# Do you believe it's possible the world is a simulation? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [May 24, 2016, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543 "2016-05-24T13:34:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/81 "2016-05-26T07:04:52Z")
Grin! The Planck length is, to my mind, actually an argument against the world being a sim, because it goes so very far beyond the necessary measures. A perfectly good Aristotelian sim could have been devised, with no measurements available below, say, 1/1000th of an inch. Microns and angstroms and the like? Unnecessary! As for whether it’s a sim that deceives one person or deceives us all…what’s the difference? In either case, the system is capable of editing our individual perceptions. Whether or not it does so is something we can never test. You may say, “Yes, I’ve been in New York,” but how do I know that? Ultimately, how do you know that? The theological “problem of pain” is a big part of what stops me from ever believing in the sim model of reality. What kind of monsters would have coded the Holocaust into the run? And if “free will” is the answer, the same objection pertains: what kind of monsters would have permitted it to take place if they could have stopped it? The Thirty Years War had already established that human evil is vast; did they really have to play “Can you top this?” and run the full Nazi scenario out? If this is a sim, then we will never be able to comprehend the alien minds that are modeling us. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/82 "2016-05-26T07:31:23Z")
Yep, I buy the argument that it’s more likely we’re living in a simulated universe than a real one, since the number of simulated universes should exceed real ones by a large factor. The cool thing about this, is that if we are in a simulation, it can potentially be hacked. Speed of light a hard limit? Not if you can somehow exploit a loop hole or glitch in the simulation. Also the idea that the we’re in a simulation gives an extra layer of meaning to the phrase “black holes are where the universe divided by zero”. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/83 "2016-05-26T13:25:52Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > The theological “problem of pain” is a big part of what stops me from ever believing in the sim model of reality. What kind of monsters would have coded the Holocaust into the run? And if “free will” is the answer, the same objection pertains: what kind of monsters would have permitted it to take place if they could have stopped it? The Thirty Years War had already established that human evil is vast; did they really have to play “Can you top this?” and run the full Nazi scenario out? Are you kidding? How many “people” are killed every day in Sim games? COD3 alone has “killed” something like the entire population of the Earth 200,000 times over. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/84 "2016-05-26T14:37:09Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > BTW, this is nothing new. Ed Fredkin dropped into one of my MIT classes in 1973 and mentioned his universe as a simulation idea. He said that miracles in the past were bugs in the code, and the lack of miracles today come from it being fixed. And Planck time is the simulation time step. > [@Trinopus](#): > > Grin! The Planck length is, to my mind, actually an argument against the world being a sim, because it goes so very far beyond the necessary measures. Not if we are alone in the Universe which was meant to model intelligent life, if not humans specifically. Perhaps miracles were the way the universe _used_ to work, until we found out all the scientific rules, then they had to stop the sim and change the rules of physics to something stranger to keep us guessing and finding out the inner workings. Quantum physics and Inflation are the latest and greatest representations of this effort. Once we were able to look at the inner workings of the atom they needed to extend the granularity to the Planck length or else we would discover we were in a sim. ---
**Author:** ![Dale\_Sams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@Dale\_Sams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dale_Sams)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/85 "2016-05-26T15:11:33Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Grin! The Planck length is, to my mind, actually an argument against the world being a sim, because it goes so very far beyond the necessary measures. > > A perfectly good Aristotelian sim could have been devised, with no measurements available below, say, 1/1000th of an inch. Microns and angstroms and the like? Unnecessary! > > As for whether it’s a sim that deceives one person or deceives us all…what’s the difference? In either case, the system is capable of editing our individual perceptions. Whether or not it does so is something we can never test. > > You may say, “Yes, I’ve been in New York,” but how do I know that? Ultimately, how do you know that? > > The theological “problem of pain” is a big part of what stops me from ever believing in the sim model of reality. What kind of monsters would have coded the Holocaust into the run? And if “free will” is the answer, the same objection pertains: what kind of monsters would have permitted it to take place if they could have stopped it? The Thirty Years War had already established that human evil is vast; did they really have to play “Can you top this?” and run the full Nazi scenario out? > > If this is a sim, then we will never be able to comprehend the alien minds that are modeling us. You never made the world burn in a Civ game? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/86 "2016-05-26T15:12:21Z")
I do not believe this, no, because it frankly sounds absurd. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/87 "2016-05-26T17:00:24Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I do not believe this, no, because it frankly sounds absurd. Thanks to **freebird** ’s [recent thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=794017), I think I’ve got this one. > **[Appeal to the stone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_lapidem)** > > Appeal to the stone, also known as argumentum ad lapidem, is a logical fallacy that dismisses an argument as untrue or absurd. The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation. This theory is closely tied to proof by assertion due to the lack of evidence behind the statement and its attempt to persuade without providing any evidence. > Appeal to the stone is a logical fallacy. Specifically, it is an informal fallacy, which means t... > **[Argument from incredulity](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity)** > > The argument from incredulity is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone decides that something did not happen or does not exist because they cannot personally understand the workings. > [@](#): > > I can explain it for you but I can’t understand it for you 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/88 "2016-05-26T18:06:14Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Grin! The Planck length is, to my mind, actually an argument against the world being a sim, because it goes so very far beyond the necessary measures. > > A perfectly good Aristotelian sim could have been devised, with no measurements available below, say, 1/1000th of an inch. Microns and angstroms and the like? Unnecessary! The speed of a simulation depends strongly on the speed of the innermost simulation loop, that updates the state of the simulation. If dealing with the Planck length (and I think about time, because my simulations are synchronous and proceed by updating the clock in the loop) means you only have to deal with n cases instead of m \>\> n cases it would be far more efficient. We can indirectly observe quantum level effects - the rules might be written so that we can’t if the granularity was coarser. ---
**Author:** ![SeniorCitizen007](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8baadc/32.png) [@SeniorCitizen007](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeniorCitizen007)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/89 "2016-05-26T18:13:05Z")
Back in the 70s I once took LSD every day for a week … and ended up in what appeared to be the real world. We are apes who are able to mechanise our behaviour… The sense that the world we perceive may not be real has something to do with this fact. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/90 "2016-05-26T18:29:30Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I do not believe this, no, because it frankly sounds absurd. I wouldn’t say that I believe or disbelieve, as there’s no evidence either way. But there’s no getting around the fact that reality is whatever reality is, whether we believe it or not. Functionally, it’s irrelevant whether the universe is simulated (unless we find a bug we can exploit). ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/91 "2016-05-26T18:33:02Z")
One of my fears is that we are a simulation and once we achieve the level of technology to create our own universal simulation, the program shuts off because it has run its course. It’s not a big fear, but I’ve thought about it. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/92 "2016-05-26T18:46:24Z")
I just noticed that Wikipedia has _two_ articles on this. > **[Simulation hypothesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis)** > > The simulation hypothesis proposes that all of our existence is a simulated reality, such as a computer simulation. > The simulation hypothesis bears a close resemblance to various other skeptical scenarios from throughout the history of philosophy. The hypothesis was popularized in its current form by Nick Bostrom. The suggestion that such a hypothesis is compatible with all human perceptual experiences is thought to have significant epistemological consequences in the form of philosophical skept... > **[Simulated reality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulated_reality)** > > The simulation theory is the hypothesis that reality could be simulated—for example by quantum computer simulation—to a degree indistinguishable from "true" reality. It could contain conscious minds that may or may not know that they live inside a simulation. This is quite different from the current, technologically achievable concept of virtual reality, which is easily distinguished from the experience of actuality. Simulated reality, by contrast, would be hard or impossible to separate from A ... I linked the first one earlier in the thread, but the second one is a more interesting read. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/93 "2016-05-26T19:08:25Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Are you kidding? How many “people” are killed every day in Sim games? COD3 alone has “killed” something like the entire population of the Earth 200,000 times over. None of these are complex simulations that give rise to intelligent entities. I find all of the video game comments in this thread just weird, no video game today has any processes within it remotely near human intelligence. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/94 "2016-05-26T21:57:39Z")
> [@Dale\_Sams](#): > > You never made the world burn in a Civ game? > [@Pantastic](#): > > None of these are complex simulations that give rise to intelligent entities. . . . Exactly. Now, yes, definitely, I have gone the absurd route in old Civ of maximizing pollution and accumulating polar melt-downs. (In “Space 1889,” I blew up the British Museum.) Once individual characters get simmed to the degree that they can talk to us, the morality changes entirely. ---
**Author:** ![Quimby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/22d042/32.png) [@Quimby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quimby)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/95 "2016-05-27T01:02:08Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Functionally, it’s irrelevant whether the universe is simulated (unless we find a bug we can exploit). As the Vulcan’s say, “A difference that makes no difference is no difference.” 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/96 "2016-05-27T01:44:01Z")
“Was that one of the classical philosophers? I was quoting Korzybski.” ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/97 "2016-05-27T01:44:24Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > One of my fears is that we are a simulation and once we achieve the level of technology to create our own universal simulation, the program shuts off because it has run its course. It’s not a big fear, but I’ve thought about it. Overhead, without any fuss … ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/98 "2016-05-27T01:48:01Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > None of these are complex simulations that give rise to intelligent entities. I find all of the video game comments in this thread just weird, no video game today has any processes within it remotely near human intelligence. Then you are misunderstanding the point. From the perspective of the “Sim masters”, our “human intelligence” may be no more significant that the stupid AI of the “Sims” that inhabit SimCity. Or they might simply not care for reasons unknown to us. ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/99 "2016-05-27T04:04:31Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > Great, so you only need to simulate the 10^50 atoms in the world? That still a reasonable prospect with a computer you can build with resources you gather from the world? If you think you don’t need to use that many particles, how many do you need for intelligent life to evolve and run its own simulation? Not even that. ## It’s only necessary to simulate the world to the level of detail that it’s being observed. If I’m looking at a mountain 30 miles away with unaided eyes, it’s not necessary to render individual leaves on the trees. Or even individual trees for the most part. If I then break out the telescope and point it in that direction it’s only necessary to update every object I observe with the events that have modified it since it was last observed. Once it is no longer being observed by an intelligence above a certain level it goes back to semi-static storage only recording events that it will need to be updated with the next time it is observed. ## If we are indeed existing in a simulation, that would lend a whole new perspective on the theories of parallel universes. They would just be other simulations running in the same framework with slightly or greatly different parameters. Or even the same parameters with variance provided by the randomness of the AI inhabitants. For that matter, all of you are simply words on a screen from my viewpoint and level of observation. You’ll be happy to know that most of you pass the Turing test though. ---
**Author:** ![Lucas\_Jackson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lucas_jackson/32/303_2.png) [@Lucas\_Jackson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucas_Jackson)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543/100 "2016-05-27T05:09:29Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > I think I heard right here on the SDMB that if you removed all the empty spaces between bits of matter all the matter in the universe would likey fit into a bucket. Wait, what? Is this true!? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-its-possible-the-world-is-a-simulation/755543.md?page=6)