> The luminiferous ether was a falsifiable theory But it effectively wasn't for the first 150 years of it's existence. The theory originated in 1720 and it wa

> The luminiferous ether was a falsifiable theory But it effectively wasn't for the first 150 years of it's existence. The theory originated in 1720 and it wasn't disproven until 1887. It took that long for someone to come up with a conclusive experiment. Nevertheless, for those 150 years the luminiferous ether theory was widely held, shaped the field of physics, and the research had to go into finding an experiment to test the theory. Similarly, the idea that atoms might do things when high energy particles hit them was all theory until Wilson's cloud chamber became the first particle detector and suddenly physicists could see what these particles were doing when they hit things. > The problem is...you can even define what it means for the universe to be a simulation. You're confusing something that hasn't been done with something that can't be done. Indeed, what they're trying to do is exactly trying to define criteria to test that the universe is a simulation. It's the first day of school and you're complaining that Newton doesn't have his Principia and Gilbert doesn't have his De Magnete. Theories often predate the knowledge of how to test them. This isn't weird.