IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 20th December 2020, 09:25 PM   #201
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Elon Musk's "simulation theory"

Let's look what Elon Musk actually said.......
https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/2/11...-in-simulation


"His (Elon Musk's )argument — one presumably honed in the soothing waters of many a jaccuzi — goes that the incredibly fast advancement of video game technology indicates we'll be capable of creating a fully lifelike simulation of existence in a short span of time. In 40 years, Musk explained, we've gone from Pong to massively multiplayer online games with millions of simultaneous players, games with photorealistic graphics, and stand now on the cusp of a new wave of virtual and augmented reality experiences."

"If you assume any rate of improvement at all then games will become indistinguishable from reality," Musk said. "Even if that rate of advancement drops by a thousand from what it is now, let's just imagine it's 10,000 years in the future, which is nothing on the evolutionary scale." Given that we're on that trajectory and that these games are increasingly playable on any device, Musk said, the odds that we are living our lives in base reality — that is, "real" reality — is one in billions."

OK. Slight problems
1) You can't simulate gravity or inertia and neither are only sensory inputs.
When my simulated spaceship goes from zero to half lightspeed in two seconds, my body doesn't go splat......
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 09:26 PM   #202
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Musk was merely paraphrasing Bostrom's work of 13 years previously.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 09:27 PM   #203
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
When my simulated spaceship goes from zero to half lightspeed in two seconds, my body doesn't go splat......
The simulation's body does.

Or, if not, the simulation has different laws of physics than our world does.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 09:29 PM   #204
DebunkThisPls
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 161
I know that Elon Musk didn't create the idea, I think it was Nick Bostrom, I hope I spelled that right. He basically says that once computing power gets to the point to where we can simulate an exact model of our universe, it's more likely that we are in a simulation than not.
DebunkThisPls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 09:43 PM   #205
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
This is a lot of work to say Brain-in-aVat 2.0.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 09:48 PM   #206
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
This is a lot of work to say Brain-in-aVat 2.0.
Not quite the same thing, though.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 09:54 PM   #207
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Musk was merely paraphrasing Bostrom's work of 13 years previously.
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
The simulation's body does. Or, if not, the simulation has different laws of physics than our world does.
Hang on. Are you saying no real humans are part of the simulation?

In that case we are jumping back to Rene Descartes "Am I a butterfly thinking I'm a human?" from about 400 years ago.


Once we claim everything in the simulation isn't real and isn't bound by any laws, then it isn't a simulation of anything, is it? It's free form anything goes.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 10:04 PM   #208
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
This is getting silly now.

If Debunkthisplease isn't real, but just a software script in a software game and he isn't really asking us anything, as we are just other scripted software characters, then it doesn't matter if there were Christmas hats or not in the past. It's just fictional characters following a narrative.

I think that was what Rene Descartes' point was. It's complete nonsense.


Let's ask Debunkthisplease" Do you consider yourself real or just a character in a scripted fictional narrative?
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 10:16 PM   #209
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Hang on. Are you saying no real humans are part of the simulation?
Only simulated humans can be part of a simulated universe.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
In that case we are jumping back to Rene Descartes "Am I a butterfly thinking I'm a human?" from about 400 years ago.

Once we claim everything in the simulation isn't real and isn't bound by any laws, then it isn't a simulation of anything, is it? It's free form anything goes.
It's not necessary to Bostrom's premise that the simulation exactly simulate every real person and every real action that they took in their life. Simulated people could have their own simulated lives, and never have actually existed in the real world. But the simulation is still of an Earth-like planet with Earth-like simulated people. If I am a simulation, it is not required that I have an exact analogue in the real world.

But again we're moving away from the real point of the simulation hypothesis when we speculate too much about the entities that are actually running the simulation. To the hypothesis, it matters only that they are conscious, and that they have sufficient computing power.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 10:17 PM   #210
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Not quite the same thing, though.
Right, hence 2.0. I never agreed that Bostrum's outnumbering simulation would follow. Why would you simulate at that scale, even if you could?

Creating a simulated universe does not create the sentient beings to live in it. That would go back to the Matrix-type connection to existing people.Too much work.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 10:26 PM   #211
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Right, hence 2.0. I never agreed that Bostrum's outnumbering simulation would follow. Why would you simulate at that scale, even if you could?
As I pointed out earlier, we do all sorts of things just to see if they are possible.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Creating a simulated universe does not create the sentient beings to live in it. That would go back to the Matrix-type connection to existing people.Too much work.
You could simulate a universe with people in it, or you could simulate a universe without people in it. It would depend on what you want to achieve with your simulation.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 10:32 PM   #212
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
As I pointed out earlier, we do all sorts of things just to see if they are possible.

You could simulate a universe with people in it, or you could simulate a universe without people in it. It would depend on what you want to achieve with your simulation.
As soon as you are simulating people, assuming you mean sentient ones, you have become God. Simulation is kind of in the rear view mirror.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 10:43 PM   #213
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
As soon as you are simulating people, assuming you mean sentient ones, you have become God. Simulation is kind of in the rear view mirror.
Well, that is kind of implied by the simulation hypothesis. Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Or religion.

But again, speculating on the origin of the simulation and the identity of the simulators is kind of not the point of the hypothesis.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 10:58 PM   #214
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Well, that is kind of implied by the simulation hypothesis. Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Or religion.

But again, speculating on the origin of the simulation and the identity of the simulators is kind of not the point of the hypothesis.
The hypothesis, in broad brush, is that we/they would be able to create a simulation indistinguishable from reality, and therefore would make one who's occupants would vastly outnumber the 'real' one, making it highly likely that we are in fact in one. That's what the clickbait title builds to, in any event. And I don't think a word of it follows.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 11:01 PM   #215
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The hypothesis, in broad brush, is that we/they would be able to create a simulation indistinguishable from reality, and therefore would make one who's occupants would vastly outnumber the 'real' one, making it highly likely that we are in fact in one. That's what the clickbait title builds to, in any event. And I don't think a word of it follows.
Notice that Bostrom is a philosopher, not a scientist. It's the job of philosophers to think up scenarios like this. If we have a way of scientifically disproving it, then it will become an interesting historical note.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 11:16 PM   #216
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Only simulated humans can be part of a simulated universe.
Hang on. The humans in Elon Musk's Simulation theory article are real. Elon Musk is merely talking about virtual reality on real humans.

Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
It's not necessary to Bostrom's premise that the simulation exactly simulate every real person and every real action that they took in their life.
Non real world software creatures individually following non real world software logic isn't a simulation of anything real is it? It is simply what it is.

Remember Conway's Game of Life from the 60's.


Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
it matters only that they are conscious, and that they have sufficient computing power.
If they are created software characters, in a software environment, with any rules the programmer makes, they aren't conscious. They are simply stimulus response programs.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Game of life.jpg (7.8 KB, 119 views)
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2020, 11:23 PM   #217
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
If you are playing Go in that attachment, you suck at it.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 12:13 AM   #218
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
I was cooking dinner and remembered that there is a movie where the humans are simulated in a simulated environment. (Even better it is by an Australian director.)

In Dark City the simulated humans are programmed never to remember that it is always night time. They can't have free thoughts because they are programmed.

That suggests to me that in a programmed simulation with programmed simulated humans I can simply program them to never think it's a simulation
Therefore the program is not simulating anything ...but is it's own thing.

Phew......and I wrote that while straight
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Dark City.jpg (46.2 KB, 3 views)
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 12:16 AM   #219
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
If you are playing Go in that attachment, you suck at it.
How rude. I'm going to delete your character program if you keep that up. You do know the next level in your current simulation game is jelly wrestling on the planet of nymphos.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 04:00 PM   #220
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Only simulated humans can be part of a simulated universe.
Hang on. The humans in Elon Musk's Simulation theory article are real. Elon Musk is merely talking about virtual reality on real humans.
I don't care what Elon Musk is talking about. As I said before, Musk is at best paraphrasing the original hypothesis. At worst he is bastardising it into saying things that Bostrom didn't intend.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
It's not necessary to Bostrom's premise that the simulation exactly simulate every real person and every real action that they took in their life.
Non real world software creatures individually following non real world software logic isn't a simulation of anything real is it? It is simply what it is.
It is a simulation of a world, or a universe, either with or without simulated conscious beings. But again, it doesn't matter. What matters is that the simulation is sufficiently powerful to convince the simulated conscious beings - us - that it is real.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Remember Conway's Game of Life from the 60's.
70s. Yes, I do. It too is a simulation, to an extent.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia
The Game of Life, also known simply as Life, is a cellular automaton devised by the British mathematician John Horton Conway in 1970.[1] It is a zero-player game, meaning that its evolution is determined by its initial state, requiring no further input. One interacts with the Game of Life by creating an initial configuration and observing how it evolves. It is Turing complete and can simulate a universal constructor or any other Turing machine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life

Your definition of "simulation" is too narrow.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
it matters only that they are conscious, and that they have sufficient computing power.
If they are created software characters, in a software environment, with any rules the programmer makes, they aren't conscious. They are simply stimulus response programs.
By "they" I am referring to the creators of the simulation, not the simulated beings.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 04:19 PM   #221
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I don't care what Elon Musk is talking about.
OK. Elon Musk was talking about real humans in virtual reality. We are now talking about created software humans in a created software environment.

Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
What matters is that the simulation is sufficiently powerful to convince the simulated conscious beings - us - that it is real.
Easy. The programmer writes a program line "You will always believe this simulation is real" for the software humans. End of story.

You can't pretend fictional created software humans are the same as random genetically evolving real humans. The software writer can write anything he wants.

That was the tragedy in the film "A.I." where the robot boy "had to find his mother" over thousands of years because he was programmed that way.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 05:49 PM   #222
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
OK. Elon Musk was talking about real humans in virtual reality. We are now talking about created software humans in a created software environment.
That's what I was always talking about, because I have been talking about the Simulation Hypothesis. Virtual reality is not the Simulation Hypothesis.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Easy. The programmer writes a program line "You will always believe this simulation is real" for the software humans. End of story.

You can't pretend fictional created software humans are the same as random genetically evolving real humans. The software writer can write anything he wants.
...Including an entire hyper-detailed universe that contains random genetically evolving simulated humans. Remember, the premise of the hypothesis is that the computing power already exists. It is assumed that the simulation is so complex and powerful that it is indistinguishable from what we perceive to be what we call "real".

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
That was the tragedy in the film "A.I." where the robot boy "had to find his mother" over thousands of years because he was programmed that way.
Haven't seen it. But I once wrote a fantasy story in which a hero was repeatedly resurrected by a cult of necromancers so that he could continue doing their evil bidding, until one day an adventurer killed him, raised his corpse as a zombie, and ordered the zombie to avoid all contact with other beings and bury itself as deep as possible in a snowdrift.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 07:17 PM   #223
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
...Including an entire hyper-detailed universe that contains random genetically evolving simulated humans. Remember, the premise of the hypothesis is that the computing power already exists. It is assumed that the simulation is so complex and powerful that it is indistinguishable from what we perceive to be what we call "real".
But "we" real humans aren't in the software. A fake human software character written by someone is in the software and you can't have genetically evolving humans if it is software. This means I can write any command line I want for the software humans including "You will never perceive that you are just software".

Isn't this just a circular position, in that the software can't be distinguished from real, but there is no "real" to compare it to, and secondly the software can write any innate behaviour into the software humans it wants, including "you will never perceive it is software"

Weird Concepts from the Arts
"A.I." is a good movie. Stanley Kubrick started it, then died and Spielberg finished it. It is about torturing robots including programming that can never be satisfied.


As for breaking the simulation, Kurt Vonnegut, has a character going insane in Breakfast of Champions, who thinks he is the only real human and everyone else is a simulation robot. Bruce Willis and Nick Nolte costarred in a film version of the book.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 07:28 PM   #224
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
But "we" real humans aren't in the software. A fake human software character written by someone is in the software and you can't have genetically evolving humans if it is software. This means I can write any command line I want for the software humans including "You will never perceive that you are just software".
You're missing the point. The premise of the Simulation Hypothesis is that we "real" humans are the simulations. It's right there in the title of Bostrom's paper - Are you living in a computer simulation. YOU - not a simulation of you, but YOU.

Anything else you may be rambling on about is not the Simulation Hypothesis.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 08:50 PM   #225
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
You're missing the point. The premise of the Simulation Hypothesis is that we "real" humans are the simulations. It's right there in the title of Bostrom's paper - Are you living in a computer simulation. YOU - not a simulation of you, but YOU.
An advanced future race came to earth and found an uninhabited wasteland. They scan for evidence of past life and the artifacts of civilization. With the data collected they create a simulation.

Sound right?
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 08:52 PM   #226
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
An advanced future race came to earth and found an uninhabited wasteland. They scan for evidence of past life and the artifacts of civilization. With the data collected they create a simulation.

Sound right?
The original conception is that a far future human civilisation simulates its own past. I posted the relevant quote from the paper upthread.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 08:59 PM   #227
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
The original conception is that a far future human civilisation simulates its own past. I posted the relevant quote from the paper upthread.
Also a possibility, I like the idea of future humans watching me better than those creepy aliens.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 09:08 PM   #228
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Anything else you may be rambling on about is not the Simulation Hypothesis.
The OP was the one discussing Elon Musk's claim concerning simulation theory. That's why I quoted Elon Musk in his article.

That Elon Musk put real humans in his claim is not my problem.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 09:16 PM   #229
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
You're missing the point. The premise of the Simulation Hypothesis is that we "real" humans are the simulations.
Simulations of what? A constructed software package is not simulating anything. It is it's own thing.

I can see that Paul Davies then agrees with what I said earlier. Unless the simulation restricts perceptions (itself a give away), the constructed software humans will reach a technology which will indicate mathematically that the environment they are in is only a simulation and not real. That's why the simulation would have to be the size of the universe and will always suffer from controlled quantum events which won't make sense, mathematically.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 09:18 PM   #230
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
The OP was the one discussing Elon Musk's claim concerning simulation theory. That's why I quoted Elon Musk in his article.

That Elon Musk put real humans in his claim is not my problem.
I put Musk into his context as an unreliable reporter of the actual Simulation Hypothesis and what it says and implies.

Honestly, this is nothing new. The Simulation Hypothesis says one thing, and one thing only - that if an advanced future civilisation wanted to simulate its past, and had sufficient computing power to do so, then we must expect to be among the simulations. All sorts of people come out of the woodwork to claim that the Simulation Hypothesis says a whole pile of things that it doesn't, including Musk. There is a good deal of work in the area that is derived from the Simulation Hypothesis, but Musk isn't doing any of it.

The OP was concerned that the so-called "glitches in the Matrix" that they thought they were experiencing might have been evidence that they were a simulation. The good news is that they aren't.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 09:26 PM   #231
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Simulations of what? A constructed software package is not simulating anything. It is it's own thing.

I can see that Paul Davies then agrees with what I said earlier. Unless the simulation restricts perceptions (itself a give away), the constructed software humans will reach a technology which will indicate mathematically that the environment they are in is only a simulation and not real. That's why the simulation would have to be the size of the universe and will always suffer from controlled quantum events which won't make sense, mathematically.
*looks up from jelly wrestling with nymphos*

Black type? Glitch.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 09:46 PM   #232
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Simulations of what? A constructed software package is not simulating anything. It is it's own thing.
Simulations of actual sentient beings, of course.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
I can see that Paul Davies then agrees with what I said earlier. Unless the simulation restricts perceptions (itself a give away), the constructed software humans will reach a technology which will indicate mathematically that the environment they are in is only a simulation and not real. That's why the simulation would have to be the size of the universe and will always suffer from controlled quantum events which won't make sense, mathematically.
Yes, well, no-one said that it was an airtight scientific prediction. It is, at best, a thought experiment. Do we know for certain that in principle our mathematics would be capable of detecting that we are in a simulation? What if the Simulators, being ultra-powerful beings that build and operate computers capable of simulating an entire universe, predicted that we would be able to do that and programmed safeguards into the simulation that closed all those loopholes? That's probably how the simulation became so complex and detailed.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 11:29 PM   #233
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Simulations of actual sentient beings, of course.
I feel as though we have to go back to establish what a sentient being is, and that's where, I admit, I have weaker understanding. Roger Penrose had this argument in the Emperor's New Mind, that a human consciousness could be set out as thousands of lines of code that get prioritised through experience, innate controls and random reasons. I don't know if that is the same as a P-Zombie. However if it is true, then why can't a simulation programmer simply write that program and add a line "you can't ever see this is a simulation"?

Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Yes, well, no-one said that it was an airtight scientific prediction. It is, at best, a thought experiment.
That's OK.

Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Do we know for certain that in principle our mathematics would be capable of detecting that we are in a simulation?
No, but the programmer has to establish rules, now, that won't be broken in future simulated discoveries. That suggests eventually holes should appear. I believe that is Paul Davies' counter argument.


Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
What if the Simulators, being ultra-powerful beings that build and operate computers capable of simulating an entire universe, predicted that we would be able to do that and programmed safeguards into the simulation that closed all those loopholes? .
Well if its a simulation the programmer can change the code any time they want to hide problems. That's why my consciousness runs on Windows 10 and its updates. (cough cough)
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2020, 11:37 PM   #234
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
I feel as though we have to go back to establish what a sentient being is, and that's where, I admit, I have weaker understanding. Roger Penrose had this argument in the Emperor's New Mind, that a human consciousness could be set out as thousands of lines of code that get prioritised through experience, innate controls and random reasons. I don't know if that is the same as a P-Zombie. However if it is true, then why can't a simulation programmer simply write that program and add a line "you can't ever see this is a simulation"?
For the purpose of the Simulation Hypothesis, the definition of a sentient being is very simple: you. You are the subject of the thought experiment. Yes, you personally - your real self.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
No, but the programmer has to establish rules, now, that won't be broken in future simulated discoveries. That suggests eventually holes should appear. I believe that is Paul Davies' counter argument.

Well if its a simulation the programmer can change the code any time they want to hide problems. That's why my consciousness runs on Windows 10 and its updates. (cough cough)
I believe that was the whole idea behind the original "glitch in the Matrix" scene in the (fictional) movie The Matrix. The glitch occurred when the machines had to change the code to account for an anomaly in the simulation.

But again, the premise of the Simulation Hypothesis is that the simulation is indistinguishable from what we call "reality". No glitches. The only way we could know we were simulations is through reason.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2020, 03:40 PM   #235
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Obligatory:

https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/dissimulation
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2020, 10:19 AM   #236
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 40,257
After 6 pages is there any clue who nicked the hat?
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2020, 12:50 PM   #237
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
 
Butter!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 7,266
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
After 6 pages is there any clue who nicked the hat?
It was Miss Scarlet, in the living room, with the rope.
__________________
Get these tribbles off the bridge
Butter! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2020, 12:53 PM   #238
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,661
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
After 6 pages is there any clue who nicked the hat?
We had all the clues we needed from the prior threads. After 1 page there was no doubt about "who nicked" the hat.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2020, 10:32 PM   #239
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
This thread is starting to remind me of Miracle on 34th Street
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.