assuming I understood the OP and assuming it was true, what difference does it make?
As I mention, if I’m simulating the whole universe, I don’t care whether some tiny number of bits (relative to the universe) has formed a pattern posting on a message board, so I don’t care whether you worship me or not.
If I did care (that is, if the simulators cared enough to see what was going on in our little corner of the simulation), they could probably do all kinds of things that were supernatural from our point of view inside the simulation. Create a character that can bring back other characters from the dead and can unload the water simulation and replace it with the wine simulation, just to name a few things. That character could be given the power to walk over substances that the rest of the Sims sink into.
ETA: to Procustus: no difference that I can see.
How is the possibility that you’ve opened yourself to any different than the myriad possibilities (read: gods) others are open to?
The difference is that there is a creator who wields tremendous power over you.
It is different because it is statistically plausible.
There are 2 assumptions, which others may or may not feel are realistic; I personally think both are reasonable to at least consider.
Not to be blunt, but your statistics are made up out of whole cloth. GIGO.
we’ll see. Or not.
Power such as…?
Again, the specific numbers are not important. Disagreeing with the assumptions is one thing, but the numbers can cover a wide range and still make the theory valid.
It’s statistically plausible that I win the mega millions jackpot. But I probably shouldn’t believe that I will and certainly shouldn’t plan my life or retirement on such an assumption.
The power of a computer programmer over a program.
In this case your odds are low. My odds hinge on 2 assumptions which I both believe have a high chance of leading to a conclusion of simulation. YMMV of course.
Well, we know that relatively advanced civilizations can exist, because I’m typing this whilst I eat flavored fiber pills.
But we have no knowledge if we’re the only ones. I think it very likely that there are other relatively advanced and beyond civilizations. Very likely doesn’t mean assured.
But we haven’t demonstrated that simulating a universe is possible.
Although, we don’t really need to simulate a universe. We just need to simulate you. I mean if your perceptions say there is an outside universe, it’s just as good. No reason to simulate complex atomic motions of far-away stars. Just simulate the leaves you can see getting blown by the wind.
But I agree, if it turns out that simulating a universe is possible, then, I’d suggest we wouldn’t need aliens. We would be more likely to ourselves be simulated by later humans.
Of course, the universe we live in, might just be a hugely simplified version of the real universe. And the laws of physics we know might just be fanciful ideas some programmer on the outside had.
Congratulations, you’re the most recent person to have ever invented the Matrix movie story line.
This, I have often thought, would be an interesting explanation for the Copenhagen Interpretation of QM - things only need to be simulated at a general level - the details only need to collapse into place when required.
Then you get locked in the clogged WCs with the door deleted just after you went in until you die of hunger ; recursive self-defecation and puking ; or until the unmonitored toddler sets the whole house on fire.
Sorry, them’s the SimRules.
You can’t handwave around the fact that we
a) Haven’t encountered any other intelligent life, and
b) Haven’t simulated any worlds to a meaningful degree
You’re operating as if those are inevitable and we’re just arguing about the percentages. First show that either a or b can happen, then we can worry about the odds of it happening elsewhere.
Okay
The complexity of the known world is not possible to create in a cost effective manner.
This has nothing to do with ethics. What is a MMORPG? One big simulated universe. Sure would be trippy if there was a universe inside a universe.
So they made a simulation, it was rather rudimentary. It was fun, and they moved on to more interesting things. Like entertaining themselves.
Unlikely to run that many simulations.
Again, the complexity thing.
You can call it a religion if you want to.
Small religions are usually called cults until they take off.
And they usually aren’t thinking of deities as being knowable, and would consider the word “alien” to be insulting.
You’re wrong.
In the post you quoted and many other instances of this thread I have mentioned that the assumptions can be disagreed with. I believe I’ve been quite accepting of this criticism.
I am not “operating” as if A and B are inevitable, I just harbor the belief that both are strong possibilities.
If you are asking for a scientific study, I am unable to provide you with one. My beliefs are not based on proof, only projections. Further, I do not fully believe them myself, I just consider simulism to be a possibility but not a certainty. I am happy to debate with you on how likely the assumptions of the theory are if you wish.
Heh. I wish I had this kind of power over my programs.
This idea is nothing new. I heard Ed Fredkin talk about it in my class in 1973. There is a book called “Three Scientists and their Gods” with a chapter on him and his simulation theory. He said that miracles were bugs in the program.
However, as someone who has written lots of simulators - of circuits and computers, not universes - this idea fails for a couple of reasons.
In simulation you do the minimum necessary to get the results you need. Even if aliens ran simulations, it is unlikely to cover as big a universe as we see. If the radius were just a few million light years, it would work just as well.
You also simulate at as high a level as possible. We don’t see that.
Now Planck time might be the simulation time step - but it is too small to be efficient.
Also, these simulations would be expensive enough that they wouldn’t run very many of them. Simulations take longer than real time - a simulated second of a computer run will take a day to execute - so there are likely more real civilizations than simulated ones. Anyhow the probabilistic argument, which I’ve seen other places, is bogus. It converts a supposed probability of something into a certainty. Given the number of humans who have existed, the probability of anyone being a Cro Magnon man is very small. Yet they existed.
But even if we are in a simulation, there is no reason to be religious about it. God is not just about power, it is about knowing all and caring all. But the simulators can’t possibly know everything that goes on in their simulation, since they are finite. They won’t know about each sparrow falling, they’d at best have a summary of sparrows falling per century. And there is no good implied. They’d be just as likely to code a nasty awful universe as a good one.