## The Simulation Argument

For general lucid chat - ask questions, share advice, set lucid dream challenges and explore the lucid realm together.
WildCat23
Posts: 133
Joined: 06 Feb 2012 23:27

### Re: The Simulation Argument

Jack Reacher wrote:What if the first reality is in an alternate universe with different laws of phsyics that allow for bigger planets/resources, computers?

Anyway this is a question I have been wondering about. If the multiverse theory is true and there are different universes with different physical laws, this just beign one of them, would the laws of nature and logic be the same in all of them? In other words, would there be different shapes in geometry that we cant possibly imagine? That the shortest distance between A and B in one universe might not be a straight line?

How would they create a simulation with different laws of physics than what they know? I think multiverses are more likely. Also the shortest distance between A and B is a straight line unless its a wormhole. The best wormhole analogy I've heard is if an ant is on one corner of a piece of paper, the fastest way would be for the ant to crawl in a straight line from it's corner to the other corner, right? What if you fold the paper? You can shorten the ant's journey to almost nothing.
"I wandered home though the silent streets
And fell into a fitful sleep
Escape to realms beyond the night
Dream can't you show me the light? "
~2112

Jack Reacher
Posts: 487
Joined: 21 Jan 2012 05:03
Location: New Zealand

### Re: The Simulation Argument

You can create video games with different laws of physical laws right? Anyway basically they would simply alter the constants and other parts of the equation that defines a physical law in the computer and just simulate it to see what happens.

In fact you could probably get an idea for what many multiverses look like simply by using a computer simulation that uses different equations for a physical law.

The point is we have no idea what the original universe (assuming the theory is true) looks like, how big it is or how it operates, so I dont see the computer processing thing to be a major flaw. Then again I dont know much about computer science so you could be right.

I think the main problem with this whole theory is that I dont see how a computer can simulate consciousness.
"There is theoretical abstraction, and then there is true abstraction."

WildCat23
Posts: 133
Joined: 06 Feb 2012 23:27

### Re: The Simulation Argument

Jack Reacher wrote:You can create video games with different laws of physical laws right? Anyway basically they would simply alter the constants and other parts of the equation that defines a physical law in the computer and just simulate it to see what happens.

In fact you could probably get an idea for what many multiverses look like simply by using a computer simulation that uses different equations for a physical law.

The point is we have no idea what the original universe (assuming the theory is true) looks like, how big it is or how it operates, so I dont see the computer processing thing to be a major flaw. Then again I dont know much about computer science so you could be right.

I think the main problem with this whole theory is that I dont see how a computer can simulate consciousness.

True, but why would you? If I were creating a similar universe, I would most likely keep most of the laws the same. I may alter gravity and not being able to travel faster than light though.
"I wandered home though the silent streets
And fell into a fitful sleep
Escape to realms beyond the night
Dream can't you show me the light? "
~2112

Jack Reacher
Posts: 487
Joined: 21 Jan 2012 05:03
Location: New Zealand

### Re: The Simulation Argument

I wouldnt, sounds like a more interesting experiment to see what reality is like under different physical laws. Why run a simulation in the first place?
"There is theoretical abstraction, and then there is true abstraction."

WildCat23
Posts: 133
Joined: 06 Feb 2012 23:27

### Re: The Simulation Argument

Jack Reacher wrote:I wouldnt, sounds like a more interesting experiment to see what reality is like under different physical laws. Why run a simulation in the first place?

I don't know. Plenty of simulations are run to see what things were like in the past.
"I wandered home though the silent streets
And fell into a fitful sleep
Escape to realms beyond the night
Dream can't you show me the light? "
~2112

rothgar
Posts: 102
Joined: 18 Oct 2011 14:44

### Re: The Simulation Argument

As a person who believes in God, it has occurred to me before that if one believes in evolution it seems you would end up at the same place, basically. Given enough time would not a human evolve to the point of such wisdom and technology that one could create other universes, or simulations if you prefer, and have the control and power to the point that you might as well be called God? I actually do believe our reality is Gods creation and after life we essentially 'wake up' to a different reality, much like the end of a dream. I also believe God is not in our universe but in a totally different dimension, but otherwise we are essentially in a 'simulation' of some sort.

[ Post made via Android ]

Jack Reacher
Posts: 487
Joined: 21 Jan 2012 05:03
Location: New Zealand

### Re: The Simulation Argument

I dont really think we will wake up afterwards, its kinda like saying when you delete a character in a computer game he will wake up somewhere else.
"There is theoretical abstraction, and then there is true abstraction."

Peter
Posts: 1970
Joined: 26 May 2011 08:02
Location: New Zealand

### Re: The Simulation Argument

It seems that over the ages the same beliefs are in place but we use the words of the time and feel we have progressed in understanding. In truth we wont know until we die and maybe each one of us is right - we get what we expect or believe will happen, this sounds just like life.
Who are you I asked, the reply "dont be silly, we are your daughers" many years before they were born