RE: Are we all just part of a computer simulation? Scientists are trying to find that out.
December 17, 2012 at 11:25 am
(This post was last modified: December 17, 2012 at 11:27 am by Mister Agenda.)
(December 15, 2012 at 12:29 pm)Ben Davis Wrote:(December 15, 2012 at 11:13 am)TaraJo Wrote: http://www.inquisitr.com/437451/our-univ...ew-theory/Erm... I think I'm reading it wrong. Did they really say that 'if we can simulate our universe then our universe must be a simulation, itself'?
It would increase the odds that our universe is a simulation, since we will know it is possible for our universe to be a simulation, but it won't mean our universe is necessarily a simulation.
It occurs to me that there must be a lower boundary to iterations of simulated universes, due to computing power not being unlimited, and that the last iteration would not be able to simulate a universe with sufficient fidelity to be 'as real' as their own, so not being able to simulate a universe would not signify that we are not ourselves in a simulated universe.
(December 16, 2012 at 4:39 pm)Brian37 Wrote: No we are not a computer simulation. I really hate this crap. What the fuck bothers humans about nature not needing a cognitive hand?
Star Trek superstition is no fucking different than God/Allah/Yahweh crap.
This postulation is simply new age woo in the same stupid anthropomorphism as the superstitious crap in the past.
If our universe is simulated, that does no imply that we are designed. We would as likely just be something that happened when someone programmed in the basic parameters and hit 'run universe'.
Not that I accept the hypothesis as likely without more evidence.
