• m0darn@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Why can’t it be that we simply live in a real universe? That’s the simplest answer, the one that requires the fewest assumptions.

    The argument goes that: a sufficiently technologically advanced society would run ancestor simulations. Those simulations may also run simulations. There’s no ceiling on the number of nesting simulations. It’s the height of conceit to think we’re the top level when there are squillions of simulated universe.

    https://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2535

    • Tetra@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      “there are squillions of simulated universe.”

      Huge assumption there lol, but I guess I see your point. If you assume simulations of this scope and quality are possible (again HUGE assumption), then your odds of being in one go up a lot, obviously.

      Again though, at some point you have to hit actual, non simulated reality, and when everything seems to point towards that being the case for us, and absolutely nothing hints at a simulation, I don’t see why we couldn’t just be in that actual reality. I can’t help but see that thought experiment as just an attempt to answer “the big question” in some way, even though in actuality it just moves it out of view.

      It’s Russell’s teapot, impossible to disprove and theorically possible, but there’s nothing backing it up besides fantastical assumptions. In that regard yeah, I think the comparison with God is warranted. The creators of our simulation, and especially the ones up above that are actually real would need such absurd levels of technology so far beyond our comprehension that it would be magic to us, and they would absolutely be our Gods.

      I don’t see much of a difference, it’s kind of just a tech themed spin on it, with the same fallacies plaguing the whole concept, IMO. It’s cool to think and write scifi about, but that’s about it.

      • m0darn@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Huge assumption there lol, but I guess I see your point.

        It’s not an assumption, it’s a conclusion based on the premises laid out in the previous sentences.

        Everything seems to point towards that being the case for us, and absolutely nothing hints at a simulation

        Maximum speed, minimum length, light is only a particle when we’re looking at it…

        Like there are other things that definitely point away from it being a simulation (eg gravity waves). But there’s not nothing pointing towards simulation.

    • tiny_electron@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      There is a cieling though. A computer made of matter of one universe cannot simulate an entire universe at the same speed. It’s like installing a VM on a computer: the VM is always slower. Each layer would then become exponentially slower with a limit of 0 speed.

      Having said that, combined with the fact that our Universe is 13B years old, it would make the age of our root universe exponentially larger than 13B years.

      It could maybe feasible if we live in the first layers, but beyond that our root universe would have died from Heat death long ago.

      • 31337@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The simulations could be imperfect simulations. So, each nested simulation would lose fidelity, simulate a smaller universe, or simulate a universe with less life. I think one hypothesis I’ve heard is that wave functions are an approximation, and the simulation only fully simulates particles when they are observed. Kinda like how games do level-of-detail optimizations when you are further away from objects.

        Edit: Another possibility is that nothing says the simulation we’re in started at the beginning of the universe, it could’ve just been given initial conditions and started yesterday for all we know.

        I don’t know if we are in a simulation, but I think it’s plausible. I think a God (at least of the religions I know of) is implausible, but possible. I kinda like the many-worlds hypothesis better than simulation theory, but I guess they’re not exclusive.

      • m0darn@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        There is a ceiling though. A computer made of matter of one universe cannot simulate an entire universe at the same speed.

        Right but we don’t know what the real universe’s limitations are, and I’m geostationary to speak too authoritatively of the capabilities of an arbitrarily advanced civilization.

        I don’t think simulation theory is true. Eg calculating gravitational forces between everything in the universe would presumably be extraordinarily cost intensive, but essentially irrelevant (I mean like gravitational waves, not the moon).