5 ms·

It opens itself up to interesting interpretations ;). god(s) aka the simulation developer(s) playing with outcomes of quantum events in order to manipulate your

by jagrsw 4y ago

It opens itself up to interesting interpretations ;). god(s) aka the simulation developer(s) playing with outcomes of quantum events in order to manipulate your/my behavior, punish the bad, reward the good, make the bushes burn etc. Since quantum events can have macroscopic outcomes, this should be possible? :)

sph 4y ago
It's probably due to artefacts and signal noise coming from the outer-system that contains our universe and/or the machine running our simulation, rather than God.
- SkyPuncher 4y ago
  Combining this with an infinite universe theory, it could also just be random noise intentionally introduced to a specific "instance" of a universe.
  - oezi 4y ago
    To the best of our ability we haven't been able to detect any signs of any strings which might point to a puppet master or any mechanism by which anything as potentially informationally massive as randomness could be transferred to 'our' universe.
    - mistermann 4y ago
      Not quite: there are millions of people who claim the existence of a God(s), or claim to have had "experiences" with the same. However, to those raised in secular environments, these claims "have" "no" validity, but this is actually just the model of reality built by the mind (what "is", in "reality"), which is heavily influenced by the metaphysical framework one was raised/trained on, or exists within. Philosophy (logic, epistemology, etc) has more appropriate tools and techniques for dealing with such questions, but if one (one's mind) has been trained that only the scientific method can provide knowledge, they are kind of stuck at a local maxima (inside a "simulated reality dome") that they are unable to see out of, or typically even want to see out of.
      - oezi 4y ago
        I think people do not deny those religious experiences because there are experiments to trigger them and the experiences can be observed for instance using brain scans. But what scientists deny is that we see any prove that these experiences have any supernatural cause.
        mistermann 4y ago
        > I think people do not deny those religious experiences because there are experiments to trigger them and the experiences can be observed for instance using brain scans. Some people, sure....but many people deny the validity/genuineness of them, or the potential existence of the supernatural all the time - it's practically a sport on Reddit, not all that uncommon right here on HN, and something I have experienced many, many times with real scientists in zoom meetings. Let's not forget: scientists are first and foremost humans. > But what scientists deny is that we see any prove that these experiences have any supernatural cause. Some scientists practice strict/disciplined epistemology, and others do not (I have observed it with my own eyes) and go on to assert/imply that it is a fact that there is no God(s), and that these experiences are only [in fact] delusions, the drugs, social/psychological conditioning (ironically), etc. And if one is to ask them some pointed questions, the response typically descends rapidly to rhetoric and personal attacks. You can even explicitly point out to people what they are doing, but they are not able to stop - often, they will act as if they did not even see the text pointing out their behavior, even if that phenomenon is pointed out in subsequent messages! I truly believe that there are certain topics that throw even the most powerful minds into a state of disarray. Extra interesting: it seems like most can acknowledge that they are subject to bias, logical fallacies, etc if the topic of conversation is directly about these psychological phenomena....but if the topic is not that, but rather from a particular subset of special ideas (culture war topics, certain instances of the unknown), this knowledge and ability vanishes. I think it would be rather hilarious if this phenomenon is actually a very big deal (with regard to affairs on Earth), but people are unable to address it (or even manifest curiosity) because of the phenomenon. Plausibly, ~success could be within reach, but we are unable to reach out and grab onto it. Meanwhile: things like climate change "are" (so it is claimed/perceived) "a big deal". So much wasted potential.

by jagrsw 4y ago

sph 4y ago

It's probably due to artefacts and signal noise coming from the outer-system that contains our universe and/or the machine running our simulation, rather than God.

SkyPuncher 4y ago
Combining this with an infinite universe theory, it could also just be random noise intentionally introduced to a specific "instance" of a universe.
- oezi 4y ago
  To the best of our ability we haven't been able to detect any signs of any strings which might point to a puppet master or any mechanism by which anything as potentially informationally massive as randomness could be transferred to 'our' universe.
  - mistermann 4y ago
    Not quite: there are millions of people who claim the existence of a God(s), or claim to have had "experiences" with the same. However, to those raised in secular environments, these claims "have" "no" validity, but this is actually just the model of reality built by the mind (what "is", in "reality"), which is heavily influenced by the metaphysical framework one was raised/trained on, or exists within. Philosophy (logic, epistemology, etc) has more appropriate tools and techniques for dealing with such questions, but if one (one's mind) has been trained that only the scientific method can provide knowledge, they are kind of stuck at a local maxima (inside a "simulated reality dome") that they are unable to see out of, or typically even want to see out of.
    - oezi 4y ago
      I think people do not deny those religious experiences because there are experiments to trigger them and the experiences can be observed for instance using brain scans. But what scientists deny is that we see any prove that these experiences have any supernatural cause.
      - mistermann 4y ago
        > I think people do not deny those religious experiences because there are experiments to trigger them and the experiences can be observed for instance using brain scans. Some people, sure....but many people deny the validity/genuineness of them, or the potential existence of the supernatural all the time - it's practically a sport on Reddit, not all that uncommon right here on HN, and something I have experienced many, many times with real scientists in zoom meetings. Let's not forget: scientists are first and foremost humans. > But what scientists deny is that we see any prove that these experiences have any supernatural cause. Some scientists practice strict/disciplined epistemology, and others do not (I have observed it with my own eyes) and go on to assert/imply that it is a fact that there is no God(s), and that these experiences are only [in fact] delusions, the drugs, social/psychological conditioning (ironically), etc. And if one is to ask them some pointed questions, the response typically descends rapidly to rhetoric and personal attacks. You can even explicitly point out to people what they are doing, but they are not able to stop - often, they will act as if they did not even see the text pointing out their behavior, even if that phenomenon is pointed out in subsequent messages! I truly believe that there are certain topics that throw even the most powerful minds into a state of disarray. Extra interesting: it seems like most can acknowledge that they are subject to bias, logical fallacies, etc if the topic of conversation is directly about these psychological phenomena....but if the topic is not that, but rather from a particular subset of special ideas (culture war topics, certain instances of the unknown), this knowledge and ability vanishes. I think it would be rather hilarious if this phenomenon is actually a very big deal (with regard to affairs on Earth), but people are unable to address it (or even manifest curiosity) because of the phenomenon. Plausibly, ~success could be within reach, but we are unable to reach out and grab onto it. Meanwhile: things like climate change "are" (so it is claimed/perceived) "a big deal". So much wasted potential.