Yes, we are doomed - SAFE is a bright spot but I think this and a few other bright spots have come too late - The World’s Sixth Mass Extinction will finalise before we can turn things around . .
Gotta love this mentality.
While its fine to question if we do live in a simulation, its not fine to say because there is no evidence then we are living in a simulation which is the logical conclusion to the hacker’s thinking. Once you say there is no evidence needed then you springboard to your conspiracy.
There’s no evidence that we can simulate a whole universe on a quantum scale, let alone large numbers of simulations. We know that quantum computers can simulate quantum systems efficiently, but I have never seen any evidence or plausible arguments that we’ll ever be able to simulate anything on the scale of a universe.
Im a huge fan of the theory that we live in a holographic universe.
Not quite the same as a simulation, but similair.
As to why people would want to leave a simulation is beyond me, you wouldnt exist, better to stay and enjoy the ride.
By bill hicks.
The world is like a ride in an amusement park. And when you choose to go on it you think it’s real because that’s how powerful our minds are.
And the ride goes up and down and round and round. It has thrills and chills and it’s very brightly colored and it’s very loud and it’s fun, for a while. Some people have been on the ride for a long time and they begin to question: “Is this real, or is this just a ride?” And other people have remembered, and they come back to us, they say: “Hey, don’t worry, don’t be afraid, ever, because this is just a ride.” … and we kill those people.
Ha ha, “Shut him up. We have a lot invested in this ride. Shut him up. Look at my furrows of worry. Look at my big bank account and my family. This just has to be real.” It’s just a ride. But we always kill those good guys who try and tell us that, you ever notice that? And let the demons run amok. But it doesn’t matter, because it’s just a ride. And we can change it anytime we want. It’s only a choice. No effort, no work, no job, no savings and money. A choice, right now, between fear and love. The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your doors, buy guns, close yourself off. The eyes of love instead see all of us as ONE.
Here’s what we can do to change the world, right now, to a better ride. Take all that money we spend on weapons and defense each year, and instead spend it feeding, clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would many times over, not one human being excluded, and we can explore space together, both inner and outer, forever, in peace.
To what end would another species put us in a simulation? The famous flaw with the matrix was why they didn’t just plug in cows instead, using a basic farm simulator.
It seems far more likely that we have put ourselves in a metaphorical cage with no bars or simulators required. We seem happy to play the game of statism and judge anyone who questions it to keep others to tow the line. The ceremonies of elections and the illusion of democracy seem to largely sufficient for most people to believe in the system. Throw in some bread and circuses and people remain mostly sanguine.
Of course, simulations may be possible, but it feels to be at the far extremes of likelihood, IMO. There are far more simple reasons for us feeling detached and powerless.
And maybe the species making our simulation are also in a simulation. So a simulation in a simulation in a … Where will it stop?
As long as we have no evidence to any of the possibilities to choose from, each has the exact same probability; it’s a trivial mathematical fact (point of lowest entropy for the probability distribution). So, yes/no questions without evidence neither pro nor con go 50-50 no matter how unlikely either of the options “feel” to somebody.
Moreover, if the evidence is impossible to attain, like against the case of living in a simulation (we can’t exclude the possibility the simulation is perfect, with no loopholes), the mathematical probability is fixed at 50% forever. The only way out from that one is finding proof for living in a simulation.
It’s fine to have strong opinions about such things, just let’s keep it in mind that arguing about them is not scientific debate but religious war
Sorry for the short lesson on the probabilities of the unknowable, it was begging to be told.
Just want to add… You know that scene in The Matrix where Neo sees the cat, and then sees it again, and Morpheus explains that it was a glitch?
I once, just once, had a very similar experience with a tram of all things, passing across an intersection. It was totally clear, completely inexplicable. My attention was was focused, waiting to get a picture of a tram crossing the intersection and between seeing it emerge into view and getting the camera up to take the picture it had disappeared, and then entered again.
Make of it what you will.
You described the movie “Thirteenth Floor”
Yes but when he says Because there is no evidence then it is true, then that is bad reasoning.
That’s what I said, yes.
It’s an interesting point you’re bringing up. Should isolated personal experiences be accepted as evidence by other people? That’s how the law works (eyewitness testimonies), so in that sense maybe they should. Not in a scientific sense though, where we would want repeatable evidence, which glitches by definition aren’t (unless we consider that one horrible Doctor Who episode).
I don’t think isolated reported experiences should be relied upon where exceptional conclusions are concerned.
Frankly I don’t know what to make of the experience myself, and I’m the only person who knows I’m not making it up - though I do know that I could be reporting a delusion.
The problem with not being able to use isolated reports for exceptional conclusions is that we may miss exceptional phenomena that occur only rarely. I think it is quite likely that this is one of the reality distortion effects of the scientific method.
The double slit experiment showed that an observer affects the outcome.
It also showed that the the process of getting to that outcome exists in a quantum state, only solidifying into an actual solid past at the point the observation is made.
It is also known that many people watching an event can perceive it differently.
These things lead me to believe we all pretty much live in our own bubbles of reality.
How we perceive or remember events happens on such a vastly different scale from quantum mechanics that I’m not sure using it to explain our subjective realities is justified.
You are probably right there.
But the fact that history is only created as a solid timeline after an observer has interacted with said event means some things work far differently than many would expect them to.
What’s more interesting to me is the 50% probability, fixed forever at that value, that the universe is fully random at the quantum level versus that it looks random but is deterministic.
If we “live” in a simulation, then we are the simulation, our life is just a simulation and our reasoning and probability concepts are just a simulation. As a matter of fact, IF we live in a simulation, everything we deem necessary to create such a simulation is just a simulation in itself. Our thinking about this is just a simulation. It’s about as fascinating as taking LSD, and it can drive you completely nuts just as well.
Wonder if it was a load balancing issue?
I like to think that when I get deja vu. Some IT tech in the simulation having a bad day.