4 ms·

Obviously every nested simulation is many orders of magnitute less "powerful". That does not mean that there could be enough nested simulations. "Outer" univers

Obviously every nested simulation is many orders of magnitute less "powerful". That does not mean that there could be enough nested simulations. "Outer" universe could be unimaginably bigger, with more dimensions, have different laws of existence which would allow to simulate ours. As to god, well, if our universe is simulated, probably there's a god or gods who made that simulation. But, unless this simulation is human-centric, we're just a speck of dust and I don't have any reasons to suspect that we're somehow special and those "gods" interacted with our ancestors. So no, from any kind of scientific PoV, our religions are not trustworthy for me and religious texts are just interesting historical records. And if our civilization is the point of interest for that entire simulation, those texts are still weird and not trustworthy. It's should be relatively easy for "god" to provide an unquestionable miracle every few centuries to keep our beliefs, but there were not any trustworthy ones. Also there are too many of religions and they don't exactly look similar, so that's another issue, as it's not possible to choose a correct religion.

tsimionescu 6y ago
> Obviously every nested simulation is many orders of magnitute less "powerful". That does not mean that there could be enough nested simulations. "Outer" universe could be unimaginably bigger, with more dimensions, have different laws of existence which would allow to simulate ours. The argument only works if you have an infinite or at least unbounded simulation tower. Otherwise you can't jump from the observation that there could be simulations to the idea that there must be simulations or a Great Filter. My point with the religious stuff was to show that you can re-state any religious idea into a 'scientistic' interpretation if you accept the simulation argument. This doesn't mean you should believe in Thor any more than you do now, but to point out that if we accept the simulation argument we must also accept that all religious texts are valod objects of scientific inquiriy, as they could be presenting events that are non-physical in our simulated universe but physical in the upper universe. Even contradictory ones could be true, as the simulation could have been unwound and replayed differently.

tsimionescu 6y ago

> Obviously every nested simulation is many orders of magnitute less "powerful". That does not mean that there could be enough nested simulations. "Outer" universe could be unimaginably bigger, with more dimensions, have different laws of existence which would allow to simulate ours. The argument only works if you have an infinite or at least unbounded simulation tower. Otherwise you can't jump from the observation that there could be simulations to the idea that there must be simulations or a Great Filter. My point with the religious stuff was to show that you can re-state any religious idea into a 'scientistic' interpretation if you accept the simulation argument. This doesn't mean you should believe in Thor any more than you do now, but to point out that if we accept the simulation argument we must also accept that all religious texts are valod objects of scientific inquiriy, as they could be presenting events that are non-physical in our simulated universe but physical in the upper universe. Even contradictory ones could be true, as the simulation could have been unwound and replayed differently.