Are we living in a simulation?

[2old4this]

CH - as a solopsist I am bound to point out that your cuts and bruises and your external reaction to them only need to be superficially convincing. There is no requirement for the simulation to generate an internal emotional state for you. It is sufficient that you just appear to me to be in pain.

Wolsty -
I agree. Actualy I am an atheist, and am acutely aware that the "simulation hypothesis" may amount to nothing more than religion - hence my call for some test that could prove or disprove it. If no such test exists even in principle then the theory is indistinguishable from religious belief inasmuch as it is intrinsically non-scientific - a matter of faith only.

I'm also aware that ever were such a test to be found and we were to discover we are in a simulation, this simply pushes back the question of "what is the nature of reality" to the next level. Perhaps that level is "real" (whatever that means) or itself a simulation.

Is there an infinite regression of such simulations? Is there any way in which a regression of two or more might actually form a loop in time and be causing themselves. Such a loop would not necessarily be paradoxical. Imagine a cosmic string - the gravity well of which can - according to some theorists - cause objects in its vicinity to travel back in time. Imagine such an object appearing from the future having been flung back through straying too close to such a string. As it appears, it meets its younger self, and their gravitational interaction deflects the younger version towards the cosmic string... Such a scenario is perfectly self-consistent even though each event was the casue of the other. Perhaps our world is brought into being as a simulation of a world that is itself simulated directly or indirectly by ours. There may be no external reality.

Whether such a hypothesis is at all useful (even if true) is a different matter. The reason I am an atheist, by the way, is that the god hypothesis imparts no information. God is conveniently defined such that it is ineffable. In that case, a much simpler hypothesis is that it does not exist (Occam's Razor). That may well be true of the simulation hypothesis too.


2old
PS: CH - Epsilon Eridani b is one of the growing number of stars known to have a planet, and is only 10 light years away. A conversational exchange with any beings there would only take 20 years, which is not very long at all in the scheme of things.
Oh, and the Darwin Philosophy board is part of the highly entertaining Darwin Awards site. Here: http://www.darwinawards.com/ (see forum link at bottom of its left frame).

 

[Channel Hopper]

Only the true messiah denies his divinity - Life of Brian

As for external reality in the cosmic string theory (is it a theory or a hypothesis ?), its not so hard to understand, as that would be the definition of the Universe - there is nothing outside it that would or could interact with whats inside it.

The theory itself could quite happily live inside its own universe, oblivious to whats going on around, only when it interacts with something that doesnt fit in with the way of things does it become open to conjecture, and possible dismissal but then we are touching on Schroeders cat in the box scenario of last year.

 

[wolsty]

@ 2old

I'm not an atheist. I refuse to accept the label, since it implies that there is a being of which I deny the existence. However, I'm not an atheist for exactly the same reasons that you are. William of Ockham is, however, undoubtedly turning in his grave at the idea of his principle being used to deny the existence of a supreme being.

It's abundantly clear, though, that if one dispenses with the concept of a god created in man's image, then life becomes much simpler and understandable. We don't have to engage in the sophistry of, for example, debating how and why an omnipotent, omniscient God permits to exist the misery and horrors perpretrated by a humankind possessed of free will or inflicts, apparently randomly, Alzheimer's, Motor Neurone Disease, flood and famine.

Doesn't solipsism cause hair to grow on the palms of your hands?

If we are living in a simulation, how would we ever know? Isn't this what logicians would call an unknowable proposition?

One of the problems of Western philosophy (what little I know of it, anyway) seems to be the issue of there being only three states of being, ie true, false, unknowable. Some Eastern philosophies have, I understand, more states, eg true but unknowable. Perhaps we have to accept the infinite regression hypothesis which, as I understand it, translates as 'the more you know, the more you find out you don't know. The search for fundamental particles is a good illustration of this. Just as you think you've found the indivisible unit of matter, protons, neutrons, electrons, quarks, strings, membranes appear. It's all very puzzling.

On the question of philosophers, I'm beginning to come round to Feynman's way of thinking - he disliked and mistrusted them all.

What is the sound of one hand clapping?

 

[jimbo]

@ Wolsty

Some Eastern philosophies have, I understand, more states, eg true but unknowable.

You have just described 'faith' haven't you, the basis of most religions?

 

[wolsty]

I agree that such an interpretation might be made. But I haven't much time for faith. It seems to me to be belief without evidence. True but unknowable is, in my understanding, the set of premises on which mathematical systems are based, eg if a=b and b=c, then a=b. Self evident, but not provable in the way that one would prove Pythagoras's theorem or even Fermat's Last. If you remove the act of belief which accepts that there is a supreme being, every faith-based system collapses under its own weight of contorted theology.

 

[Channel Hopper]

Faith is not limited to believing in a supreme being

Its also relevant to trusting and believing those of equal stature around you, at worst you can be disappointed, at best the ability to believe in others can be beyond comprehension.

Who needs a supreme being when you can really trust those around you ?

 

[wolsty]

I don't agree that faith is synonymous with trust. Trust for one another is born of experience. We may come into this world trusting those around us, but experience soon teaches us that some are not worthy of it. Those who are to be trusted are normally equally obvious but usually fewer in number. Religious faith is belief without evidence; trust is a much more rational emotion. Perhaps we need more trust and less faith. We certainly need more evidence.

 

[2old4this]

At the risk of sounding cynical, I'd say that religious faith is the act of believing in something even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The point being that faith is not a passive state, something that will be supplanted on the production of evidence - it is more profound that that. It is something that by its very definition must be actively maintained independently of the evidence.

CH's quote from Life of Brian captures this beautifully. The only being that would carry sufficient credence to divest the faithful of their faith would be the object of their faith, the supreme being itself. But for such a being to thruthfully deny its own divinity would be a logical impossibility.

Where many religious people err is in trying to justify their faith based on "evidence" of the existence of a supreme being. For example, in citing the scriptures as evidence for the existence of Jesus, or of the complexity of the eye as evidence for creation. If any evidence is to be admitted to support any particular view then ALL evidence should be admitted to potentially support ANY view. Evidence is not something one can pick and choose from as a means simply to support some preconceived premise. In any event, each time a person of faith seeks recourse to evidence, s/he is effectively debasing the very concept of faith.

2old

 

[Channel Hopper]

Evidence is not something one can pick and choose from as a means simply to support some preconceived premise

Unless youre in a UK courtroom, defending a client with a bad cough, on a high profile case involving coughing, with a jury similarly disposed.

nudge nudge ;) ;) say no more !

 

[lejizz]

It's hard to talk about some of these subjects, as often people are labled "Kooks, "weirdo's" etc... But IF there is a Matrix scenario out there, then maybe we are being given a small jolt back into reality. There are more and more stories of alien abductions and sightings these days and then in the late 90's we were subject to movies about huge comets hitting the earth as in armageddon and deep impact. This was about the time that there were huge rumours on the net about the possible collision of comet Lee (1999) with earth, and then rumours that it had wiped out one of mars's moons Phobos. Maybe we are being prepared for the worst possible scenario.. maybe not

Until a few years ago, we were told that they could have never been life on mars, and NASA lost many craft trying to land safetly on mars, but since the end of last year, there was a succesful landing and in the news last week, they are talking about a salty sea on mars. We seem to have become very advance in the last 30 years, some slowly and some huge ones. Where the hell did the stealth bomber come from? there was NOTHING like it, all aircraft was conventional stuff before it.

I for one believe that there are HUGE cover up's about our past, and maybe even our future. Is it the Matrix? not so sure about that, but i believe that there is another source other that the Human one that we know.

I remember my English teacher once talking about space/human life etc... he said
" Just imagine, we are going about our daily lives thinking that we are unique, when really, we are a speck of dirt in someones fingernail, and he is about to press a doorbell..end of mankind"

Makes ya think Huh?

 

[s*t*a*r*m*a*n]

Well extra terrestrials are visiting the earth and there is human contact with them one way or another and i have personally witnessed many ufos over the years and regard myself as an experiencer and i once also saw a ufo pursuit by military jets so yes they are real and they are here i can assure you so now you know why i call myself s*t*a*r*m*a*n

in the very last and sadly final issue of UFO magazine in the uk march 2004 issue

(check out the main page http://www.ufomag.co.uk there is some story going about about why ufo mag should stop publishing after many years by a guy called p mantle who i think might be philip mantle the ufologist. UFO Magazine say the story circulating the net is not true but i cant find out what it is. The editor graham birdsall unfortunately died recently and this did have an impact on the publications editorial quality i feel but i doubt he would have wanted them to ever stop publishing and i am highly suspicious of the whole think)

anyway back to my story. There is an article entitled "Mars Images Doctored PROOF" In the february issue graham ennis showed images that were not in the public domain until Legal intervention had NASA release them, these are high resolution B/W images showing what clearly looks like trees or bushes and even lakes of water visible on the surface of Mars.The futurist, science fiction writer and developer of the COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE , Arthur C. Clarke, was shown these images of Mars and went on record claiming "They look like trees to me".

AND the sky on mars is actually blue not red as nasa have been putting a filter over the images, yes some early photos were red skies but many have been doctored when infact the sky was red so says the article.Its interesting that i just heard that now there is a form of oxygen on Mars also, seems Nasa may have to come clean after all for what reason one can only speculate. But im certainly not one of the surprised ones, who is daft enough to believe anyway that NASA are the only space explorer organisation anyway im sure we do have another secret one with astronauts that no one has or ever will hear about. At least thats what i think anyway. ;)

 

[lejizz]

There was a program released by anglia TV in 1977 ( april 1st) called alternative three, that was a spoof news program, that claimed that there were glass structures on the dark side of the moon, and it apparently hit a nerve. It has since become a cult, and is hard to find, but is available on the net, but has it's problems, which the site think is a conspiracy to stop the movie file. http://www.thule.org/alt3.html


The program talks of a Noah's Ark style project in case the worst should happen. I personally think that if there was an impact severe enough to end life on the earth, then the moon would go also. There are stories of astronauts being threated with death if they divulge information about what they have seen out there.

There are so many things that governments know that would probably have us quaking in our boots, as i said before, I don't think that the matrix would be real, but I think that we have all lived wierder things in our dreams at night
PS just did a search on the ufomag/mantel heres a link
http://www.grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?f=5&i=911&t=911&v=f

 

[s*t*a*r*m*a*n]

lejizz thanks very much for the info :-righton
I am particularly gratefull for your help in helping me find the site
http://www.ufomonthly.com as this will undoubtedly be the closest we can get to the online version of ufo magazine uk edition and only £1.50p a month to subscribe when it starts up with the first issue free to try and it has the new editor from ufo magazine onboard so thats good. Im surprised that Mrs Birdsall the wife of the late Graham Birdsall original ufomag editor decided to quite publication of the magazine, i cannot understand why she would do that she could have just sold on the publication or something, its all a little strange and im still suspicious of the whole incident.

Just to put a final thought on ufo mags closure, the very last issue of ufo magazine front cover had this as a title "ARE WE EXPERIENCING A FLAP?" So there is certainly no shortage of things going on and if anyone says thats why they stopped publishing then they are very misled.

 

[Channel Hopper]

Well extra terrestrials are visiting the earth and there is human contact with them one way or another and i have personally witnessed many ufos over the years and regard myself as an experiencer and i once also saw a ufo pursuit by military jets so yes they are real and they are here i can assure you so now you know why i call myself s*t*a*r*m*a*n ;)

Maybe we should change your forum name to c*a*r*t*m*a*n

 

[s*t*a*r*m*a*n]

No thanks channelpopper eh sorry hopper
i will stick to s*t*a*r*m*a*n

 

[wolsty]

The problem with lack of knowledge is that we don't know what it is that we don't know. However muc we may speculate, we can only make informed guesses based on what we already know. Before the discovery of the electromagnetic spectrum, who could have predicted mobile phones, radio, television etc? Before Copernicus, Galileo and Newton, who could have predicted satellites. Before Hubble, who could have predicted that the Universe is larger than our galaxy? I suspect it's an infinite regression: the more you know, the more information you have on which to build hypotheses.

My thought for the day concerns dimensions. We can readily understand the concept of three spatial and one time dimension; even distorted spacetime is just about accessible with the aid of a bowling ball, a rubber sheet and a bit of imagination. I've seen some conjectures that 3 spatial dimensions is the optimum number required for life to exist; the arrow of time requires only one dimension (self evident). But mathematically, we can have as many dimensions as we wish, and M Theory requires the existence of 11, although none of us can envisage an 11-dimensional universe - at least I can't.

So here's the question: are we unable to visualise a 4+ dimensional universe because we are inherently incapable of the feat? Or is it simply because we've had no experience of such a state?

 

[Channel Hopper]

So here's the question: are we unable to visualise a 4+ dimensional universe because we are inherently incapable of the feat? Or is it simply because we've had no experience of such a state?

I've experienced distorted spacetime on my 20th birthday along with a few fellow experimenters, but the exhorbitant material cost of the scrumpy with brandy chasers rather puts me off doing it again.

 

[Channel Hopper]

By the way there is a satellite due to be launched soon that puts the gravitaition and distortion theory to the test

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3596499.stm

 

[wolsty]

I've just returned from my future son-in-law's stag night. Some of the features at the lap dancing club we visited defied all the laws of physics. Including gavity!

 

[wolsty]

I've just had a toot at the BBC site. I'd always thought Einstein's Theory of General Relativity was a load of balls. I'm not surprised that Nasa intends to prove it.

LOL