Simulation Theory

I never put that tbf

Ah.

Well yeah, its definitely possible. I mean I haven't studied the quantum mechanics behind it or anything but common sense dictates that it is far more logical than a magic man sitting in the sky listening to our prayers.

Ah Nick Bostroms simulation hypothesis? Big fan.

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
Ah Nick Bostroms simulation hypothesis? Big fan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you make a science and nature board?

And yes! Ive only just been reading into it! At first I laughed at it, but it could be highly plausable!

Hypothetically Its just that if humans found out then its possible that the simulation could end!

comment by 1maneontherun (U4291)
posted 6 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
Ah Nick Bostroms simulation hypothesis? Big fan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you make a science and nature board?

And yes! Ive only just been reading into it! At first I laughed at it, but it could be highly plausable!

Hypothetically Its just that if humans found out then its possible that the simulation could end!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like a science and nature board. I'm probably more into that than sport. But its probably not appropriate, as much as I would like it. Might deliberate it when I'm doing the promotion and relegations on here.

The simulation could end, or we could destroy ourselves, or we could eventually start running our own simulations. Nested simulation theory. In many respects, moving from the pure "ancestors" simulation hypothesis, there is also the concept of the universe as a computer. Our entire reality centers around
starting variables such as the size of electrons, atomic weights, gravity. The entire universe and all bodies within moves according to this. Another universe as a computer may be radically different in terms of its starting variables.

The other side of the simulation hypothesis is that all technologically advanced societies destroy themselves before they are able to run such simulations, in which case our reality is the true reality.

A lot of research is going into the search for a grid or lattice which may indicate a minimum "resolution" for the simulation. Even if we discover such a thing, our reality doesn't stop becoming our reality.

In Bostroms books "Superintelligence" he also talks about the merging of organic intelligence and machine and where it leads... It makes sense that in order to travel to something millions of light years away, it's unlikely that intelligence will be organic. Within minutes of creating an AI that surpasses human intelligence, it is likely that the intelligence self improves such that in mere moments it surpasses the combined sum of human intelligence since we arrived as a species. By that point all bets are off.

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 2 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by 1maneontherun (U4291)
posted 6 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
Ah Nick Bostroms simulation hypothesis? Big fan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you make a science and nature board?

And yes! Ive only just been reading into it! At first I laughed at it, but it could be highly plausable!

Hypothetically Its just that if humans found out then its possible that the simulation could end!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like a science and nature board. I'm probably more into that than sport. But its probably not appropriate, as much as I would like it. Might deliberate it when I'm doing the promotion and relegations on here.

The simulation could end, or we could destroy ourselves, or we could eventually start running our own simulations. Nested simulation theory. In many respects, moving from the pure "ancestors" simulation hypothesis, there is also the concept of the universe as a computer. Our entire reality centers around
starting variables such as the size of electrons, atomic weights, gravity. The entire universe and all bodies within moves according to this. Another universe as a computer may be radically different in terms of its starting variables.

The other side of the simulation hypothesis is that all technologically advanced societies destroy themselves before they are able to run such simulations, in which case our reality is the true reality.

A lot of research is going into the search for a grid or lattice which may indicate a minimum "resolution" for the simulation. Even if we discover such a thing, our reality doesn't stop becoming our reality.

In Bostroms books "Superintelligence" he also talks about the merging of organic intelligence and machine and where it leads... It makes sense that in order to travel to something millions of light years away, it's unlikely that intelligence will be organic. Within minutes of creating an AI that surpasses human intelligence, it is likely that the intelligence self improves such that in mere moments it surpasses the combined sum of human intelligence since we arrived as a species. By that point all bets are off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow thats a lot to chew on!

Its a real difficult one IMO, but as you say we are real to us and thats what matters!

And if we are in a simulation, then theres no knowing what could be on the other side?

And please do a science board! This site can be anything you want it to be and these types of discussions do come up often enough on this site!

Its a real difficult one IMO, but as you say we are real to us and thats what matters!
----------------
It's debatable whether the desire to understand the nature of reality is a flaw we have. Majority of animals live, screw then die. Something that lives for 70 odd years isn't a big influence on the comic scale. There is some weird stat like we live closer in time to the t-rex than the t rex did to the stegasaurus. I wonder if we inflate our own genetic importance.

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 hour, 42 minutes ago
Its a real difficult one IMO, but as you say we are real to us and thats what matters!
----------------
It's debatable whether the desire to understand the nature of reality is a flaw we have. Majority of animals live, screw then die. Something that lives for 70 odd years isn't a big influence on the comic scale. There is some weird stat like we live closer in time to the t-rex than the t rex did to the stegasaurus. I wonder if we inflate our own genetic importance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We certainly do! Humans take themselves far too seriously

70 years is naff all isn't it?! I think a sentient species like ours should live somewhat longer, but we don't so whats the point ??

Also we are too insignificant

Maybe there is a God in the simulation.

Or the easter bunny.

Anything is possible in simulation.

comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
Maybe there is a God in the simulation.

Or the easter bunny.

Anything is possible in simulation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deep!