God as computer

[Max_Kolbe]

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).

[Ryantology]

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 can't really imagine how it would make any practical difference, except that it makes the 'who created the creator' question less of a last resort for Christian goalposts and more of a legitimate philosophical issue.

[Captain Colostomy]

Who made the computer?

[Faith No More]

Well, one has to wonder how something like that would be able to be confirmed. It seems to be beyond of human knowledge and understanding and could never be anything more than a "what if" scenario. It's the kind of thing that makes for interesting literature but doesn't really have a practical application in science.

Besides, we have to go where the evidence leads us, not force it to conform to a presupposition, so unless the evidence points towards the universe being a computer program, I don't see a reason to try and put together a working theory.

[Max_Kolbe]

Besides, we have to go where the evidence leads us, not force it to conform to a presupposition, so unless the evidence points towards the universe being a computer program, I don't see a reason to try and put together a working theory.

This makes sense. There is no evidence that the universe is a computer program, as we know programs. This makes me think of another idea, that will make another thread. Actually your answer raises the really important question: where does the evidence lead us?

---

Who made the computer?

A self generating computer?

[Captain Colostomy]

Who made the computer?

A self generating computer?

So even the computer had a beginning?

[MindForgedManacle]

A computer that generated itself? Incoherent and/or infinite-regress?

[Cyberman]

What was the computer doing before it created the Universe and why would it suddenly decide to do that, let alone how?

Also, what would a computer outside the Universe need with the prayers of a single species of upstart monkey on one tiny planet lost in an insignificant backwater of the cosmos?

Basically, all the questions that pertain to a god would still apply to your scenario.

[max-greece]

Actually I seem to recall quite a good argument somewhere on the binary qualities of the universe in that it could quite easily be a computer program running on a huge computer somewhere. I don't think this was on a religious/atheist forum - it might have been on an IT forum or a physics one.

More interesting than the God question, however, was the assumption from that that we too could therefore build our own universes in time - given sufficient processing power and storage.

If we are programs within the universe program then reality and virtual reality merge and the one would, by definition, be indistinguishable from the other.

Other areas to consider would include the possibility of multiple universe programs running simultaneously, that the operator(s) may not be the same as the user(s) and may not be the original programmer(s). In fact it is quite unlikely all three even know each other.

The problem is - where do you go from there? There is no reason for us to presume, at this stage, that the universe is a computer program. Unless and until such time as we find a bug (that we can recognise from inside the program) its an unprovable hypothesis.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

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.