3 ms·

> Are we living in a simulation? 45% voted yes (of 14,463 votes so far). Whether we're living in a computer simulation is an absolutely fascinating subject to

> Are we living in a simulation? 45% voted yes (of 14,463 votes so far). Whether we're living in a computer simulation is an absolutely fascinating subject to think about, and I do not dismiss the idea, but do a significant number of people really believe it?

ALittleLight 5y ago
How do you answer the simulation argument? https://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html https://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
xscott 5y ago
Doesn't Planck's constant seem like using integers in fixed point? Doesn't the speed of light feel like a sneaky limit on the maximum size of those integers? :-) I humbly suggest the reason the universe we live in does not use Real numbers is because you couldn't simulate that with a Turing machine.
- tooltower 5y ago
  Quantum Turing Machine!
mewse 5y ago
Yes, but only because of a silly off-by-one bug Steve left in the human credulity AI subsystem. Again. We've been trying to roll out a patch to address that along with several other, related issues (you can probably guess which ones those are), but we don't have an ETA yet; you wouldn't believe how long it takes for this thing's unit tests to complete.
seventhtiger 5y ago
It's a sort of post-modern nihilism. Just one more of the tens of thousands of unprovable and undeniable ideas that humans have adopted. The science fiction aesthetic makes it and easier pill to swallow. When people are living their daily lives and interacting, but in the backs of their minds they have a loose grip on reality, to me it's a new low in spiritual degradation. Not only is reality meaningless, as a classical nihilist might affirm. Whether it has meaning or not is irrelevant because reality isn't real. Aside from the philosophical argument, I think computer science has a good line of argument against simulation theory. Unless the metaverse transcends logic/computation itself, then computer science actually has a lot to say about the topic. Even universe size computers can't bend some rules.

ALittleLight 5y ago

How do you answer the simulation argument? https://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html https://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html

xscott 5y ago

Doesn't Planck's constant seem like using integers in fixed point? Doesn't the speed of light feel like a sneaky limit on the maximum size of those integers? :-) I humbly suggest the reason the universe we live in does not use Real numbers is because you couldn't simulate that with a Turing machine.

tooltower 5y ago
Quantum Turing Machine!

mewse 5y ago

Yes, but only because of a silly off-by-one bug Steve left in the human credulity AI subsystem. Again. We've been trying to roll out a patch to address that along with several other, related issues (you can probably guess which ones those are), but we don't have an ETA yet; you wouldn't believe how long it takes for this thing's unit tests to complete.

seventhtiger 5y ago

It's a sort of post-modern nihilism. Just one more of the tens of thousands of unprovable and undeniable ideas that humans have adopted. The science fiction aesthetic makes it and easier pill to swallow. When people are living their daily lives and interacting, but in the backs of their minds they have a loose grip on reality, to me it's a new low in spiritual degradation. Not only is reality meaningless, as a classical nihilist might affirm. Whether it has meaning or not is irrelevant because reality isn't real. Aside from the philosophical argument, I think computer science has a good line of argument against simulation theory. Unless the metaverse transcends logic/computation itself, then computer science actually has a lot to say about the topic. Even universe size computers can't bend some rules.