Simulation theory

There was a great thread about the simulation theory Let's continue. Do you think we are living inside a simulation? Why? Why not?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-RMOGFaOLSQ
youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser)
google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjIqdKO8a_PAhUE44MKHWUEAroQFggeMAA&url=http://theawakenment.com/theoretical-physicist-james-gates-finds-computer-code-in-string-theory-equation/&usg=AFQjCNEuHBANa1C9iiL4Ly-qdNgDRyExzA&sig2=tNeYdtald_nUipkfUNx4JA
youtube.com/watch?v=G2xXu8_2Exo
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

I dont know whether we are or not but its certainly possible that we are. But how tf can you ever know if you're in a sinulation. You can only say its possible

The real question is if this is multiplayer game or singleplayer. Is everyone a player or are some NPCs?

did anyone in the last thread talk about how the theory ties in with quantum mechanics?

Like other religions, simulation theory is based on limited knowledge filling in the massive gaps of our understanding.

It uses the existing limit of knowledge to seem fresh and new, but the pattern remains exactly the same: life is an illusion, "reality" is unprovable because it's beyond the veil, and you can only succeed by believing with blind faith.

:/

An MMO

youtube.com/watch?v=-RMOGFaOLSQ

I watched another talk of his the other night that was also linked on Cred Forums, very interesting stuff.

oк. Where is exit? How to leave this phantasmagoric circus? in4: kill yourself

>The universe simulation would most likely not be semiconductor based. It's really just a "makes you think" analogy. There is plenty of stuff I am willing to concede that is probably beyond my comprehension. Quantum theory lends itself to the universe being information based on fundamental levels. The limits on experimental observation of reality have spooky not (scientifically) resolved implications. Let's hope science keeps trucking along as independent of politics as possible.

I think that were reality to be a simulation, it wouldn't have sentient beings that would question their existence.

I mean, you can argue that giving beings sentience allows them to develop for themselves without having to drop in new technology for them to adapt to every so often, but really, I don't think it would be feasible.

then again, that raises the question are we just programmed to not be able to comprehend just how feasible it is? Sort of like said.

It's an interesting question, but I think it's just unlikely that any being that may have created us/programmed us into a simulation would have allowed us to remain this level of independence. There always comes the risk that we just fail to be anything worthwhile.

And then there's the whole question "why bother"? This isn't the matrix, human bodies were experimented on in WW2 to figure out if they were viable sources of energy, they're not. The amount of shit you'd need to put in to keep the human body functioning would probably be far more than what it puts out in a comatose state.

I don't know man, it's just a question that I don't think you can honestly answer.

wait wait shit, if we're preprogrammed, ww2 was too.

...Fuckin paradoxical bullshit. You know what I mean. It's not likely based on the only logic we have available to us. It's possible, but not likely.

On phone so can't provide link but you tube Tom Campbell what a recent physics experiment means to you,
Tldr double split confirmed with a different method and how it ties into simulation theory. Every thing of tom Campbell is apllicable to this convo

This

youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc

this?

Your simulation theory is probably just another simulation inside of simulation.

Yep, thanks user

We are the NPCs. There are no players.

Not sure if relevant. My post is hasty as I'm cooking.

I just finished a book about "biocentrism". I am not sure about its conclusions. But the gist of it states that the universe exists because we can observe it. With no observer then there cannot be existance.

There's an old question about this: if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there, does it make a sound?

The answer is no. Sound is a perception.

TL;DR?

Not gonna spend +3 hours to watch these.

to measure you need to interact - its not conscious observation that is changing the behaviour - its the fact you have to bombard it with particles in order to observe.

They did an experiment called "The delayed choice quantum eraser" (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser)

What seems to be the conclusion is that particles don't really "exist". Every particle is simply a wave of probability, and we ONLY observe particles when the universe is forced to give us information - otherwise it's not "sending" information (aka, the particle doesn't actually exist).

The analogy used in the video is that a MMO server isn't sending information if there's no players online. You only get information back if you make a request.

Sorry bong, but I'm Player 1.

Perception is reality

Control mass perception

Control reality

The Jew World Order is centered around a dumb, manipulatable slave underclass and a ruling jewish elite that know the truth about perception manipulation.

This may have already happened in the past and this is just them doing it again to harvest DNA

Our entire Universe is information. You can point to any stuff and assign it value. Moreover, the laws of mathematics are deeply integrated in it and apply to every single corner of it, equally.

Considering the above, you can rebuild an actual representation of every single law, particle and particle behavior. They are information after all that simply behaves in X Y Z ways, which is easily programmable.

Now, let's take a look at our current Universe. It probably contains millions of sentient civilizations spread across it. A huge number of them will live up to the age of simulations, where they'd program a close to real representation of reality.

If we take that fact, and that the simulations they build will most likely contain sentient programs (AIs), what is the chance for us to be in the single real Universe, as opposed to the infinite potential simulations?

Moreover, our Universe already exhibits signs of maximized computational utilization (something you'd expect to be programmed in a simulation) - there is a limit to the speed, there is a limit to the energy that can be contained within a sector of space (else it collapses into a BH), there is a certain time where "it all began" as opposed to "it always was here", all the particles around us are full copies of each other, and most importantly, it is fully representable by information, which means that if you had a powerful enough device, you could plug that information in it and end up with our Universe as it is.

None of those laws would exist in a real Universe, since they would not be needed in the first place. The only reason to have those laws existing is to maximize the computation ability of the simulation so it doesn't consume too much resources.

SHUT IT DOWN !!!

Nigger detected.
At least watch the first 15 minutes. You will understand quantum physics.

Doesn't really contribute to the discussion imho, because if reality is a simulation and/or our conception of it is all there is, this surely happens on a much more fundamental scale than any human media or technology could currently influence.

Or do the jews also trick you into believing air, water and your fridge are real?

but spain.
how can fridges be real if our eyes aren't real?

That's the thing about quantum physics tho: when you go into small enough detail, the conventional laws of mathematics might not apply anymore and we might be actually unable to assign any meaningful information

The tree itself would hear the sound, a situation in which no one is present to hear it is impossible. Even if you were to argue that the falling tree is dead/non-living, well so are microphones and they can detect sounds just fine even in environments without any living creatures at all. The universe can perceive itself.

what does that even mean?
>the tree itself would hear the sound
What does, according to your definition, the act of hearing entice?

>With no observer then there cannot be existence.

It kind of makes sense given the information "probability wave when not observed" issue that keeps popping up in quantum mechanics.

Perhaps this is a mutually beneficial system? The universe cannot exist without perception - and perception can't exist without the universe. Yin and Yang famalam.

They alter how you perceive everything by trapping you in 3 dimensions.

There's something to do with the pineal gland.

I didn't mean it literally. The point was that sound is an objective physical phenomenon and the presence or nature of the observer is meaningless.

Nigga everything is made up, stay woke

>With no observer then there cannot be existance.

How do you define observer? In the sense of humans or other intelligent life?
Seems very shaky to me, since intelligent life apparently developed from there being no life at all. In fact, "life" is just a label we give to complex biochemical structures that self-reproduce.

So we're dealing with multi-dimensional kikes. How did you uncover that secret?

I haven't thought hard enough on it nor have I read enough on simulation theory to give myself a concrete opinion on what I want to believe.

From what I've read though, a lot of the people who push this theory are staunch atheists/deists and refuse to believe in any sort biblical afterlife. Simulation theory seems like an escapism for them where it gives them a reason not to be worried about what comes after dying.

If there's anything I'm thankful for, it's being dumb enough that I cannot grasp the concept of death for more than 5 minutes a day at most. I can't imagine if your life was dedicated to something like this while being a firm believer in death as the final curtain.

>How do you define observer?
I would define it as anything that forces the universe to "respond" in the same way as it responds when it collapses a wave function when we try to make a measurement. I don't necessarily know if a consciousness has to be involved, but if the universe HAS to be giving information to "something" requesting it, then it must exist.

look at the goddamn experiments then

nobody give a shit about how you are long and hard

The more you objectively analyze the machine which you use to analyze the world the more you realize how fragile "reality" is

I don't do hallucinagens, but friends have told me they are like a shortcut

Studying history/science origina is an eye opener too. Both "truths" are just consensuses agreed upon by enough "experts"

You can eventually create anything in history/science with enough corruption.

Pretty soon people believe information that is 100% objectively false.

The idea of truth is a lie because truth is just a compilation of lies a group agrees upon

Strong digits for such a pile of horse shit

But why do we assign agency to it? As soon as we try to measure a certain physical property, it appears to have 'decided' one of it's possible outcomes. We don't force the universe to give us information, information happen as part of the universe when we observe; the same way the universe has for the longest time made information happen. Interaction on this most basic level is an uncertainty function, but a function of the universe nontheless. In that sense, saying without an observer there can be no existence is pretty much a truism, like saying without words there can be no speech.

Are material things like bread and shoes also mere illusions? Or phenomena like electricity? Because that's what this thread is about.

No, but I think our brains cause an illusion which we call "life".
The simulation theory is just fucking retarded.

its non falsifiable
vain, in the absolute, to talk or think about it

>Do you think we are living inside a simulation?
No. The whole idea is preposterous.

"truth" is just mental masturbation

only "fact" has any, and total, validity

>With no observer then there cannot be existance.


non falsifiable
as is just about everything everyone has asserted in this thread

it's obvious that we're in a simulation. time slows down around massive objects with many particles being rendered at once to conserve processing power. particles travel differently when observed, so that they don't have to be all rendered at once, also to conserve processing power.

fallacious
but one possible cause among myriad that would confirm those observations

you merely selected the cause that you most fancy

also you need to brush up on relativity

What people think about multiverse theories? During summer I started to learn about different string theories and it was fascinating how probable it is that there is parallel universes.

it's very likely that we're living in a simulation. if we assume that society will eventually achieve technology with the power to simulate consciousness as we define it and we assume that once that technology is created it will be used to simulate many many universes, it becomes clear that it is more likely that we are living in a simulated universe than base reality. the assumptions are both fair, considering how quickly technology advances, moore's law, etc. the chance of being in non base reality is so low compared to being in a simulation being done by a computer in base reality, or a computer in a simulation.

This guy is pulling theories out of his ass. Result of those experiments could mean many things, and yet he is certain that his make-believe one is right

Your definition of illusion may be off. Everything is an illusion(information) that your senses are telling you exists.

>truth is mental masturbation

Pretty much. When you ask others for the truth, you are asking to be misled

...

see:
unless you can theorize an experiment that relies on known physics to test for such claims

Theoretical physicist gates discovers computer code in string theory equations...

Does this lend speculation into wether our universe is coded or not?


google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjIqdKO8a_PAhUE44MKHWUEAroQFggeMAA&url=http://theawakenment.com/theoretical-physicist-james-gates-finds-computer-code-in-string-theory-equation/&usg=AFQjCNEuHBANa1C9iiL4Ly-qdNgDRyExzA&sig2=tNeYdtald_nUipkfUNx4JA

ITT: People that don't Physics

hey now....
thats primarily what i was exclusively hinting at

you should not have said that and linked to the 3 in your list, all mine

He's implying that you don't know physics

Sorry, I was just generally pointing out that the Simulation Argument naturally rises from the most basic laws of the universe as we now understand them, all the theological and philosophical arguments that follow are not hard science.
I really didn't check if you posted any number of different replies, sorry

*last 3

i know

which is wrong

because he didnt read my posts

while it could have been a pre-programmed world event, the sim could be like the game of life as well. basically you write the fundamental rules, and see what happens on its own.

biblical god could have created the simulation.
Dead entities could be "garbage collected" into a new simulation, or reinserted into the original sim

sim theory is compatible with classical god, humanizes it even

Get back in here googles

*bump*

Honestly if we're in a simulation, we're here for a reason. Just keep living to find out that reason I guess.

I doubt it.

All stages of scientific thought explained things via their own cultural lens.

Back in the days of alchemy, people thought the human body and mind worked off of the presence of different fluids in the body. Later on during the industrial revolution, people envisioned the human body as a complex mechanical construct, and thought they could explain the entire universe through engineering as well.

And now we have tons of faggots saying the human mind works like a computer (It doesn't) and the entire universe is like a simulation.

I guess it doesn't mean it's wrong, per se. It's just not exactly a genius concept, it's the same retarded shit scientists have been thinking for over a thousand years when they can't see further than the top of their noses.

I bet you all this shit is going to be considered a bizarre and laughable "scientific" fad of the times in the future.

The truth we just plain won't be able to know what the universe is really like for a few thousand years because it's hard to tell what color your house is while you're standing inside of it.

If the universe is a simulation then it has a creator? Or not necesarily?
If this is true, then it means we are all literally fictional characters. "Stories are important" the old wise men used to say, maybe they were talking about us all.

The reason is to be observed. If there is one simulation, there are infinite others running different variants of the same thing with slightly different variables.

Agree bro. Do you have any thoughts on the Mandela effect?

The bizarre question is - who created the creator? And the creator of creator? And so on to infinity. What if there isn't a "real" reality, a point of beginning? It's just an infinite loop and the "real" reality is where you are?

We aren't in a simulation retard. You think we are in a computer program because you are unable to think critically and when people with perceived authority (ie Elon musk) says something you just agree blindly. Mix that with being totally saturated with pop culture and media (da matrix guys) and this is what we are left with.


We are in an endless repeating cycle of the same thing. Those planets that orbit the sun is the same thing as electrons orbiting a nucleus. It is the same cycle of life and death over and over. As above so below. Ying/yang. Jesus and the devil. Good and evil. Life and death. Love and hate. 1s and 0s. Just repeating itself and growing outward on top of itself from nothingness. It means absolutely nothing, but as you get older you realize that only when there is no meaning at all can any meaning be constructed.

>unironically looking like an older version of The Architect from The Matrix and thinking this way
Wew lad interesting stuff tho

I don't think there's crossover with parallel universes, no.

The Mandela effect is ultimately just uninformed people being mistaken, and when they express their mistaken views other uninformed people go along with it because they don't know.

>Mandela died in the 80s, right?
>Uh, yeah, I think I might remember something about that.
The first person is just mistaken, the second person is wracking his brain for an affirmative answer because he doesn't want to seem like a retard.

Same concept with the Berenstain bears. Some dude says BerenSTEIN because he knows Stein is a common naming ending, and Stain isn't, so other people who have sketchy memories of their childhood just go "Hmm... Yeah I remember the BerenSTEIN bears!"

It's a group psychology problem, not evidence of parallel universes.

No. That's not how simulations work. It's just mathematical calculations, the stuff it simulates is not conscious.

The Earth is at the center of the universe. Think about it.

>this surely happens on a much more fundamental scale than any human media or technology could currently influence
The trick is to subliminally convince people to deceive themselves. Coordinated media saturation of a specific angle can make that happen.

...

There is a question we must ask before delving into this useless debate.

Does this question or a yes/no answer to it have ANY effect on your day to day life? Is there any practical use to this?

This is how philosophy degenerates, looking for things-in-themselves theoreticals, and not practicality.

universe is so big that tyranids or reapers exterminate all life is some galaxy just to prevent people that they live in simulation - it would be too big shock for them...

so technically universe is a place where.. all dreams and hopes comes true?

How dare you question unfalsifiable claims

We're clearly all living in a simulation because of this single news article written with a hyperbolic headline, that references a scientific study I can't comprehend
Clearly no journalist would ever write a misleading headline for clicks

Checkatheists m8

>watch 15 minutes of a youtube video
>understand quantum physics

True nigger logic detected

You're making many "assumptions" that don't have to be true at all. First, the simulation doesn't have to program any event. Its all random. This would be especially true if the programmers are running thousands of simulations a day. Which if you understand machine time, totally possible. We are getting by for thousands or millions of years in our space, where as outside the computer its 12 seconds. If you think about it, there are tons of reasons one could come up with as to why you would run simulations, including many reasons we may not understand yet.

As far as people being sentient, I'm not even sure thats entirely true anyways..

No. Because the creators of the simulation are in a simulation ... and so on

About the death thing.

I really am not scared about death. I don't know why.

What I think about is, when I die, it means it's done. You leave and you're done, will you feel the pain of the sorrows of those you left behind? I don't know. What lies after it? Will I be stuck in an endless void? Will my conscious instantly be erased the time that I die? Will I resurrect? Will I wake up from a bad dream and make myself believe that the past life was a dream and continue on living? I don't know.

I am very much happy and contented with my life but if ever I die, I wouldn't bear a grudge on it.

It's funny how atheists will accept something like this as and explanation for the universes existence but they'll turn around and completely reject god even though it requires less assumptions.

i resent the human form. so dirty, requires so much maintenance to keep a clean feeling. i want to feel high tech like i'm living in the Blame! manga.

This. People don't seem to understand that not everything needs to be pre-programmed to do every little thing. The instruction set of Conway's Game of Life is incredibly simple and can create seemingly complex patterns. There are many other iterative algorithms like this one. It's one of the things that actually got me into computer science

Define "simulation" and i'll give you an answer.

I'm beginning to wonder. Tge leftwing are utterly insane and ignore facts. How can one race (whites) be so suicidal, cucked and in denial.

It beggars belief!

What a shit argument.

Bitch im rank 1 in this game

That wasn't an argument

Have you ever thought about why are you able to be yourself?

Have you ever thought about being others?

Have you ever felt that kind of eerie feeling? When you think deeply about it?

While you are able to know the feeling of being yourself, how can you able to know the feeling of "being" that friend of yours? Since you have completely no way of being that friend of yours, have it ever crossed your mind to think that this whole universe is just like a single player game for you?

Yes we live in a technical "simulation" our universe itself is one of infinite upon infinite upon infinite programs running simlutaniously with the God Program.

What practical uses are there for these sentient particles?

Shit opinion.

They're the drivel of meme magic

ayy lmao clearly said about death and stuff

youtube.com/watch?v=G2xXu8_2Exo