Simulation Theory

fibonaccii

Do we live in a computer simulation, are our brains quantum computers processing data all around us. Governed by maths and fractals. Should the big bang be renamed the big click?

fibonaccii

For all the stoners out there that cant be arsed with the in depth videos.

Cookie_Monster

so the matrix then...

sbsquarepants

There is actually an experiment being planned at the moment to test whether there is something in this theory or not (i'll try find a link). It's not as crazy as it first sounds. In 30 years or so we've gone from pong to call of duty in computer generated "reality". Resolution is increasing at something like 1000 fold per decade, in a very short period of time it will be indistinguishable from our current "reality". (Reality is merely perception after all - how we percieve it is determined by our available senses. For example my reality is that i can't find my way around in total darkness without walking into things, an owl experiences darkness completely differently and can carry on as normal.)
It is concievable that our whole universe is a programme on an alien computer somewhere, or on a computer built by a more advanced version of ourselves. Think of all the computer models we have running to predict weather, financial markets and so on - the more detail the more accurate the prediction - we could quite concievably be being used to predict the weather for sky news! Rupert is god, now all bow down - or he'll press control alt delete!:D

--Kaiser--

If we were in a a mssively complicated computer simulation surely they (whoever they are) would take the time to make sure there would be no way for anyone to tell that is was a simulation?

TaosHum

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

If we were in a a mssively complicated computer simulation surely they (whoever they are) would take the time to make sure there would be no way for anyone to tell that is was a simulation?

Maybe that's the point of the simulation? To see how long it would take us to realise we are in one.

hardCopy

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

If we were in a a mssively complicated computer simulation surely they (whoever they are) would take the time to make sure there would be no way for anyone to tell that is was a simulation?

Yep, just prevent us from developing computers so the idea of a simulation would never even cross anyone's mind

sbsquarepants

TaosHum wrote: »

Maybe that's the point of the simulation? To see how long it would take us to realise we are in one.

That's assuming the simulation is is about us - it could be about anything, seeing how the universe would develop given a certain initial state for example, or if certain physical laws were slightly different or so on. We could be just a by product.
I mean look at the size of the universe and look at the size of us - we really are unlikely to be the focal point of anything!

TaosHum

sbsquarepants wrote: »

That's assuming the simulation is is about us - it could be about anything, seeing how the universe would develop given a certain initial state for example, or if certain physical laws were slightly different or so on. We could be just a by product.
I mean look at the size of the universe and look at the size of us - we really are unlikely to be the focal point of anything!

That's it, we can speculate all we want but it's impossible to know what the purpose of it is.

But what this theory does support is the idea of a grand designer and a meaning to our existence. Which is amazing considering the growth of atheism over the past few decades.

BloodBath

Atheists are idiots. Yes Dawkins I'm looking at you. There is massive evidence of intelligent design.

Not believing in an organised religion is one thing. Thinking you know everything about the universe is another. The smug git doesn't realise how ignorant we are as a species.

I don't believe it's a computer simulation though.

mr lee

religious people are idiots,yes pope im looking at you,
massive evidence? ,i'd like to see that one.

BloodBath

Lol you have the whole universe all figured out then huh?

I'm not religious but I'm not ignorant enough to say that there are no higher beings or creators of this universe and/or the things in it. I don't care how intelligent you are and what theories you come up with. We can never explain the big bang and the creation of the universe with any degree of certainty.

The human race overestimates it's intelligence.

The majority of astrophysics is a guessing game. Intelligent guesses that may or may not get verified but considering we only know about 5% of the matter that makes up the universe I would say we have a lot to learn.

That's why I'm agnostic. Sorry if I caused any offence to any atheists but you really should open your mind to the possibility of a creator / higher intelligence as we don't know enough about the universe to be coming up with conclusions like "there is no god/creator".

Penn

BloodBath wrote: »

Atheists are idiots.

mr lee wrote: »

religious people are idiots

Settle down with the language. Referring to large groups of people as idiots based on religious or non-religious beliefs is needlessly offensive. Discuss the topic at hand.

--Kaiser--

BloodBath wrote: »

Atheists are idiots. Yes Dawkins I'm looking at you. There is massive evidence of intelligent design.

Let's have it then

mr lee

lol yourself,calling someones beliefs ignorant ,is the height of ignorance,
asking someone do they have the universe figured out,is an ignorant statement.

BloodBath

I'm talking in relation to the universe and the things in it. How they are constructed at the atomic and sub atomic scale and how dna / rna ect works in living organisms. I am not disputing evolution.

lol yourself,calling someones beliefs ignorant ,is the height of ignorance,
asking someone do they have the universe figured out,is an ignorant statement.

Thinking you know enough about the universe to be atheist is ignorant. You don't. Nobody does. Of course you are free to believe whatever you want just as I am.

mr lee

how are you able to tell i dont know enough about the universe,
have you access to my mind so you can decide for yourself what i know,
you know sweet f**k all about me so keep your judgements to yourself.

BloodBath

I would say you are getting needlessly upset. Sorry if my comments were inflammatory. I wasn't expecting a siege of atheists who strongly believe in it. (or don't )

How do I know? Well considering the combined knowledge of the greatest minds of our species from the last few thousand years has only given us knowledge of about 5% of the matter that makes up the universe with massive holes in how everything works together I would say it's safe to assume that you don't know either.

sbsquarepants

TaosHum wrote: »

That's it, we can speculate all we want but it's impossible to know what the purpose of it is.

But what this theory does support is the idea of a grand designer and a meaning to our existence. Which is amazing considering the growth of atheism over the past few decades.

Well if it did turn out to be a simulation, "god" would most likely be some geek in a lab coat, almost certainly unconcerned with the sexual habits of his creations, or with giving aids to babies and helping old biddies find their car keys and whatnot. If he even noticed we existed!

BloodBath wrote: »

Atheists are idiots. Yes Dawkins I'm looking at you. There is massive evidence of intelligent design.

Might you have an example?

BloodBath

You could of course turn that around and say I am ignorant for being agnostic as I don't know enough about the Universe to believe there is a higher being / creator but I do believe there is more evidence for it than not.

If you want specific links or condensed info I can't provide it. There are lots of sources of information for the scientific evidence on intelligent design in the Universe. Google is your friend.

Penn

Two posters infracted. Cut out the personal attacks and sweeping generalisations. Likewise, this is turning into a religious debate. Either bring it back to the OP and discuss that, or do not post. This thread will be locked if it keeps going in this direction.

BloodBath

It's nothing to do with religion and everything to do with science and is related to the op. If it was a computer program it would still suggest intelligent design.

Sadly you can't mention intelligent design without people relating it to current organised religions.

Being Atheist or Agnostic is basically saying I don't believe in any religion. They aren't religions in themselves, they are philosophies, so it's not a religious debate at all.

TaosHum

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Well if it did turn out to be a simulation, "god" would most likely be some geek in a lab coat, almost certainly unconcerned with the sexual habits of his creations, or with giving aids to babies and helping old biddies find their car keys and whatnot. If he even noticed we existed!

You could well be right, but if it turns out the universe is simulated, it doesn't extinguish the fact that we have been created and there is a purpose to it. What people determine to be the reason for the simulation is entirely up to them.

How mankind would react to such a discovery would be very interesting.

mr lee

where is the conspiracy here anyway?,am i missing something?

endacl

This thread would be considered a bug in the code surely? If its closed by an Admin, I'd say you'd have your proof right there.

mr lee

i think there on to us,so im off to watch the tdf,au revior

fibonaccii

Maybe its a dynamic like program, where it was started off and learned as it grew with every probability possible.

And we are all God experiencing life through a different perspective, when we die we are reborn, maybe 10000 miles away, the point of life is to experience, learn and live the perfect life?

Ill roll another one

sbsquarepants

TaosHum wrote: »

You could well be right, but if it turns out the universe is simulated, it doesn't extinguish the fact that we have been created and there is a purpose to it. What people determine to be the reason for the simulation is entirely up to them.

How mankind would react to such a discovery would be very interesting.

If it was ever proved it would indeed prove a creator of some sort, for us - but who created them and so on and so on. Eventually you have to accept that something or someone "created" itself. A creator is not neccesary - it's a possibility, but not a requirement.

shanered

Its crazy, only spotted this thread there a minute ago but I've been researching this topic alot in the recent days.
I think its something to do with a fractal process whereby we simulate a simulation until that can produce more internal simulation.
Kind of like a program that was designed to produce components that can produce internal components which do the same.
People always think of the universe expanding outwards, but what if it equally can be expanding inwards such as making said initial simulation.
Its kind of interesting and the more I think of it the more realistic it comes, look at all the computer games we play, they are all games involving our ansestral civilisation, usually at war, but games such as the sims/gta etc all into one game you'd end up with a reality like we have now.
With speculation that we could upload our conciencness online in 50-100 years this type of thing may be more down the alley then we might like to believe.
But sure, its all speculation.

BloodBath

In terms of technology I can't perceive computers as we know them ever having the processing power to handle a simulation like that. At the moment we don't have the power to simulate a single human brain never mind the infinite complexities of the universe.

The task of programming something like that, in a conventional sense, would not be possible either. I think it is designed and may be quite similar to a computer program but it's not within our understanding. It's pretty egotistical to think it could be our future selves running a program. I think it's more of an organic thing designed by a lifeform, if you can call it that, far beyond our understanding. It could be perceived as a god.

In terms of the computer power needed to run something like this it's thousands of years off anything we have now even if moore's law continued. It's already slowing down though and silicon will be at it's limits within 5-10 years. I'm sure new tech will replace it and continue advancement but I can't see us ever getting to that level.

As much as we think we know we could be like monkeys to more advanced "lifeforms" or single cell organisms to others.

EoghanIRL

The answer is 42.

fibonaccii

BloodBath wrote: »

In terms of technology I can't perceive computers as we know them ever having the processing power to handle a simulation like that. At the moment we don't have the power to simulate a single human brain never mind the infinite complexities of the universe.

The task of programming something like that, in a conventional sense, would not be possible either. I think it is designed and may be quite similar to a computer program but it's not within our understanding. It's pretty egotistical to think it could be our future selves running a program. I think it's more of an organic thing designed by a lifeform, if you can call it that, far beyond our understanding. It could be perceived as a god.

In terms of the computer power needed to run something like this it's thousands of years off anything we have now even if moore's law continued. It's already slowing down though and silicon will be at it's limits within 5-10 years. I'm sure new tech will replace it and continue advancement but I can't see us ever getting to that level.

As much as we think we know we could be like monkeys to more advanced "lifeforms" or single cell organisms to others.

Quantum Computers?

fibonaccii

http://www.viewzone.com/pauli.html

Stinicker

Sometimes I think it is something more like that Jim Carey movie "the Truman Show"

shanered

mr lee wrote: »

where is the conspiracy here anyway?,am i missing something?

It would be a conspiracy on our existence, our reality.

If simulation theory were to true it is thought that our futures selves have cracked quantum mechanics and possibly the forth dimension to a certain extent and similar to computer programmers "conspired" to create us and everything we experience.

shanered

just watched this,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySBaYMESb8o&list=PLB1208CE3C7998BA1

its about imagining the 10 dimensions.
Would this make sense as the maximum dimensions we can think of in string theory is 10, would this in a strange sense be linked to something like numbers 1-9 being single digits, which makes them different and all other numbers are a double digit and therefore are a combination, this would possibly tie to our future selves still adhereing to a number system similar to the one we use now and would therefore create some kind of binary code that can only have 10 possibilities such as our 10 dimensions presented above.

Please excuse my wonderings! Ha!

Pro Hoc Vice

BloodBath wrote: »

It's nothing to do with religion and everything to do with science and is related to the op. If it was a computer program it would still suggest intelligent design.

Sadly you can't mention intelligent design without people relating it to current organised religions.

Being Atheist or Agnostic is basically saying I don't believe in any religion. They aren't religions in themselves, they are philosophies, so it's not a religious debate at all.

That is the definition of Atheist, Agnostic is a totally different thing, go look it up Google is your friend. I am a Agnostic.

BloodBath

I know what it means. I am agnostic myself. Agnostic theist would be more accurate.

My statement holds true.

Pro Hoc Vice

BloodBath wrote: »

I know what it means. I am agnostic myself. Agnostic theist would be more accurate.

My statement holds true.

No you said "Being Atheist or Agnostic is basically saying I don't believe in any religion" the or between Atheist and Agnostic means the definition holds true for both. So from that sentance you stated that Agnostic does not believe in any religion. It is more correct to say an Agnostic believes he does not have the required knowledge to know if a God or Gods exist and therefore if any Religion is correct or not.

BTW how can one be an Agnostic Theist, as a theist believes in at least the concept of God an Agnostic knows he does not have the knowledge to know. They are incompatible.

BloodBath

So from that sentance you stated that Agnostic does not believe in any religion.

They don't. I don't. As I've explained already they are philosophies not religions. The statement holds true.

BTW how can one be an Agnostic Theist, as a theist believes in at least the concept of God an Agnostic knows he does not have the knowledge to know. They are incompatible.

It's an accurate term that's widely used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_theism

I believe the Universe and everything in it is designed. If you want to call that creator a god that's fine.