Are we living in a Simulation?

[Keanumoreira]

there will be a convergence between the two exponential functions. So what then?

Take your pick:

- Armageddon

- Universe divided by zero

- End of Simulation

 

too often conclusions are drawn before evidence

Citation needed.

Is this really necessary? How about the whole thing that science told us for many years that humans evolved from apes. Evolution theory showing that man developed from ape was taught in schools for as long as I can remember. DoH!!! Fossil evidence found that debunks the entire theory. Scientists say "sorry 'bout that"

 

Anyway, back to topic. Who says the computer has to be so advanced that it has to keep up with all the atoms in the universe. As recently mentioned, most everything could be LOD-generated. Nothing outside your field of vision exists until it comes into view....kinda makes the whole question of "does a tree make a sound if it falls in the forest with nobody around to hear it?" seem kinda silly and should really be asking, "does the tree in the forest even exist before I can see or hear it?"

 

Then again, who is to say anybody is actually really being simulated than just YOU. Maybe every interaction you have is with other AI that is just within your field of view. Oooooohhhhh. Hows that for a head trip! Whose to say that this complex universe isn't really being simulated down to the very atom? Maybe each fraction of a second takes a huge amount of "rendering time" but while in the simulation, you never see the discontinuation of time...you see it as if it were continually running.

 

 

That's a good point. :thumbsup:

[Ihoe]

Well, if you start tossing in mental conditions and some religious views of existence, then really you cannot debate much of anything without having first defined what reality is as it applies to all... And that is a MUCH bigger kettle of fish. All the more reason to accept that for all intents and purposes, whatever here is, it is the universe in which we believe we exist and is the only universe which we have any experience of. Ergo, it is real for us.

that's the point! You can't define it, yet you also can't define theorems that may define it. Although some way we can define the "dream thing" using the mental illness, religious facts or reductio ad absurdum.

 

A fondamental element of western philosophy is "Cogito ergo sum." the basis of the ideas of most people, in their "existence". Change it to " we think, therefore we are." if all of us "are" then all of us exist, therefore if we see each other, everything we see exists. A mishmashed thesis that's based on the above unproven argument, if the fondament is wrong, the whole proof (mishmashed thesis) is wrong.

 

I endorse what LHammonds mentions in the "simulation" field of view, nuff said.

[Vagrant0]

That's a good point. :thumbsup:

Not especially.

 

First off, the whole idea of this universe only really existing for YOU is a fairly old one that became incorporated into one of the primary beliefs of Buddhism. The problem with relating it to a technological model is that it ends up becoming one which is prone to far more flaws, for the same reasons as that whole stellar complexity stuff. Sure, on a 1-1 scale or even a 1-20 scale some sore of extremely advanced AI might be able to handle dealing with a normal scene... But all of that instantly goes out the window when you have a gathering of a few thousand people, several million insects, all interacting on an individual basis, with their own objectives, reacting to the environment as it happens... All the while everything else continues happening at the same exact rate without error. And again, with gatherings in the millions. Even isolated to a single city block, to a single hour of the day, there is a staggering amount of complexity behind everything which happens inside that city block. And as you can see other city blocks during that same hour, it becomes exponentially more complex. If that were just data recorded somewhere, it would not be mere terabytes. It would be octillions of terabytes of data and tracking for the location, orientation, direction, and state of each and every sub-atomic particle within just that infinitesimally small area. Then multiply that times the number of times that small area can fit within the Earth. Then consider that in comparison with just our own galaxy, the Earth is about as large as a single grain of salt within that city block. And all of this data recording, loading and handling occurs seamlessly, without any interruption or inconsistency. While some might be able to put together a word which would describe the amount of data... Probably something like a Googolplex (10 to the 10 to the 100) Yottabytes (10 to the 24 bytes). In short, far more data to record the universe than there is space in the universe, regardless of media.

 

The whole LOD thing falls apart when you consider that things happen even when you don't see them and there is no change the consistency and timing of events based on what else exists within your observable range. Even if on a mountain, seeing another hiker on another mountain 10 miles away, that hiker existed as some sort of LOD element, you can still communicate and interact in real time with that person with the same level of consistency as if they were sitting 5 feet away. And 10 miles is far from being the maximum distance from which larger objects can be observed in detail. For something to be LOD, it would have to exist beyond the observable area, at which point, it doesn't technically exist... Beyond that you start touching on aspects of quantum physics.

[LHammonds]

 

You're sounding like those guys that said "you'll never need more than 640k ram" or "the world will probably only need 5 computers"

 

200 years ago, the thought of what is possible back then is caveman compared to what is going on now. Who are we to be able to tell what is possible 200 years from now...or a thousand? Maybe our idea of how to "store" data is caveman stupid compared to what we will discover in 50 years. Maybe the entire worlds collective body of knowledge will fit inside a jedi holocron that rests in the palm of your hand. We simply do not know. There are things call paradigm shifts that occur which completely destroy whatever theories, plans or estimations for how things are supposed to be. At one time, the Swiss were the center of the universe when it came to making accurate watches...then digital clocks with LED displays came along in mass production which leveled the playing field and rendered their entire process and market domination obsolete.

 

Again, who is to say that everything isn't being calculated down to the atom on the farthest planet and being rendered one "frame" at a time but to "us" in the simulation, we see no stoppage of time?

 

When doing extensive and complex tasks / tests, it is always more efficient to go as small as possible. Who is to say that our entire universe is the size of another universes' atom? Maybe our entire existence occurs within a split second of that universes' time while their quantum computer is turned off which might yield the result of our existence experiment with the ultimate answer to the ultimate question which is 47. :tongue:

 

EDIT: It is 47, the book was a lie.

 

LHammonds

[Lisnpuppy]

*Cough* I thought it was 42? Or is my liberal studies aspect of dealing with numbers showing again? :P

[species5478]

 

 

When doing extensive and complex tasks / tests, it is always more efficient to go as small as possible. Who is to say that our entire universe is the size of another universes' atom? Maybe our entire existence occurs within a split second of that universes' time while their quantum computer is turned off which might yield the result of our existence experiment with the ultimate answer to the ultimate question which is 47. :tongue:

 

EDIT: It is 47, the book was a lie.

 

LHammonds

 

I agree.

 

And if life is indeed a simulation, the complexity of our "life" would matter least to me. At the current rate of tech in human hands, something like the microprocessor will evolve a thousand fold within a matter of years. What if the creator to our "simulation" possessed cognitive power that exceeded our own by a million. (Like a human to a fly) And what if said creator had one trillion years to fine tune, and expand our simulation? The human mind can scarcely image such power, or the results thereof. We would be the flies to something greater.

 

A form of LOD processing is feasible. The universe might be rendered in a similar fashion as that of a game. It could explain why we look into the past, when peering at the sky. The stars we see now, are billion, or trillions of years old. Essentially, every time you peer into the sky, you're looking into the past because you're not viewing distant celestial bodies as they are, but as they once were. So if distance alters our perception of objects within time, then distance, or perhaps even time, may function as RAM.

 

But my question would be, "To what end?" If life is indeed a simulation, then what is the purpose?

[evilneko]

To amuse, obviously.

 

Why else does humor have such power? :tongue:

[Keanumoreira]

To amuse, obviously.

 

Why else does humor have such power? :tongue:

 

Why does the wind blow? (Retorical question; just go with it.)

[Vagrant0]

Why does the wind blow? (Retorical question; just go with it.)

The Earth's rotation, changes in heat and pressure of solids and liquids as they enter into or leave the path of sunlight combined with other geologic factors and various fluid dynamics.

 

It's not a rhetoric question since the reasons why it happens can be traced directly to physical phenomena which can, eventually, be predicted once all the factors involved are known. The reason why weather reports are not 100% is because all the factors are never known due to the number of variables involved, and instead what is being reported is a statistical guess based on projected models from what knowns exist with possibles being inputted for those which are unknown.

[ub3rman123]

Maybe the reason a machine could be capable of running such a simulation is that the simulation has crappy Half-Life graphics and our eyes are just filling in the gaps. Our eyes do that regularly for us anyways..

 

My own opinion: If it is a simulation, it doesn't matter that much if we're living the exact same life in it as out of it. It's just the same thing.