before the simulation ends.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/11/physicists-may-have-evide_n_1957777.html
  2. Subscriberjoe shmo
    Strange Egg
    podunk, PA
    Joined
    10 Dec '06
    Moves
    7733
    17 Dec '12 16:331 edit
    Its an obvious conclusion, but it still doesn't provide any finality to conscious paradoxes...If we are a simulation, then are simulators are simulations, with each perceived level being simulations of our previous selves. It seems to get pretty crazy! The fact that I am a simulation may be why I cant escape these logical paradoxes, no matter how intelligent, or open minded I believe I am.

    The real question is what is our fascination with simulation? from books, to plays and television. Look around you at all the simulation, It almost makes me nauseous.
  3. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    17 Dec '12 18:322 edits
    Originally posted by joe shmo
    Its an obvious conclusion, but it still doesn't provide any finality to conscious paradoxes...If we are a simulation, then are simulators are simulations, with each perceived level being simulations of our previous selves. It seems to get pretty crazy! The fact that I am a simulation may be why I cant escape these logical paradoxes, no matter how intellige ...[text shortened]... , to plays and television. Look around you at all the simulation, It almost makes me nauseous.
    If we are simulations, the trick for the simulator is to keep us from figuring that out.

    Or maybe we are being rendered a test, CAN we figure it out?

    "Ah, look at the Earthling humans, aren't they CUTE? They just figured it out.
    So now what, should we introduce ourselves or keep up the pretense?"

    "Throgud, you know they could not stand the shock, so silence about that"

    Imaginary conversation of the simulators๐Ÿ™‚

    I get a queasy feeling in my stomach just thinking it may be true.

    But I would think the simulation would be powerful enough to allow for random events and self-determination and all that stuff.

    The simulation would let us take side trips it would not have simulated but lets us run with it. Whatever 'it' is.
  4. Subscriberjoe shmo
    Strange Egg
    podunk, PA
    Joined
    10 Dec '06
    Moves
    7733
    17 Dec '12 19:102 edits
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    If we are simulations, the trick for the simulator is to keep us from figuring that out.

    Or maybe we are being rendered a test, CAN we figure it out?

    "Ah, look at the Earthling humans, aren't they CUTE? They just figured it out.
    So now what, should we introduce ourselves or keep up the pretense?"

    "Throgud, you know they could not stand the shock, us take side trips it would not have simulated but lets us run with it. Whatever 'it' is.
    The idea of this being a simulation is as old as the first ideas developed in the simulation. Man and perhaps not exclusively finds in inescapable holes in his logic if he is willing to look deep enough. A small logical gap in the program, perhaps the same type of gap that made our first computers (simulators) freeze or go bonkers.

    What is the purpose of the simulation? Perhaps it is just as you say...to continue to improve upon the "simulation", so that the "simulation" goes completely unnoticed.

    These paradoxes that we know of, have yet to be resolved. Perhaps because until now we have had no analog of the paradox within our own simulation. It could be that the simulation becomes useless to the simulators ( our future selves ) at this point, or a point in the future, and the program need be re-written either from scratch or on the fly to either resolve the paradox, or the paradox identifier (a virus in the code if you will).

    The computer scientist shall inherit the universe, or all of them.

    However, the paradox still isn't resolved, a simulation would have to begin out of, and exist in nothingness. Which is in fact another paradox, that "we" the entire simulation-sub-simulation system exist in nothing. The truth never will seem to lead us anywhere.
  5. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    18 Dec '12 11:19
    Originally posted by joe shmo
    The idea of this being a simulation is as old as the first ideas developed in the simulation. Man and perhaps not exclusively finds in inescapable holes in his logic if he is willing to look deep enough. A small logical gap in the program, perhaps the same type of gap that made our first computers (simulators) freeze or go bonkers.

    What is the purpose ...[text shortened]... n-sub-simulation system exist in nothing. The truth never will seem to lead us anywhere.
    Well, if we proved it to be a simulation at least we would have the truth.
  6. Standard memberSoothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    Planet Rain
    Joined
    04 Mar '04
    Moves
    2441
    18 Dec '12 17:23
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    If we are simulations, the trick for the simulator is to keep us from figuring that out.

    Or maybe we are being rendered a test, CAN we figure it out?

    "Ah, look at the Earthling humans, aren't they CUTE? They just figured it out.
    So now what, should we introduce ourselves or keep up the pretense?"

    "Throgud, you know they could not stand the shock, ...[text shortened]... us take side trips it would not have simulated but lets us run with it. Whatever 'it' is.
    In a way all the Christians in the spirituality forum believe the universe, and all of reality, is just a simulation. God "made it up," and he can "shut it down" on a whim.

    Simulation or no, at least the mathematics I know seems sound. ๐Ÿ˜‰
  7. Standard memberSoothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    Planet Rain
    Joined
    04 Mar '04
    Moves
    2441
    18 Dec '12 17:23
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Well, if we proved it to be a simulation at least we would have the truth.
    But who is simulating the simulators?
  8. Subscriberjoe shmo
    Strange Egg
    podunk, PA
    Joined
    10 Dec '06
    Moves
    7733
    18 Dec '12 17:32
    Originally posted by Soothfast
    But who is simulating the simulators?
    Think about it as a Russian nested doll paradox...I know I've said this before. A simulation, within a simulation, within a simulation, etc...

    The short answer being our future selves, they are all us, each level of the paradox is us!
  9. Subscriberjoe shmo
    Strange Egg
    podunk, PA
    Joined
    10 Dec '06
    Moves
    7733
    18 Dec '12 17:423 edits
    Originally posted by Soothfast
    In a way all the Christians in the spirituality forum believe the universe, and all of reality, is just a simulation. God "made it up," and he can "shut it down" on a whim.

    Simulation or no, at least the mathematics I know seems sound. ๐Ÿ˜‰
    But you only know a finite amount of mathematics, certainly nowhere near what the programmer of this universe would know. I'm sure the greater structure of mathematics is almost all but completely missed by our greatest mathematicians. I would imagine there is some greater structure that unifies all of mathematics, much in the way we believe in a greater structure that unifies all of physics.

    But the paradox, doesn't cease, because each level of programmer would be trying to uncover the greater structure of their universe, in which "your" greater structure is only a subset of.

    Like I said, if this is the "truth" it gets us nowhere in my opinion, much like I believe all other pursuits of this matter will also inevitably lead.

    Also,in order for us to still be "around" the simulated universe would have function completely independently of its super universe. If they were not completely independent and the "power goes out" in any one of the super universes, the entire chain below it would fail. But then again, using this type of logic indicates some sort of "super entity" that exists in "nothing". A beginning.

    We have to be computers, this is something only computer would struggle with.
  10. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    18 Dec '12 18:17
    Originally posted by joe shmo
    But you only know a finite amount of mathematics, certainly nowhere near what the programmer of this universe would know. I'm sure the greater structure of mathematics is almost all but completely missed by our greatest mathematicians. I would imagine there is some greater structure that unifies all of mathematics, much in the way we believe in a greater ...[text shortened]... .

    We have to be computers, this is something only computer would struggle with.
    There is a set of multiverse theories, one where our universe was beget by a larger universe and ours came out of a black hole from their's and ours is the other end of the black hole, a white hole. That would be the ultimate Russian doll scenario.

    Our universe would spawn a daughter universe, actually trillions of daughter universes and that universe would spawn ITS daughter universes, etc.
  11. Standard membercaissad4online
    Child of the Novelty
    San Antonio, Texas
    Joined
    08 Mar '04
    Moves
    615584
    19 Dec '12 07:40
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Well, if we proved it to be a simulation at least we would have the truth.
    I don't know if we can handle the truth. We will most likely just ignore the results if they do not conform to our prior understanding. ๐Ÿ™„
  12. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    19 Dec '12 19:113 edits
    Originally posted by caissad4
    I don't know if we can handle the truth. We will most likely just ignore the results if they do not conform to our prior understanding. ๐Ÿ™„
    "THE TRUTH? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH", Jack Nicholson.
  13. Standard memberThequ1ck
    Fast above
    Slow Below
    Joined
    29 Sep '03
    Moves
    25914
    20 Dec '12 12:54
    Originally posted by joe shmo
    But you only know a finite amount of mathematics, certainly nowhere near what the programmer of this universe would know. I'm sure the greater structure of mathematics is almost all but completely missed by our greatest mathematicians. I would imagine there is some greater structure that unifies all of mathematics, much in the way we believe in a greater ...[text shortened]... .

    We have to be computers, this is something only computer would struggle with.
    There's no such thing as 'nothing' and there's a lot that takes place outside of logic.
  14. Standard memberThequ1ck
    Fast above
    Slow Below
    Joined
    29 Sep '03
    Moves
    25914
    20 Dec '12 14:25
    I would say that a closed loop simulation is the most feasible explanation of existence.

    A simulation that eventually engineers itself.
  15. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    20 Dec '12 14:43
    Originally posted by Thequ1ck
    There's no such thing as 'nothing' and there's a lot that takes place outside of logic.
    How do you know that there is no such thing as nothing?
Back to Top