4 ms·

The point is that the physics would be heavily approximated in obvious ways. E.g. you would observe artifacts of 3d rendering, which we shouldn't expect to obse

The point is that the physics would be heavily approximated in obvious ways. E.g. you would observe artifacts of 3d rendering, which we shouldn't expect to observe at all. However a sufficiently clever simulator could cover that up a bit. By say altering the results of physics experiments that would detect that. However there is a limit to how far they could go. We couldn't have computers too big, or it would break the simulation. So at some point they would have to intervene and prevent us from building them, or just reset the simulation. Either way, you can't have "turtles all the way down". Each nested simulation would only have a tiny, tiny, fraction of a percent of the computing power required for the parent simulation. After just a few levels it would inevitably reach 0.

dragonwriter 10y ago
> The point is that the physics would be heavily approximated in obvious ways. Whether they would or not depends on the complexity of the computer and software running the simulation, the limits to which are set by the laws of physics of the "real" universe in which the simulator exists (which may not be those of the simulation). Our intuition of what is practical in a simulation based on our own technology and what is practical in our universe simply don't apply. > E.g. you would observe artifacts of 3d rendering, which we shouldn't expect to observe at all. Our universe has a lot of quantization artifacts which defy intuition based on assumptions about continuity of physical quantities. Once we systematically observed and cataloged them, we incorporated models of them into our understanding of physical laws. Whether those are "real" physical laws in a non-simulated universe, intended simulated physical laws of a simulated universe, or simulation artifacts representing limitations of the simulation in a simulated universe are impossible to distinguish from within our universe. > However there is a limit to how far they could go. We couldn't have computers too big, or it would break the simulation. If the simulation is sufficient to model a universe the size of our observable universe at the detail level our universe is observable too, the maximum scale of computer we can have without breaking the simulation is a quantum computer of the complexity of our physical universe. Anything up to that scale is within the capacity of the simulation. Basically, all of the assumed limitations you propose are undetectable from within. You may be making the additional assumption that not only is there a host universe, but that the host universe has a scale and physical laws basically identical to those that we observe in our universe, such that the simulation would need to be substantially less complex. But there is no reason that either the scale or general physical laws of the host universe would have to mirror those in the simulation. > Either way, you can't have "turtles all the way down". If you assume the host universe is infinite in scope and information content (and the assumption that it is infinite in time and that all of that time is available to civilizations, which seems to underlie the conclusions on the that our universe is likely to be a simulation, implies this), then no matter how small of a fraction of its capacity one thinks a simulation can have, it can support an unbounded number of layers of simulation underneath it. If you assume a finite root universe, then (even leaving aside other reasoning flaws in the argument), the conclusion that our universe is likely to be a simulation falls apart rapidly.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> The point is that the physics would be heavily approximated in obvious ways. Whether they would or not depends on the complexity of the computer and software running the simulation, the limits to which are set by the laws of physics of the "real" universe in which the simulator exists (which may not be those of the simulation). Our intuition of what is practical in a simulation based on our own technology and what is practical in our universe simply don't apply. > E.g. you would observe artifacts of 3d rendering, which we shouldn't expect to observe at all. Our universe has a lot of quantization artifacts which defy intuition based on assumptions about continuity of physical quantities. Once we systematically observed and cataloged them, we incorporated models of them into our understanding of physical laws. Whether those are "real" physical laws in a non-simulated universe, intended simulated physical laws of a simulated universe, or simulation artifacts representing limitations of the simulation in a simulated universe are impossible to distinguish from within our universe. > However there is a limit to how far they could go. We couldn't have computers too big, or it would break the simulation. If the simulation is sufficient to model a universe the size of our observable universe at the detail level our universe is observable too, the maximum scale of computer we can have without breaking the simulation is a quantum computer of the complexity of our physical universe. Anything up to that scale is within the capacity of the simulation. Basically, all of the assumed limitations you propose are undetectable from within. You may be making the additional assumption that not only is there a host universe, but that the host universe has a scale and physical laws basically identical to those that we observe in our universe, such that the simulation would need to be substantially less complex. But there is no reason that either the scale or general physical laws of the host universe would have to mirror those in the simulation. > Either way, you can't have "turtles all the way down". If you assume the host universe is infinite in scope and information content (and the assumption that it is infinite in time and that all of that time is available to civilizations, which seems to underlie the conclusions on the that our universe is likely to be a simulation, implies this), then no matter how small of a fraction of its capacity one thinks a simulation can have, it can support an unbounded number of layers of simulation underneath it. If you assume a finite root universe, then (even leaving aside other reasoning flaws in the argument), the conclusion that our universe is likely to be a simulation falls apart rapidly.