3 ms·
Agreed! Such a succinct way of putting it. That has been my problem with the simulation hypothesis too. It seems like such a failure of imagination. What if the
by rendall 7y ago
Agreed! Such a succinct way of putting it. That has been my problem with the simulation hypothesis too. It seems like such a failure of imagination. What if the beings who "run" us live in a universe that intersects with 143 spatial dimensions and 23 time dimensions, and their "computer" is actually a by-product of some other process, and they aren't even really aware of it or us, and are not even really sentient in a way that we would understand. Can it really be said to be a "simulation" at that point? How strange would it have to get for the word "simulation" to be meaningless? I have a feeling that whatever is going on is far more bizarre than anything we can possibly imagine.
- ryanmercer 7y ago>and their "computer" is actually a by-product of some other process, and they aren't even really aware of it or us, Wouldn't it be hilarious if we were effectively a random number generator on some kid's toy?
- rendall 7y agoWorthy of Douglas Adams!
- JohnFen 7y ago> Can it really be said to be a "simulation" at that point? Nope. And even if our reality really is a "simulation" in the sense that we're just the result of a program running on a computer, that simulation is so comprehensive that I don't think it could be called a simulation at all. It's just a different layer of reality. If you perfectly simulate something, after all, you haven't simulated it at all -- you've created the real thing.
- rendall 7y agoThat's a good point, too.