V _ _ _ ger

[SaltyNuts]

A simulation explains our corner of reality it does not explain why the simulators universe exists. In your hypothesis our simulation exist in that universe which means that the simulators universe is ours too.

Also math is math. Their simulation of our universe has to model the simulated universe we interact with. Their model has to account for the estimated 10^80 particles we see, all the data to describe those particles, and the data to describe the interactions between those particles. Just to store the information about a few 100 electrons would take computer memory with more particles than the universe has. Now we could hypothesize that this isn’t an issue for the Simulators but we very quickly leave “it’s turtles all the way down” to “God Did It” by attributing god like powers to the Simulators.

Universe as Simulation is a hypothesis and if you want to treat it that way it is science. If you are accepting it on faith then it’s not.

1. No, it does not. Hence why we need to try and sense, discover, what is outside simulating our universe.

2. Stop with the silly semantics. So much cheesy overload.

3. Are you literally trying to make some argument that the computational power in our simulated universe would have problems simulating our universe? That might be the silliest thing I've ever read. Even beyond some (but not all LOL) of Captantes gibberish.

4. Universe as a simulation, and trying to SENSE AND DISCOVER WHAT IS OUTSIDE THE SIMULATION DOING THE SIMULATING is 1000000000% more scientific than the dorks that just say "oh yea everything is just perfect in our universe because we are in an infinite number of universes that we cannot possibly see or detect but trust me, they are there, and ours is just a good one for life. Trust me, although we can never show it, just trust me." THAT is accepting shit on faith, LOL.

 

[Pohemi]

But where did the carbon come from??!

Here ya go @SaltyNuts :
Has a superintellect monkeyed with our universe's physics?

 

[SaltyNuts]

But where did the carbon come from??!

Here ya go @SaltyNuts :
Has a superintellect monkeyed with our universe's physics?

Read that, don't see anything to even bother with, honestly. Certainly nothing counter to what I am saying, if anything the opposite...

 

[Pohemi]

Read that, don't see anything to even bother with, honestly. Certainly nothing counter to what I am saying, if anything the opposite...

After reading the article, I didn't see their proposition of a SI influence only from the perspective of an internal entity, but an external one (outside our universe). Guess you didn't glean that.

 

[Paratus]

1. No, it does not. Hence why we need to try and sense, discover, what is outside simulating our universe.

To “sense and discover” what is “outside” our universe you need some testable hypotheses. Furthermore, our universe encompasses everything we can interact with so your tests are limited to effects in this universe.

2. Stop with the silly semantics. So much cheesy overload.

Math is math? I guess you don’t understand what I meant. If this universe is a simulation then the simulation must be able to store and manipulate the informational equivalent of everything contained in our universe. That shouldn’t be a controversial statement to you.

3. Are you literally trying to make some argument that the computational power in our simulated universe would have problems simulating our universe? That might be the silliest thing I've ever read. Even beyond some (but not all LOL) of Captantes gibberish.

Again you don’t seem to understand. This universe would require a huge amount of information to model. The information required to simulate it provides at least one scientific bound in describing this hypothetical simulation of yours.

4. Universe as a simulation, and trying to SENSE AND DISCOVER WHAT IS OUTSIDE THE SIMULATION DOING THE SIMULATING is 1000000000% more scientific than the dorks that just say "oh yea everything is just perfect in our universe because we are in an infinite number of universes that we cannot possibly see or detect but trust me, they are there, and ours is just a good one for life. Trust me, although we can never show it, just trust me." THAT is accepting shit on faith, LOL.

Both the “Many Worlds” and “Copenhagen” interpretations of quantum mechanics are scientific descriptions of the results of quantum mechanics experiments. They make testable predictions and can potentially be falsified.

Your simulation hypothesis needs to do the same or it’s no different than saying “god did it”.

Can you provide some potentially falsifiable tests that would support a simulation hypothesis?

 

[snoopy7548]

Yeah, I don't get it. Thinking that we're living in a simulation is basically a step away from thinking there is supreme being (God) who created everything. You can't believe in evolution at that point.

Who/what created the "beings" that created the simulation?

 

[Captante]

Read that, don't see anything to even bother with, honestly. Certainly nothing counter to what I am saying, if anything the opposite...

Why on earth would anyone who has experienced reading your posts more than once or twice bother "countering" anything you say as if it was factual?



You're an amusing little fellow but the act is getting a bit stale.... maybe you should PM Gizmo for inspiration on the next "pube-soap" thread.

My sincere apologies for ever bothering to take you seriously and trying to help you out.... it won't happen again.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Again you don’t seem to understand. This universe would require a huge amount of information to model. The information required to simulate it provides at least one scientific bound in describing this hypothetical simulation of yours.

Only in it's entirety all at the same time. You can approximate large systems to a reasonable degree, then specify more granularly as necessary. We do that already, and there's a non zero chance that would explain a lot of things, like why we can't square classical and quantum physics (they aren't meant to square). Also dark matter.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Where's your space probe?

Out there Sir!!

Earth to Voyager: NASA detects signal from spacecraft, 2 weeks after losing contact​

August 2, 2023 • The Jet Propulsion Lab lost contact with Voyager 2, which is traveling 12.3 billion miles away from Earth, after engineers mistakenly pointed its antenna 2 degrees away from its home planet.

 

[IBMJunkman]

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Contact!

NASA hears from Voyager 1, the most distant spacecraft from Earth, after months of quiet

The most distant spacecraft from Earth stopped sending back understandable data last November.

apnews.com

.