Universe is not real and is instead a giant simulation

Universe is not real and is instead a giant simulation

Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

53 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160901-we-might-l...

i think we live in one most likely created by ourselves millennia or even mega-anna into the future. Computers seem to answer at lot of potential questions.

010101

1,305 posts

147 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Is it not a flaw in the nature of many men and women to forever and forlornly search out an ultimate true and inequivocable purpose of the self?
How can joy spring from the lack of discovery of a thing so dear to us.

Edited by 010101 on Tuesday 6th September 04:46

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Surely it's possible for it to be real, but nevertheless a simulation?

Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Does it matter?

Flooble

5,565 posts

99 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Depends, if I can find the "cheat mode" for superpowers that would be cool :-)

Pachydermus

973 posts

111 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Not exactly science is it? How is it any different to blaming God for everything?

SilverSixer

8,202 posts

150 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
The article misses one obvious possibility, and it's the one I'd be most inclined to believe. That we are the first species ever to reach this level of civilisation/technology in the Universe.

That seems much more plausible than the three options as outlined.

Mammasaid

3,777 posts

96 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all

Flooble

5,565 posts

99 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
SilverSixer said:
The article misses one obvious possibility, and it's the one I'd be most inclined to believe. That we are the first species ever to reach this level of civilisation/technology in the Universe.

That seems much more plausible than the three options as outlined.
He does mention the "destroy themselves before they get to this point".

It's really only luck that the planet has not been nuked several times over - imagine if Trump was in power during the Cuban missile crisis for example. Or had Heisenberg not wandered off trying to use heavy water as a moderator, leading to WWII ending in nuclear exchanges.

We might yet destroy the planet just through regular economic activity (or by imploding in a celebrity-driven culture which values nothing other than social media connectivity).

So we don't even have to be the first, there could have been plenty of civilisations before us which fell apart before starting any simulations.

SilverSixer

8,202 posts

150 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Flooble said:
So we don't even have to be the first, there could have been plenty of civilisations before us which fell apart before starting any simulations.
Then they wouldn't have been the first to reach the level necessary to create simulations, we could be though. Others could, of course, have reached the level, created simulations and then died out, and their simulations with them. We could perhaps be the only ones with the potential to create the capability at this moment in time.

Another thought is, if we are in a simulated universe, then that must exist within a real universe containing real beings which have created our simulation, mustn't it? So we'd still exist in a real universe in one sense, even though we couldn't sense it necessarily.

Beati Dogu

8,862 posts

138 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
We all know the Earth is an experiment commissioned by the mice on us. Slartibartfast even won a design award for the Norwegian coastline.

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
SilverSixer said:
Then they wouldn't have been the first to reach the level necessary to create simulations, we could be though. Others could, of course, have reached the level, created simulations and then died out, and their simulations with them. We could perhaps be the only ones with the potential to create the capability at this moment in time.

Another thought is, if we are in a simulated universe, then that must exist within a real universe containing real beings which have created our simulation, mustn't it? So we'd still exist in a real universe in one sense, even though we couldn't sense it necessarily.
We could of course be a simulation within a simulation, which doesn't affect the principle but does make things weirder.

SilverSixer

8,202 posts

150 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Dr Jekyll said:
SilverSixer said:
Then they wouldn't have been the first to reach the level necessary to create simulations, we could be though. Others could, of course, have reached the level, created simulations and then died out, and their simulations with them. We could perhaps be the only ones with the potential to create the capability at this moment in time.

Another thought is, if we are in a simulated universe, then that must exist within a real universe containing real beings which have created our simulation, mustn't it? So we'd still exist in a real universe in one sense, even though we couldn't sense it necessarily.
We could of course be a simulation within a simulation, which doesn't affect the principle but does make things weirder.
Well yes, the image of standing between two mirrors and seeing infinite copies of myself in both directions had crossed my mind. *shudder*

There would have to be 'reality' somewhere though, right, i.e. the place between the mirrors where I was standing?

Laplace

1,090 posts

181 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Pachydermus said:
Not exactly science is it?
No it's not, it's philosophy and I'm not sure if I like idea of God being a spotty nerd programmer from the future. I wonder if he gets plagued by Adobe Reader updates too.

Regardless of the what the universe may be, it's real to us and those who are bound by its laws.

Tryke3

1,609 posts

93 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
If i could get my thick skull around the size/mass issue i could believe that we were created in LARGER Hadron collider

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
Laplace said:
No it's not, it's philosophy and I'm not sure if I like idea of God being a spotty nerd programmer from the future. I wonder if he gets plagued by Adobe Reader updates too.

Regardless of the what the universe may be, it's real to us and those who are bound by its laws.
But working out whether it's a simulation might help us determine what those laws are.

If a physicist is having trouble pinning down exactly what his particle is doing, and trying to determine whether it's a limitation of his equipment or that the particle is inherently fuzzy, a possibility that he's looking at a simulation of a particle with limited resolution is a relevant consideration.

Imagine the project meeting.

Oh bugger, the Earthlings are going to send a probe round the back of the moon, they'll notice there aren't any mountains or craters.

Can't we add some?

We don't have the processing power, why do you think we made sure the moon was tidally locked?

Suppose we reduce the resolution of the whole simulation?

Well, that could free up enough capacity for a bit more lunar detail, but it won't be as good as the side we've already got. Also we won't have the resolution to represent sub atomic particles properly, the entire quantum world is going to go completely to st.

A few years later.

Now they are looking for more planets! What are we going to do?

No problem, I've freed up capacity by downgrading the US presidential subroutine, anyone who can accept particles being in two places at once will have no trouble believing in Donald Trump.




Jinx

11,345 posts

259 months

Thursday 8th September 2016
quotequote all
Flooble said:
Depends, if I can find the "cheat mode" for superpowers that would be cool :-)
Type IDKFA over and over.......

R E S T E C P

660 posts

104 months

Thursday 8th September 2016
quotequote all
SilverSixer said:
The article misses one obvious possibility, and it's the one I'd be most inclined to believe. That we are the first species ever to reach this level of civilisation/technology in the Universe.

That seems much more plausible than the three options as outlined.
Really? I know a lot of very clever people believe this, but..... really??

All the stars that you can see in the sky on the clearest night, are about 0.000000008% of the stars in the Milky Way.

I think the current estimate is that there are about 10,000,000,000 Earth-like planets orbiting Sun-like stars in the Milky Way.

And the Milky Way is one of about 200,000,000,000 galaxies, possibly a lot more.

Obviously these are all estimates based on estimates based on estimates, and could be wildly inaccurate. But that's all we have... And it would suggest there are approximately 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Earth-like planets orbiting Sun-like stars in the universe (or... in one of the universes??).

Look at the technological advances in the last 100 years. They're... staggering!
Will humans ever be able to create a simulation of a universe?
If you took someone from the early 1800s and demonstrated a VR headset with some kind of space simulator with clever AI elements - they would be convinced that we already have created a simulated universe.
If we don't kill ourselves in the next 200 years, I bet 2200's people could similarly convince us that they have created a simulated universe.
And that's only 200 years... 0.1% of the time that humans have existed. What if we survive another 200,000 years (only 0.004% of the time the Earth has existed)... It's beyond comprehension what could be possible in that amount of time.

And many of those 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Earth-like planets are a lot older than Earth. They should have already passed the stages we have passed, gone on for another 200,000 years... Or another billion years.

And if any civilisation gains the ability to create a simulated universe, they eventually would. And chances are, they would run a sped up version so they didn't have to wait a few billion years for something interesting to happen.
And how many of those simulations will reach the stage where they run their own simulations?
Etc.



tl;dr. I can't accept that we're lucky enough to be the first to reach this stage, or that we're lucky enough to be at the top of the simulation-within-simulation tree. I also don't believe that our "simulators" even know of our existence - after all we're only one of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in this universe.

Edited by R E S T E C P on Thursday 8th September 14:08

don4l

10,058 posts

175 months

Thursday 8th September 2016
quotequote all
R E S T E C P said:
SilverSixer said:
The article misses one obvious possibility, and it's the one I'd be most inclined to believe. That we are the first species ever to reach this level of civilisation/technology in the Universe.

That seems much more plausible than the three options as outlined.
Really? I know a lot of very clever people believe this, but..... really??

All the stars that you can see in the sky on the clearest night, are about 0.000000008% of the stars in the Milky Way.

I think the current estimate is that there are about 10,000,000,000 Earth-like planets orbiting Sun-like stars in the Milky Way.

And the Milky Way is one of about 200,000,000,000 galaxies, possibly a lot more.

Obviously these are all estimates based on estimates based on estimates, and could be wildly inaccurate. But that's all we have... And it would suggest there are approximately 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Earth-like planets orbiting Sun-like stars in the universe (or... in one of the universes??).

Look at the technological advances in the last 100 years. They're... staggering!
Will humans ever be able to create a simulation of a universe?
If you took someone from the early 1800s and demonstrated a VR headset with some kind of space simulator with clever AI elements - they would be convinced that we already have created a simulated universe.
If we don't kill ourselves in the next 200 years, I bet 2200's people could similarly convince us that they have created a simulated universe.
And that's only 200 years... 0.1% of the time that humans have existed. What if we survive another 200,000 years (only 0.004% of the time the Earth has existed)... It's beyond comprehension what could be possible in that amount of time.

And many of those 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Earth-like planets are a lot older than Earth. They should have already passed the stages we have passed, gone on for another 200,000 years... Or another billion years.

And if any civilisation gains the ability to create a simulated universe, they eventually would. And chances are, they would run a sped up version so they didn't have to wait a few billion years for something interesting to happen.
And how many of those simulations will reach the stage where they run their own simulations?
Etc.



tl;dr. I can't accept that we're lucky enough to be the first to reach this stage, or that we're lucky enough to be at the top of the simulation-within-simulation tree. I also don't believe that our "simulators" even know of our existence - after all we're only one of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in this universe.

Edited by R E S T E C P on Thursday 8th September 14:08
Good post.

An alternative TL;DR:- "We know nothing".



Cobalt Blue

215 posts

195 months

Thursday 8th September 2016
quotequote all
My take on this is that, due to an vast error of scale, our universe is nothing more than dust particles in the spare room of a being many orders of magnitude larger than ourselves. Fans of Douglas Adams will recognise the concept.

Let's hope that (s)he is not too houseproud!