Do We Live In A Simulation?

[the_engineer 1,415]

Not sure this belongs in the conspiracy thread it's more philosophy. This seems to be something my mind has settled on. I admit it sounds a bit far-fetched but when you dive into it and learn the more likely it becomes. There's also scientfic evidence to back it up too!

 

1) computer code in our DNA and not only that , there's also malicious code written into our DNA that infects computers like a virus. I'm not sure they're the same strand of DNA though or two separate ones.

 

https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/09/malicious-code-written-into-dna-infects-the-computer-that-reads-it/

 

2) Particles act differently when observed. Nick Bostrom described this as like when your in a computer game the room you're in and what you're avatar is observing will have all the computing power aimed at it , to give you a full HD experience. But the room next door in the game will be pixelated A) to save processing power and Be) as there is no one there to observe it,it doesn't need to be rendered.

 

On top of that when to many things happen at once in computer games it tends to slow down. We've heard people say many times it was like time slowed during a near death experience or an accident etc. We also know time slows down as you get close to the event horizon of a black hole. A black hole could be like a large recycle bin for corrupted data or to get rid of unnecessary or unwanted data.

 

We've seen how for computer games have come in the last 30 years and we're already approaching in the next 30 years graphics indistinguishable from reality. In fact I think in 30 years they won't be called games but simulation experiences, Combined with VR or even full body immersion. 

 

Has anyone played  wipeout PSVR on the PS4? It's an incredible experience! We could say in the 25th century people wanted to create a simulation of 21st century or ancestor simulations either for fun or science, we've already ourselves created simulations of the past and simulations of our universe though rudimentary compared to what is possible in the future.I think they could easily in 400 years time fully simulate our reality now. Also with each simulation that kicks up new glitches and bugs they could  easily be ironed out. Could explain why we don't or rarely see any clues we're in a simulation other than the few mentioned.

 

 

3) we've already simulated our universe kind of... 

 

https://comp-astrophys-cosmol.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40668-017-0021-1

 

It would explain everything. Reincarnation, ghosts , dark matter/ energy, why we're so susceptible to believing in creation / a god. 

 

 

4) The rare earth theory . Many people think the universe is teeming with life but we haven't found no aliens and not even a hint of life outside of our planet.It becomes implausible we're alone in a vast universe but there is an explanation for both. What if this universe was created explicitly for us? The fact that earth exists is remarkable. A very rare planet like jupiter protecting us from space debris to the moon have just the right amount of impact on our planet to do it good rather than do it harm. We're in the goldilocks zone. It really does have the pattern and precision of design. 

 

 

 

https://player.fm/series/the-end-of-the-world-with-josh-clark/ep02-great-filter

 

Anyway this is something I wanted to share with everyone and wonder what your thoughts are.  

[markb4 902]

No.

[John Key 747]

No.

[Joey Russ 7,229]

[Paul Bearer 6,109]

No. (What a stupid fucking thread) 

[charon 4,943]

 

Impossible to prove one way or the other.

 

Same as religion I suppose.

 

Interesting concept tho.

[runebomme 377]

1 hour ago, charon said:

 

Impossible to prove one way or the other.

 

Same as religion I suppose.

 

Interesting concept tho.

I think religion is a lot less likely to be true than the simulation idea

[Cat O'Falk 3,290]

1 hour ago, Paul Bearer said:

No. (What a stupid fucking thread) 

 

Why don't you move it to the humanity thread?

[msc 18,480]

Yep, here's your problem. Someone set this planet to "evil."

[Deathray 2,941]

I mean the idea that life is a computer game might actually motivate me to do better in it. So I'll take it.

[Spade_Cooley 9,541]

No, it's an absolutely  idea.

[Cat O'Falk 3,290]

 

 

[Grim Up North 3,727]

I've often wondered if our sense of perspective is not clear and that we are all cells in some colossal (in comparison to us) body that mirrors the relation between our body and our cells.

 

And possibly even that colossal body is in turn a cell in another even more colossal body etc.

 

I get the simulation idea and relation to God but actually this is nothing new - the Greeks used to think that the Gods played with them like toys - same idea just updated.

[The Mad Hatter 1,092]

Is this the real life or is this just fantasy

Can't in a landslide no escape from reality.

[the_engineer 1,415]

15 hours ago, runebomme said:

I think religion is a lot less likely to be true than the simulation idea

 

Yea this is my thinking. The simulation theory is based on Not proving to others it's true but following the path to where humanity is heading . Will humans make simulations in the future indistinguishable from our reality now? Humans want that and technology is improving everyday.

[the_engineer 1,415]

9 hours ago, Joey Russ said:

 

You defo come across as a blue piller joey 

[Deathray 2,941]

7 hours ago, msc said:

Yep, here's your problem. Someone set this planet to "evil."

 

Nope the issue is the kid they gave the programme to code because "it'll never actually work" met his girlfriend and moved to America half way through and the entire team were locked up with a profitable business programme to finish, so the semi-retired Kevin given it fucked up the rest of the code by hurrying it - as he really didn't want to stay at the company anymore than enough to get a half decent wedge - so the world is unfinished and full of bugs.

[time 8,624]

Possibly, in which case we'll be destroyed by the Vogons any time now.

[gcreptile 10,979]

As far as I am concerned, you all don't exist and all your posts are written by my other personalities.

[charon 4,943]

6 minutes ago, gcreptile said:

As far as I am concerned, you all don't exist and all your posts are written by my other personalities.

 

 

Hiya Bladan , hiya pal.

[Deathray 2,941]

32 minutes ago, charon said:

 

 

Hiya Bladan , hiya pal.

 

Oi! That was my firm belief long before any talk of this bladan fella.

 

Everybody else on this forum is just figments of my imagination.

[DevonDeathTrip 2,358]

1 hour ago, gcreptile said:

As far as I am concerned, you all don't exist and all your posts are written by my other personalities.

 

That can't be right, because I know that I'm going to wake up soon and find out I'm still four years old, meaning I've dreamt everything I think has happened since.  Therefore you can't exist at all and neither can this forum.

 

Or maybe we all live inside someone else's dream.  But, if this is so, then who is the dreamer? 

[drol 11,979]

Oh, the double slit experiment... if only I had a penny... I'll try to explain it simply. We have a double slit where the distance between the single slits is very short. We send to the slit electrons, one by one. We put a screen behind the slit and when an electron hits the screen it leaves a sign. If we send only one electron it seems to behave like a bullet and hits the screen in a random point. We send an infinite number of electrons. Surprisingly we will find on the screen behind a whole interference figure typical of waves and not of particles. Bullets would distribute on the screen with a simple (double) Gaussian probability. So electrons are waves, we think. Now we want to know which of the two slits was crossed by the electron. We put a simple measurement system, a lamp that lights the electron (physically it sends a photon to the electron) whenever it passes through a slit. Well we use the goddamn lamp and obtain a Gaussian curve, exactly as if electrons were bullets! So we think it's the energy of light that changes the system. We use a low intensity lamp. If we do that we obtain the interference pattern but can t say where electrons passed because there are not enough photons. So we try to keep intensity constant and use a large wavelenght (red for example) for the lamp. We do obtain the pattern but now d<<wavelenght with d distance between slits so we can't distinguish slits anymore as the detector sees them as an only slit. Conclusion: we can see only the pattern (wave aspect) or from which slit they passed (corpuscolary) but never both together. This is because the measurement system changes the system! You may know measurable properties of a quantic system are associated to Hermitian operators known as Observables. The eigenvalues of this observables are the possible result of a measurement. The system is not usually prepared in an eigenstate but in a linear combination of the eigenstates as they are a complete (and orthonormal) base. Every eigenstate will have a coefficient Ci that expresses its contribute to the complexive state. Ci^2 is the probability to obtain the eigenvalue related to that eigenstate |i> of the observable. Sum of Ci^2=1 if the state is normalyzed. Now we can imagine electrons are the combination of two states |wave> and |particle > with ci= √2/2 obviously for both. Measurement will NEVER restitute the complexive state but only one of the two states (in form of the eigenvalue). That' s the exact point. Measurement makes the system collapse into a single eigenstate. And after the system collapses if you repeat measurement you only obtain that eigenvalue. I don't introduce the concept of expectation value but I hope you at least understood why the double slit experiment does not fucking mean things behave differently if you watch them.

[charon 4,943]

 

 

 

 

 

gotta love Quantum Theory .

[Deathray 2,941]

I wonder what were actually scored on if life is some sort of simulation game.

 

I'd imagine some sort of advanced technological race would be behind this so maybe we as a person would be a fusion of the person who is playing our character and then "us" as the character. The photo-realistic world around us would be the bounds of the world. You'd imagine it would be a sandbox style world rather than an open world game and there'd be a few hard-coded limitations (you can't grab a gun and shoot everybody on the planet unless the game has reached a post-apocalyptic stage), but you can work scientifically towards that goal and create a nuclear weapon capable of destroying a few countries). Maybe you'd be scored on your progression as an individual throughout the lifespan of the game  - if you'd player spawned as an orphan in the middle of the DR Congo and managed to get to be a US billionaire tech business man that could be worth 5bn points - whereas being born to do lawyers in London and becoming a homeless ex-con burglar in Glasgow would be worth nothing. Or maybe you're given a specific mission, but the character can't know what your mission is; and you have to conceal it from them and make them view it as there own decision or they won't pursue it. Or maybe your scored on how well you live your life according to the values of the society, maybe in the opinion of the game-creator the entire Earth is some kind of hell and you're just being thrown into it to see how long you can survive. What prize could you win for "winning" the game? Whatever that is (maybe living to 100 or managing a exceptional level of success), maybe the society has immortality rings they give out to high achievers in the game, or enough money to set up five or six generations of the player's family?