Can you disprove that we are living in a matrix?

Guess this isn't a simulation.

There is a big difference between being able to prove something is true, and not being able to disprove something

user, this is not me.

I'm Simulation based hypotheses/interpretations are resultant of the structure of quantum field theory, as it is mathematically equivalent to that of a spatially distributed quantum computer.

Simulation hypotheses are mathematically tenable; however that does not mean that they correspond to reality.

we don't discuss subjects based on not being able to be disproved otherwise religion threads wouldn't be banned here. But they are.

You failed to show any evidence. Now fuck off

Why did you quote me?
Fuck off, you don't know shit either.

I'm not OP and I'm not trying to prove anything. Are you retarded, or do you just not know how to read?

And I don't act as if its a fact supported by scientific evidence either. I'm merely pointing out that there is zero evidence and is entirely insensible garbage. Just like ghosts, spirits and spaghetti monsters, which belong to

You're very confused and I didn't say it was provable this is a simulation in any regard.

Cease being confused at once.

You are either a complete fucking moron, or a very subtle troll, because none of the posters you are arguing with have actually stated that they think we are living in a simulation.

What is the probability that you cannot morally disprove that we aren't tulpae (conscious qualia) living in an ontological matrix without using any axioms besides A=A, and why is it 50%?

Can you disprove x is not science. Science is about proving things and coming up with hypothesis with supporting evidence, not shitposting around if anyone can disprove it. You don't even know how science works.

You don't have any supporting evidence or anything to talk about.

Now back to

...

I'm not going to even bother generating an actual response.

...

you are literally arguing with two people who agree with you.

Do they agree that this garbage of a thread has no place in Veeky Forums ?

Science is already philosophy because it's reliant on empiricism.

> trying this hard

DUMB GORILLAPOSTER

That's easy. No machine can generate consciousness. I am conscious, therefore I am not a simulation.

I don't have a stance on that since I didn't make this thread nor do I have the ability to delete it.

All I'm saying is that you seem very confused since you keep arguing the same points as the people you are arguing against.

At this point I don't even care about the discussion, but your responses are perplexing enough to keep me interested in what you will say next.

No they were trying to justify this thread to stay here with bullshit semantics
Where as it belongs to

No more than you keep justifying the existence of the thread by continually posting that it shouldn't be here

The thread asked a question, I answered it. Anything else is strictly your own creation and has no inherent relation to the source, ie, "putting words in my mouth".

no

...

Are you aware that this thread gets bumped back to the first page every time you post?

...

Just don't give them attention.

are you aware that me not bumping the thread does not guarantee that the popscifag will not bump it with yet another retarded post ?

I dunno man, I think it's kind of amusing, in a limited way.

Illusion of control. Your actions likely ultimately have very little impact.

about 1/4 of the posts in this thread are yours, while the majority of the others are from two other people who are responding to you because they think you are silly.

Therefore I put forth that you are the single most significant contributing factor to the continuing propagation of this thread.

can you disprove to me that you are not conscious?

The matrix theory is good for a thought exercise, not much else.
There's two possible versions for a computer simulation. The first involves me having an actual physical body outside the simulation.The second is that my consciousness was created by the simulation and that I am an AI program. If I was an AI there's nothing I could do. Likely, the system running the simulation is isolated in a single room with no way of data either entering or exiting that room. So even if I were to somehow escape the programming I would just be a rogue AI program lost in a computer. There would be no further actions I could take, because the owner of said computer would see an error in its processing and either destroy the virus (me) or wipe the whole system. But suppose the system running the simulation were connected to a network like our internet? It is likely that I could travel through this, trying to learn and find answers about the stimulating and the reality outside it. Until either I took over the whole network (hello skynet) or was discovered and destroyed.
Now back to the idea I have a body. If I have a physical body but my mind is trapped inside the program then there are only a few possibilities.
It's possible I'm inside a simulation so those outside can perform a psychological study on how I react to different scenarios. Or that I had a previous life outside the stimulation but committed a crime, and this is an imprisonment where I can cause no further damage to society. Or a number of other reasons.
Now suppose I tried to escape. I tried to exit the simulation and take back my actual body. It is likely there would be safeguards against that, such as physical restraints or a system designed to kill me if I do escape.
Or if this is a psychological study then the ones running it might release me to lead a "normal" life in the "real" world.

No, because inertia is caused by free will. If one little particle has free will nothing else does.

I meant *yes