Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Good news everyone! The Boards.ie Subscription service is live. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Simulation Theory

2»

Comments

  • #32
    fibonaccii
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 79 ✭✭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?


  • #33
    fibonaccii
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 79 ✭✭fibonaccii


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


  • #34
    Stinicker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,099 ✭✭✭Stinicker


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


  • #35
    shanered
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,117 ✭✭✭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.


  • #36
    shanered
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,117 ✭✭✭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!


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭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.


  • #38
    BloodBath
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,283 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


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

    My statement holds true.


  • #39
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭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.


  • #40
    BloodBath
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,283 ✭✭✭✭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.


Advertisement