This is mostly a philosophical issue (see "digital philosophy"), but I don't think that we can actually ever find out whether or not we are living inside a simulation. The whole universe itself could be a giant simulation, but then there won't be any way of distinguishing between the "simulation" and "reality."

The simulation idea is also a convergence of physics and information theory. From this perspective, everything that we do in our lives is a part of the universal computation because we are storing and processing information (or bits of information), like computers.

I read a book titled "Programming the Universe," by Seth Lloyd, in which the author argues that the universe itself is a quantum computer.

"The universe is made of bits. Every molecule, atom, and elementary particle registers bits of information. Every interaction between those pieces of the universe processes that information by altering those bits. That is, the universe computes, and because the universe is governed by the laws of quantum mechanics, it computes in an intrinsically quantum-mechanical fashion; its bits are quantum bits. The history of the universe is, in effect, a huge and ongoing quantum computation. The universe is a quantum computer." (Lloyd, 3)

Here's one good article on the "computational" view of the universe, and it explains the connections between black holes, information theory, and the holographic principle.

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/Black...puters.pdf

(December 16, 2012 at 4:19 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: The way the world is, I assume the simulation is running on Windows.

That would explain it. Only Bill Gates could perpetuate such a cluster fuck, therefore Bill Gates is God. Boy is humanity fucked.

---

(December 16, 2012 at 4:39 pm)Rayaan Wrote: This is mostly a philosophical issue (see "digital philosophy"), but I don't think that we can actually ever find out whether or not we are living inside a simulation. The whole universe itself could be a giant simulation, but then there won't be any way of distinguishing between the "simulation" and "reality."

The simulation idea is also a convergence of physics and information theory. From this perspective, everything that we do in our lives is a part of the universal computation because we are storing and processing information (or bits of information), like computers.

I read a book titled "Programming the Universe," by Seth Lloyd, in which the author argues that the universe itself is a quantum computer.

"The universe is made of bits. Every molecule, atom, and elementary particle registers bits of information. Every interaction between those pieces of the universe processes that information by altering those bits. That is, the universe computes, and because the universe is governed by the laws of quantum mechanics, it computes in an intrinsically quantum-mechanical fashion; its bits are quantum bits. The history of the universe is, in effect, a huge and ongoing quantum computation. The universe is a quantum computer." (Lloyd, 3)

Here's one good article on the "computational" view of the universe, and it explains the connections between black holes, information theory, and the holographic principle.

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/Black...puters.pdf

I am sorry, it is bullshit. It is simply attempting to replace one god concept with another. Non cognitive objects move without a hand pushing them. Life is a product of a non cognitive process, not a who, and not a fucking program created by a super who.

There is no need for a "programmer" anymore than there is a need for a god.

(December 16, 2012 at 4:45 pm)Brian37 Wrote: I am sorry, it is bullshit. It is simply attempting to replace one god concept with another. Non cognitive objects move without a hand pushing them. Life is a product of a non cognitive process, not a who, and not a fucking program created by a super who.

There is no need for a "programmer" anymore than there is a need for a god.

I'm not saying that there is necessarily a need for a programmer, but I was just pointing out that the computational idea of the universe is something that has many connections and applications with theoretical physics, information theory, the human brain, our DNA, cells, and all kinds of complicated, biological systems.


The following article explains many of the connections between living systems and information theory, which I think are consistent and sensible:

http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/papers/sholle.html

(December 15, 2012 at 11:13 am)TaraJo Wrote: http://www.inquisitr.com/437451/our-univ...ew-theory/

Interesting article. Thanks.

I read an interesting thought experiment earlier this year which considered the morality of computer game designers incorporating into their games, if they could, an advanced artificial intelligence such as would make the characters truly sentient.

It was none-too-subtle analogy to God giving human beings sentient awareness of pain. IE. Should the game designer incorporate that program into the game He created? The counter-apologist Op claimed that, (unlike God) the consensus of most human game designers is ''that the designer ought not to incorporate that program - that to do so would to be doing something wrong. The underlying intuition is that to introduce the ability to suffer is wrong.''

The thought experiment is supposed to help lead the mind to the conclusion that;

- since most human game designers arguably would not inflict AI pain awareness (sentience) on Sonic the Hedgehog or car crash victims in Grand Theft Auto because that is immoral,

and/

- the games themselves can be enjoyed by the game users as intended, as they are without the need for the existence of any AI sentience of real suffering by the game characters, so God/game programmer wouldnt include redundant suffering,

and/

- unlike programmed games, the real world has actual human sentient experience of pain,

Therefore - The pain sentience of characters in real life must have derived from some other explanation - an impersonal cause - NOT a deliberate program designer. (AKA - teleology.)


Of course it overlooks heaps of other theodicy arguments answering the so-called problem of pain, but otherwise it sounds persuasive, right?

WRONG.

Heres why. Are we really supposed to believe that game ''sentience'' programmers wouldnt be lining up to claim a Nobel Prize for this breakthrough in "artificial intelligence"?

If creating ''characters'' with the sentient ability to feel pain is immoral, why do we willingly take part in the game called parenthood?

(December 16, 2012 at 8:46 pm)Lion IRC Wrote: Heres why. Are we really supposed to believe that game ''sentience'' programmers wouldnt be lining up to claim a Nobel Prize for this breakthrough in "artificial intelligence"?

Invalid argument, because :
a) Lining up for Nobel Prize would not make the action any less immoral.
b) Pain awareness is not the same as sentience. AI can be sentient without having to feel pain.

(December 16, 2012 at 8:46 pm)Lion IRC Wrote: If creating ''characters'' with the sentient ability to feel pain is immoral, why do we willingly take part in the game called parenthood?

Most of you do it for the crazy idea that god wants you to do it. Others because they have the idea inculcated in them that their lives would be unfulfilled or hold little meaning if they don't reproduce.

Those who make the choice rationally do so because they see an advantage that outweighs the pain and do their utmost to the pain in the child's life. Something that your god fails spectacularly at.

It's unclear what to think of this as its central claim, "In a few decades, computers will be able to simulate large chunks of the universe that would prove we are living in a computer model," is distinctly unclear. Exactly how this would prove we are living inside a simulation is not specified.

Hilary Putnam wrote an essay in which he claimed to refute the possible hypothesis that we are brains in vats. (Putnam, Hilary. From Reason, Truth, and History, chapter 1, pp. 1-21. .) I found Putnam's argument largely unpersuasive.

(December 16, 2012 at 4:39 pm)Rayaan Wrote: I read a book titled "Programming the Universe," by Seth Lloyd, in which the author argues that the universe itself is a quantum computer.

Quote:"The universe is made of bits. Every molecule, atom, and elementary particle registers bits of information. Every interaction between those pieces of the universe processes that information by altering those bits. That is, the universe computes, and because the universe is governed by the laws of quantum mechanics, it computes in an intrinsically quantum-mechanical fashion; its bits are quantum bits. The history of the universe is, in effect, a huge and ongoing quantum computation. The universe is analogous to a quantum computer." (Lloyd, 3)

There. Fixed that for him.

(December 16, 2012 at 5:19 pm)Rayaan Wrote:

(December 16, 2012 at 4:45 pm)Brian37 Wrote: I am sorry, it is bullshit. It is simply attempting to replace one god concept with another. Non cognitive objects move without a hand pushing them. Life is a product of a non cognitive process, not a who, and not a fucking program created by a super who.

There is no need for a "programmer" anymore than there is a need for a god.

I'm not saying that there is necessarily a need for a programmer, but I was just pointing out that the computational idea of the universe is something that has many connections and applications with theoretical physics, information theory, the human brain, our DNA, cells, and all kinds of complicated, biological systems.


The following article explains many of the connections between living systems and information theory, which I think are consistent and sensible:

http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/papers/sholle.html

Don't care. As soon as ANYONE starts using anthropomorphic language to describe uncaused and non cognitive processes, they are doing a disservice to science and to humanity by projecting human qualities on the world around them.

All this is implying is without the si fi woo, is that the world is complex. Just leave it at that and don't give it some si fi woo.

You could only simulate a linear universe, and our universe isn't linear so I don't understand how it could be synthetic?