Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
simulation-argument.com
Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
1–10 of 56 posts
Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#2I find the theory full of holes...
1) Just think about the amount of power needed by a system to maintain such a virtual world
2) Consider the magnitude of the power needed to further maintain a nested system/S within itself???
[....besides.. i doubt amazon ec2 could scale this kind of thing anyway \)
Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#3After having just spend a bunch of time reading the "Why are geeks atheists" thread, this article cast an entirely new image of the phrase "Jesus saves" into my mind...
Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#4No.
Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#5do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth. There is no spoon.
Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#6Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#7Not this again...
Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#8From the FAQ:
Do you really believe that we are in a computer simulation?
No. I believe that the simulation argument is sound.
Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#9I find the theory full of holes... 1) Just think about the amount of power needed by a system to maintain such a virtual world 2) Consider the magnitude of the power needed to further maintain a nested system/S within itself??? [....besides.. i doubt amazon ec2 could scale this kind of thing anyway \)
That doesn't bother me. Presuppose a fancy, futuristic computer that can handle it, and -- bam -- problem solved.
What bothers me is that it's tautological. It's meaningless and banal.
Re: Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?
#10I find the theory full of holes... 1) Just think about the amount of power needed by a system to maintain such a virtual world 2) Consider the magnitude of the power needed to further maintain a nested system/S within itself??? [....besides.. i doubt amazon ec2 could scale this kind of thing anyway \)
That doesn't bother me. Presuppose a fancy, futuristic computer that can handle it, and -- bam -- problem solved. What bothers me is that it's tautological. It's meaningless and banal.
Well, nowadays philosophy is often meaningless. But I think it's a good exercise only to train our mind to think about non-conventional theories. Probably it's a lite version of 'What you can't say' http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html.
Evidently, it's a question whose answer is unreachable and, in my opinion, completely irrelevant (i really don't care if there is/isn't god, if we are a computer simulation, or if I'm a potato).