What is your opinion on the simulation theory?

What is your opinion on the simulation theory?

I unironically think this universe isn't real/the true reality. Am I deluded?

If you can explain either a) how it's relevant or b) how it's falsifiable, you might get more bites, user.

Back when machines were getting big, Newton said the universe is a clock. Now it's a simulation.

I don't put any stock in it.

No, I'm in the same boat. I know it's a crack head type theory, but I believe we're in a simulation.
It's fine to not put any stock in it, but if your reasoning is: "Well, Newton said its a clock and it's not. Since it's not a clock, it's not a simulation."
That's a little silly. Just because Newton was wrong, doesn't mean every other thoery is wrong.

I think it may not exactly be a "computer simulation as a game" as pop sci has popularized, but some form of being/beings are running our universe from their real universe.

A) it helps us understand our place and our life better
B) it's one of those things I think that aren't falsifiable.

Solipsism for stemfags.

It doesn't answer anything though, just moves the goal posts. When we're talking about something as all-inclusive as existence calling it x or y or z is honestly meaningless. it just is.

The thing is, assuming this life IS just a simulation inside another universe, it's kinda hard to prove it without just blowing up the universe to see if it reboots the system.

A) Understand it better how? When life is perfectly simulateable to the point that it's indistinguishable from whatever reality is, what do we learn by thinking it is?
B) Good for you that you think that. But how do we KNOW? Like before, if life can be simulated to this extent, how do we prove it? Being non-falsifiable is simply not enough.

I think it's entirely possible, I think it would actually probably be for the better if there happens to be no god, and I also think that we will never know unless we're allowed to.

You couldn't really blow the whole universe up. If you try they would just reset things back and you wouldn't remember anything.

>((((they))))

...

That's just some fancy way of saying you are deist

Bump

...

If the true reality had multiple arrows of time, or time dimensions then simulating our universe would be trivial.
Sure, same might apply to spatial dimensions but it's not so fun.

This is an inherently unsupportable assertion. About as nonsensical as claiming that a deity or group of deities created everything.

Reddit welcomes you my fellow skeptic
No fun allowed there

Wouldn't it be more fun to find the actual truth? It could be there, you know, hidden betwixt the memes. One only needs to reach for occam's razor and shave it all away.

>betwixt

>occam's razor
Nice meme

That wouldn't change anything from our perspective.

1. There is something
2. That something is not chaotic but follows rules
3. An intelligent species would want to try to create a perfect simulation of itself to see if it can be done, and if it can, that strongly implies they themselves are simulated. So a motivation to create such a simulation is there.
4. The universe isn't infinitely complex. For example, there are elemantary particles that make up everything. However, these are much bigger than the theoretically smallest possible size "something" can have. Why is there such a big difference between how small things can be, and how small the smallest thing really is? An answer to this could be because going even smaller would overload the "hardware" this universe is running on. This means, if we were to create an universe, we would probably not create elemantary particles as the smallest "something", but several layers above that, e.g. atoms or molecules as the smallest "building stones". This means, with every layer of simulation the difference between Planck-length and the size of the elemantary particle increases.
6. The smallest particle have a size of 10^-19 metres. The Planck length is 10^-35 metres. This means there could be 10^16 layers of simulation, depending on how much bigger the smallest particle gets with each iteration.

It's true btw

>6. The smallest particle have a size of 10^-19 metres. The Planck length is 10^-35 metres. This means there could be 10^16 layers of simulation, depending on how much bigger the smallest particle gets with each iteration.

How the fuck did you get to that conclusion and what the fuck does that sentence even mean

Bump

It's like God. Unprovable from the inside so musing about its chances are somewhat moot. You can have either believe it or not, and from their you choose to react towards it.