If the universe was fine tuned for our life...

[Heywood]

Historical Simulations - Motivational, Ethical and Legal Issues, Journal of Futures Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 23-42, August 2006

Perhaps lawyers aren't the very best place to get information about physics or future technology. What you have there is thought speculation about the legal implications of using computer simulations for medical testing working on the assumption that such simulations might be possible by 2050. Jenkins relies on futurologists for that prediction.

I was just citing the source of my statement about stacking problems. I noticed this morning when I was putting up the link that Jenkins is from a law school. I almost commented on it but figured paper was peer reviewed prior to publication. I could be wrong about that too. I didn't spend any time researching the Journal of Futures Studies. I'm not interested in debating stacking problems with Rhythm....I just want to throw out there my source for that particular comment I made.

---

Very smart people are working on how we could tell if we are existing in a sub reality right now. There are published paper detailing on how we can test for it.

It would be impossible to test a system from within the system. Any anomalies would be a part of the system that we were not yet aware of. Within the system one can only 'test' with the rules of the system.

Here is the source of my statement on people thinking about how to test Simulation Hypothesis.

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/429...imulation/

---

It is tuned for life.

What on earth makes you say that?

There are a lot of main stream physicists and cosmologists who acknowledge a "fine tuning" problem. However many do not.

It is not a crack pot idea.

Again I would dispute the notion the universe is fine tuned for life, but rather instead claim it is apparently fine tuned for emergent complexity.