God as computer

[max-greece]

Don't quite understand, so in this computer theory, we're part of the software, yes?

If we say the entire universe is a software, how does that change what we're dealing with? Because we are still observing the same things, just you choose to call it a program? I mean is there any practical differences that is required for the universe to be a program (by your definition), that the universe wouldn't have if it wasn't a program? If no, then it really is just a matter of taste what you call it.

Well if you assume that the universe is a program, or more likely a huge number of programs running together then you could re-create it on a computer of your own.

As time in that program would be independent of time in yours you could, in theory, accelerate time in your version and overtake time in your own.

This would, of necessity create within your software another program which would do the same relative to that program and so on and so forth ad infinitum.

This would mean that relative to you several generations down the chain the universes would be massively more advanced than yours - you would have a perfect window on the future.

This would raise hundreds of other issues and questions of course. For one thing it would tell us that time in our universe cannot be assumed to be linear, other than relative to our experience of it. The entire universe could be paused and restarted without us having a clue what has happened.

Its also possible that changes are being made which impact our memories (including written form) so we have no idea whether our recalled histories are common from one day to the next.

It all goes a bit Dark City from there on in if you have ever seen that movie.

[Mister Agenda]

First, I'm new here. Second I am a Christian. Third this is a serious question/speculation. It will be interesting (and hopefully enlightening) for me to read the responses.

Welcome, Max!

So what if Who (What?) we call God is actually a computer (or a really advanced type of technology that we understand as a computer) and all that we see and detect in the universe is simply a part of a program?

The idea can't be completely discounted. If Moore's law (in the general sense) continues to hold for another 40 years, a computer the size of a modern desktop will have the processing power of five billion human brains and at least comparable memory. Since all of our experiences are in our brains, you could have billions of 'virtual people' have an experience of the universe identical to ours (the programming would be a bear, but it would be possible).

I don't imagine this computer is "personal" like the Christian God is, but, I suppose it could have attributes that seem to convey personhood. I imagine that somehow the "computer" is outside of the universe program, or so far "above" it to be, effectively, not part of the universe. I know there was a book about this years ago, but I don't the name of it.

If the simulation is intended for us (rather than us just being a byproduct of a 'run universe' command), I suppose it would be for scientific purposes, and therefore as much like the 'real world' as possible. My reasoning is that if it's for entertainment purposes, there are a lot of simple upgrades that could be done to make it better for that purpose.

So, is this a reasonable or workable theory? How would one reason it out? Is it possible, through reason or evidence to, if not prove it, make a plausible argument for something like this?

If we're in a simulation, our computers are simulations as well. Our reality could be a simulation run by a simulated computer. There must be a limit to the original computer's processing power. If we happen to be the last iteration of the original computer's processing power, we would not be able to accurately simulate the experience of a universe because there won't be enough processing power in the original computer to run the last simulation. That's a big 'if' though.

I am interested in reading speculations that are based on reason and from a skeptical and/or atheistic point of view.

It's an interesting question, but it may be unresolvable. It occurs to me though that it is not too soon to start considering the ethical implications of running a conscious mind on a computer.

(I mentioned that I am Christian just so anyone answering will understand my background. I am not interested in this post in answering questions about my faith. I can go to another thread and do that. Besides, this is an atheist message board, no one here is interested in Christianity).

Fair enough. Some of us have an interest in Christianity, but it tends to either be more academic, or in the sense of being aware of what they're up to.

---

Don't quite understand, so in this computer theory, we're part of the software, yes?

If we say the entire universe is a software, how does that change what we're dealing with? Because we are still observing the same things, just you choose to call it a program? I mean is there any practical differences that is required for the universe to be a program (by your definition), that the universe wouldn't have if it wasn't a program? If no, then it really is just a matter of taste what you call it.

I suppose if we find evidence that we are actually in a simulation, we might try to find a way to change the programming or contact the user(s). A question I would have for them is 'do you think you're living in a simulated reality?'.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Max-greece, is that a technical possibility? Create a "universe" in a computer?

Mister Agenda, if we're really living a simulation and manage to contact the users, I doubt they'll believe we're "living". If your character in a game stops responding to your commands and starts talking to you, would you think it's a malfunction or that it became self aware?

And oops, welcome, Max_Kolbe.

[max-greece]

Max-greece, is that a technical possibility? Create a "universe" in a computer?

Mister Agenda, if we're really living a simulation and manage to contact the users, I doubt they'll believe we're "living". If your character in a game stops responding to your commands and starts talking to you, would you think it's a malfunction or that it became self aware?

And oops, welcome, Max_Kolbe.

It is possible if, and only if, the universe we are experiencing is a computer program, otherwise we could only ever make an approximation of the real universe (like we do with modelling weather patterns and you see how well that works).

One of the fundamental rules of computing is that any computer can run the program of any other computer given enough storage space/memory. The only variable would be time (ignoring having to re-compile the program).

If the universe is digital then yes - it is technically possible (but fucking difficult to do).

However, in terms of computing power we would need to keep beating Moore's law for another thousand years or so before we would build a computer powerful enough to accelerate time in that universe relative to our own.

By then - all bets are off. Impossible to know what we might be capable of.

[Mister Agenda]

Mister Agenda, if we're really living a simulation and manage to contact the users, I doubt they'll believe we're "living". If your character in a game stops responding to your commands and starts talking to you, would you think it's a malfunction or that it became self aware?

Presumably I would KNOW if the characters in my game are self-aware. If they are, aren't I beholden to treat them as people?

This is what I meant by the ethical implications of simulating conscious being on a computer.

In Star Trek: TNG, the holodeck character Moriarty figured out he was in a simulation and caused trouble by messing with the Enterprise. Rather than terminating Moriarty's simulated existence, they dealt with him by deceiving him into thinking he was free of the simulation. It may not have been honest, but it WAS dealing with Moriarty as a real person who had a right to not be summarily deleted or transfomed into a more tractable character.

[downbeatplumb]

First, I'm new here. Second I am a Christian. Third this is a serious question/speculation. It will be interesting (and hopefully enlightening) for me to read the responses.

So what if Who (What?) we call God is actually a computer (or a really advanced type of technology that we understand as a computer) and all that we see and detect in the universe is simply a part of a program? I don't imagine this computer is "personal" like the Christian God is, but, I suppose it could have attributes that seem to convey personhood. I imagine that somehow the "computer" is outside of the universe program, or so far "above" it to be, effectively, not part of the universe. I know there was a book about this years ago, but I don't the name of it.

So, is this a reasonable or workable theory? How would one reason it out? Is it possible, through reason or evidence to, if not prove it, make a plausible argument for something like this?

I am interested in reading speculations that are based on reason and from a skeptical and/or atheistic point of view.

(I mentioned that I am Christian just so anyone answering will understand my background. I am not interested in this post in answering questions about my faith. I can go to another thread and do that. Besides, this is an atheist message board, no one here is interested in Christianity).

If we were all part of a giant version of the sims how would we know?

If its at all like microsoft products it would be glitches that would be the tell.

Glitches such as someone being able to walk on water or coming back and walking around after they died.

If any of that happened then you can be sure that we are all in some alien nerds PC.

But then you get the problem of where does the alien live?
What kind of universe does it exist in?

It would not be an answer but the start of many more questions.

[Mister Agenda]

It is possible if, and only if, the universe we are experiencing is a computer program, otherwise we could only ever make an approximation of the real universe (like we do with modelling weather patterns and you see how well that works).

Since we are only capable of experiencing an approximation of the real universe in the first place, wouldn't a simulation only have to be good enough to fool us?

However, in terms of computing power we would need to keep beating Moore's law for another thousand years or so before we would build a computer powerful enough to accelerate time in that universe relative to our own.

We do it with just our own brains. Remember that the universe we're aware of exists entirely in our brains. Before the idea of computers being able to simulate a universe like ours came along, we had the 'brain in a jar' dilemma, we have no way of knowing for sure that we're not disembodied brains being fed sensory information that doesn't correspond with the 'real world' at all. If Moore's law holds, you get about a 30,000-fold increase in computational power in about 15 years, and that would put computers capable of forming accurate models of every part of the human brain appearing around 2025. And 30,000 times THAT by 2040. I don't expect Moore's law to hold forever, but I'll be a little surprised if a desktop couldn't deliver a simulated universe that we couldn't tell from a real one by 2050, provided we're able to interface our brains directly with the virtual envrionment efficiently enough.

By then - all bets are off. Impossible to know what we might be capable of.

You're definitely right about that, my friend.

[paulpablo]

First, I'm new here. Second I am a Christian. Third this is a serious question/speculation. It will be interesting (and hopefully enlightening) for me to read the responses.

So what if Who (What?) we call God is actually a computer (or a really advanced type of technology that we understand as a computer) and all that we see and detect in the universe is simply a part of a program? I don't imagine this computer is "personal" like the Christian God is, but, I suppose it could have attributes that seem to convey personhood. I imagine that somehow the "computer" is outside of the universe program, or so far "above" it to be, effectively, not part of the universe. I know there was a book about this years ago, but I don't the name of it.

So, is this a reasonable or workable theory? How would one reason it out? Is it possible, through reason or evidence to, if not prove it, make a plausible argument for something like this?

I am interested in reading speculations that are based on reason and from a skeptical and/or atheistic point of view.

(I mentioned that I am Christian just so anyone answering will understand my background. I am not interested in this post in answering questions about my faith. I can go to another thread and do that. Besides, this is an atheist message board, no one here is interested in Christianity).

I'm not saying it is impossible that god is a computer and we are part of a program or whatever, but look at it this way.

I've heard of ancient tribes believing that humans are just parasites ontop of a living creature, they believed the earth was a creature and they were the parasites because this was understandable to them, now years later we're still trying to grasp the creation of the universe and relating it to a system familiar to us on this little tiny rock of a planet, instead of just admitting we don't understand it. Instead of parasites on a huge creature it's moved onto it being a computer program.
Again I'm not saying it is impossible I'm just saying people are doing the exact same thing they were doing thousands of years ago and it doesn't explain anything because then where did the computer come from, how was it created?

[max-greece]

Downbeat,

Love it - God is an Alien nerd!

Sure explains a lot.

[CapnAwesome]

What if God is a giant floating space hamster?