Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is reality a computer simulation? Does it matter?

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: Is reality a computer simulation? Does it matter?

#11

Post by ljak »

benekastah wrote: post #9

> Should any error [in the program] occur, the director could easily edit the states of any brains that have become aware of an anomaly before it spoils the simulation. This seems really problematic to me. Why would you assume that a full-on universe simulator has a concept of a brain? If you're in the business of simulating the interactions of nanoparticles, having a "brain" object doesn't seem to make much sense. I…

The hypothesis presented in the article is that of an ancestor simulation. A future post-human civilization may very well be interested in the brains of their ancestors or creators.

Re: Is reality a computer simulation? Does it matter?

#13

Post by morganvachon »

nemo44x wrote: post #7

If it's the case that we are currently a part of a simulation then we can assume those above use are part of a simulation too and eventually we will create a simulation below us and it's turtles all the way down....and up.

That's my take on it as well. We've created fiction that explores the idea (The Matrix is the most obvious recent entry), we've created games which are simulations themselves, and pretty soon we'll be able to create complex, realistic simulations that in turn can create complex, realistic simulations. After all, we've managed to simulate an entire ALU in Minecraft, itself a simulation of life in a blocky world, and there are far more advanced game engines out there.

Re: Is reality a computer simulation? Does it matter?

#14

Post by duaneb »

benekastah wrote: post #9

> Should any error [in the program] occur, the director could easily edit the states of any brains that have become aware of an anomaly before it spoils the simulation. This seems really problematic to me. Why would you assume that a full-on universe simulator has a concept of a brain? If you're in the business of simulating the interactions of nanoparticles, having a "brain" object doesn't seem to make much sense. I…

It seems to be a thought experiment in torturing the inhabitants of a computer simulation. How else would you pose the question "Is this a reality that may be modeled, or a simulation of a model?" If it's a perfect simulation, there is literally no difference to the inhabitants. If it's not a perfect simulation, then the experiment being run is what differentiates this model? The answer is clearly those conscious of the problems with the model and how they react. And if a physicist ever seriously posits we're in a simulation, they had better have better evidence than "because humans are interesting".

Anyway, until we fuzz physics enough to detect inconsistencies in (e.g.) conservation of energy, this is an entirely fanciful and useless topic. If I may bring in Plato's allegory of the cave, it's fairly clear this line of thought is only useful if we can detect and/or manipulate it. Until then, it's fairly absurd to think what we may be "turning our back to" in the cave when we are unable to even figure out if we have a back.

Re: Is reality a computer simulation? Does it matter?

#15

Post by squozzer »

The notion of simplification, which I hadn't considered, might explain - if testable - certain things such as Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, i.e. limiting the precision with which one can measure a particle's position or momentum would make it more difficult to discover the underlying true reality.

I'm tempted to use Occam's Razor but probably can't because the simulation hypothesis assumes an intelligence created it. And intelligent beings have demonstrated more than once the capability for subterfuge.

I think to test the simulation hypothesis one might have to assume a couple of things - 1) the sim has resource constraints, otherwise the creator might as well build a real universe (thanks to Pete Bonani of Falcon 4.0 for sharing a similar insight); 2) every object in the sim has a state and a function which acts upon that state.

I'm not sure how someone inside a sim might test these assumptions though I suppose we could try making babies and hopes that overloads the sim before we run out of food.

Re: Is reality a computer simulation? Does it matter?

#18

Post by Retric »

duaneb wrote: post #6
dwild wrote: post #4

This idea of a computer simulation is what made me become agnostic. At first I was an atheist, I wasn't believing that any powerful entity would create us like this, a world so complex and coherent, just to test our belief. If I had the capacity to build this kind of computer simulation, I would personally do it in an heartbeat. In fact I'm feel like I'm doing this on some games. I would also consider myself to be th…

In my mind, I dislike the 'computer simulation' because it implies an entity that computes, which doesn't really make sense without an uber-reality. Such teleological thinking doesn't belong in scientific reasoning (or even, frankly, philosophy).

IMO it's really a question of the quality the simulation. If it's not bug free you might be able to directly measure hidden variables and possibly 'hack' the simulation. Picture a device that simply tells the simulation to swap the contents of two locations. Or could just directly replicate the contents of some location. Or how about GPS 2 that uses in game /loc command vs an array of satellites.

PS: Just imagine if the large hadron collider ended up opening the game console.

Re: Is reality a computer simulation? Does it matter?

#19

Post by dwild »

duaneb wrote: post #6
dwild wrote: post #4

This idea of a computer simulation is what made me become agnostic. At first I was an atheist, I wasn't believing that any powerful entity would create us like this, a world so complex and coherent, just to test our belief. If I had the capacity to build this kind of computer simulation, I would personally do it in an heartbeat. In fact I'm feel like I'm doing this on some games. I would also consider myself to be th…

In my mind, I dislike the 'computer simulation' because it implies an entity that computes, which doesn't really make sense without an uber-reality. Such teleological thinking doesn't belong in scientific reasoning (or even, frankly, philosophy).

Could you define "uber-reality" and explain how it doesn't really make sense?

Re: Is reality a computer simulation? Does it matter?

#20

Post by sosuke »

duaneb wrote: post #14
benekastah wrote: post #9

> Should any error [in the program] occur, the director could easily edit the states of any brains that have become aware of an anomaly before it spoils the simulation. This seems really problematic to me. Why would you assume that a full-on universe simulator has a concept of a brain? If you're in the business of simulating the interactions of nanoparticles, having a "brain" object doesn't seem to make much sense. I…

It seems to be a thought experiment in torturing the inhabitants of a computer simulation. How else would you pose the question "Is this a reality that may be modeled, or a simulation of a model?" If it's a perfect simulation, there is literally no difference to the inhabitants. If it's not a perfect simulation, then the experiment being run is what differentiates this model? The answer is clearly those conscious of…

Perhaps we are the control, and other simulations have the variables.
Post reply on HN