4 ms·
Why would you apply the word "simulation" to the activities of 6th-dimensional (or 67th-dimensional or googolplexth-dimensional) entities? Assuming you could e
by rendall 3y ago
Why would you apply the word "simulation" to the activities of 6th-dimensional (or 67th-dimensional or googolplexth-dimensional) entities? Assuming you could even apply human concepts to them like intention, consciousness, or research, why would these proposed creatures be "simulating". Why couldn't the Universe just be some by-product of some kind of industrial process? Or something else? At what remove do you start to say "yeah that's too weird to be called a simulation"?
- wongarsu 3y agoYou are right, "simulation" might narrow it unnecessarily, it could as well be a side effect of something entirely else. Going with "simulation" comes from humans running lots of simulations. Humanity has a $350 billion/year industry dedicated to making simulations for recreational use (aka video games), and then there's all the simulations we run for industry and research. And many simulations are simplified models of our world, with compressed time, space and sometimes fewer dimensions, and greatly simplified physics. So that's a natural starting point, but it's of course far from the only scenario.
- rendall 3y agoThen I think we agree more than we disagree. My objection to the simulation hypothesis is precisely that it lacks imagination. It's boring. Given all of the infinite imaginative possibilities, that our Universe is simply an instance of our latest nerd obsession is as unlikely as its being the 6,000 year old side project of a cranky sky giant. Those two explanations come from exactly the same impulse: explaining the weird fact of our existence in terms that are reducibly familiar to us.