2 ms·

The idea put forth is that if we're able to simulate life that we must almost certainly be living in a simulation. But this assumes that our post-humans have n

by logn 14y ago

The idea put forth is that if we're able to simulate life that we must almost certainly be living in a simulation. But this assumes that our post-humans have nearly infinite computing resources and that each simulation (within a simulation) somehow has the uncanny ability to evolve to the point of creating exceptionally good simulations. I don't think either is true so I think we're probably real.

GuiA 14y ago
A treatment of the question by an Oxford philosophy professor: http://www.simulation-argument.com/ http://www.simulation-argument.com/ The paper is very readable, even for the novice. tl;dr: "A technologically mature “posthuman” civilization would have enormous computing power. Based on this empirical fact, the simulation argument shows that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) The fraction of human-level civilizations that reach a posthuman stage is very close to zero; (2) The fraction of posthuman civilizations that are interested in running ancestor-simulations is very close to zero; (3) The fraction of all people with our kind of experiences that are living in a simulation is very close to one. If (1) is true, then we will almost certainly go extinct before reaching posthumanity. If (2) is true, then there must be a strong convergence among the courses of advanced civilizations so that virtually none contains any relatively wealthy individuals who desire to run ancestor-simulations and are free to do so. If (3) is true, then we almost certainly live in a simulation. In the dark forest of our current ignorance, it seems sensible to apportion one’s credence roughly evenly between (1), (2), and (3). Unless we are now living in a simulation, our descendants will almost certainly never run an ancestor-simulation."
wladimir 14y ago
If we're living in a simulation it would only mean that somehow, on a lower level, we're represented differently than we think we are (ie, bits instead of atoms/particles/quantum waves/...). This is not a very large leap. Information theory has been linked to physics in various ways. It wouldn't make us, or our experiences, any less real. The environment we evolved in would always be exceptionally realistic to us, by definition (we don't know any different!). Even if some higher entity sees us living on some game-of-life grid. Though that's a philosophical matter, I guess. Edit: To be clear, I believe it is possible that we live in a matter-level simulation. I do not believe that we live in a human-level simulation. That would be a much too anthropocentric view for me.

by logn 14y ago

GuiA 14y ago

A treatment of the question by an Oxford philosophy professor: http://www.simulation-argument.com/ http://www.simulation-argument.com/ The paper is very readable, even for the novice. tl;dr: "A technologically mature “posthuman” civilization would have enormous computing power. Based on this empirical fact, the simulation argument shows that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) The fraction of human-level civilizations that reach a posthuman stage is very close to zero; (2) The fraction of posthuman civilizations that are interested in running ancestor-simulations is very close to zero; (3) The fraction of all people with our kind of experiences that are living in a simulation is very close to one. If (1) is true, then we will almost certainly go extinct before reaching posthumanity. If (2) is true, then there must be a strong convergence among the courses of advanced civilizations so that virtually none contains any relatively wealthy individuals who desire to run ancestor-simulations and are free to do so. If (3) is true, then we almost certainly live in a simulation. In the dark forest of our current ignorance, it seems sensible to apportion one’s credence roughly evenly between (1), (2), and (3). Unless we are now living in a simulation, our descendants will almost certainly never run an ancestor-simulation."

wladimir 14y ago

If we're living in a simulation it would only mean that somehow, on a lower level, we're represented differently than we think we are (ie, bits instead of atoms/particles/quantum waves/...). This is not a very large leap. Information theory has been linked to physics in various ways. It wouldn't make us, or our experiences, any less real. The environment we evolved in would always be exceptionally realistic to us, by definition (we don't know any different!). Even if some higher entity sees us living on some game-of-life grid. Though that's a philosophical matter, I guess. Edit: To be clear, I believe it is possible that we live in a matter-level simulation. I do not believe that we live in a human-level simulation. That would be a much too anthropocentric view for me.