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 17th December 2020, 09:40 PM   #161
DebunkThisPls
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
So did you tell your mom you were "very freaked out" by a magic teleporting Christmas hat, took a photo of the hat....and it transported again?

She simply turned off the TV and went to bed while you go post the story on a skeptics forum?
Believe it or not, kids don't tell their parents everything. I do tell my mom a lot of things, but I didn't mention this to her, I didn't think it mattered at the time. She could probably tell I was a little freaked out, but I never told her directly, no
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 17th December 2020, 09:47 PM   #162
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by DebunkThisPls View Post
Believe it or not, kids don't tell their parents everything. I do tell my mom a lot of things, but I didn't mention this to her, I didn't think it mattered at the time. She could probably tell I was a little freaked out, but I never told her directly, no
Really? You were not freaked out enough to tell you mum after it teleported the first time and you took a photo as evidence and after that, it teleported again?

You asked your mother if she moved your magical teleporting Christmas hat, and she didn't ask "Why?"
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 17th December 2020, 09:54 PM   #163
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by DebunkThisPls View Post
Just had the Hat in my room, right next to a shirt on my bed. I was laying down. I got up once but I can't remember if it was before or after I had placed it here. It's not there.
Sooooo... it didn't teleport when you were in the shower, nor was it on the blanket when you took the photo. So how did it move next to your shirt? You moved it, right?
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 17th December 2020, 09:59 PM   #164
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by DebunkThisPls View Post
My family was with me the whole time. My mom never moved, my dad was in the other room and never came into the living room, my sister was right by me, and she's 9
Amazing.
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 17th December 2020, 10:05 PM   #165
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by DebunkThisPls View Post
... after a shower I found it on my bed. Then I took a picture as I was, at the time, afraid it "teleported", and I wanted to make sure I didn't hallucinate it. I got up once or twice after this, and then at around 12, looked over and saw it wasn't at the foot of my bed, or on my pillow, so I then walked around the house and saw it on the couch.
So your family wasn't with you the entire time and your mother turned off the TV.
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 17th December 2020, 10:17 PM   #166
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Perhaps our youngest member is curious about the realm of possibilities, one in particular piques his interest. He thought a discussion with a forum of skeptics would be totally rad but he doesn't know how to present a case for something that has zero evidence.

An easy way would be if, what he would consider to be an example happened. An anecdote based on an actual hat is tailored to limit the explanations and focus the conversation. Add some hypothetical emotion, possible explanation and a thread was created.
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 17th December 2020, 10:37 PM   #167
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Perhaps our youngest member is curious about the realm of possibilities, one in particular piques his interest. He thought a discussion with a forum of skeptics would be totally rad but he doesn't know how to present a case for something that has zero evidence. .
I have directly asked him where he read the article about simulation theory as described by Elon Musk. He avoids answering that. Elon Musk did make a comment in an article in 2016.

I'm happy to move onto that, but he doesn't want to discuss it.
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 18th December 2020, 05:49 AM   #168
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
 
Butter!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 7,266
ME, get a grip.

Even if this person were lying about every last thing (which I don't think he is), your reaction would be over-the-top.

DTP, if you want to move on, just ignore Matthew and answer Thermal's question about simulation theory and where you heard about it and what you think about it. That's the only way the discussion is going to move on.

Let's not get a huge portion sent to AAH again.
__________________
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 19th December 2020, 10:39 AM   #169
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
Ok, we've presented the most reasonable explanation for a hat being in places it was not recalled to be: faulty recollection. How about less likely explanations? Say for instance, I dunno, glitches resulting from living in a simulation?

I'd say right off the bat that this is not a good explanation. Do you often see the hat turned black with pink trim for a couple hours? If there were as many glitches as we propose, the colors would be occasionally wrong too, right?

Ok, maybe you think it's only location that gets glitched (for whatever reason). Do the trees on your street occasionally appear on the wrong side of the road? Does your mom's car occasionally appear in the kitchen? Are your drinking glasses frequently lined up on the ceiling? Does your bathroom sometimes manifest as a streaming line of code with ERROR blinking in the middle?

See, if we were in a simulation that was prone to glitches, we would see others besides remembering a hat being in a different place. Why wouldn't your sneakers be found floating in the hallway once in a while? The complexity of the Universe is stunning. It doesn't stand to reason that mundanities like a hat's location across a few feet is going to be the sign of it.

As poster Myriad pointed out upthread, so what if we were ultimately part of something else that we don't understand, like something else's simulation? Does that make your mom or sister any less real to you? Do your fingers wiggle less when you want them to? If we are in a simulation, it wouldn't matter. Its being alive to us. Enjoy it. Theres a lot of fun to be had, and learning to be...uh, learned. Go set the simulation on fire with your career in journalism. Impress the Code Writers with how much you can do. Have at it, bro.
__________________
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 19th December 2020, 11:19 AM   #170
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
 
alfaniner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sorth Dakonsin
Posts: 24,889
Yeah, I hate it when the sky and the trees get all pixelated. It's like the holodeck streaming can't keep up or something.
__________________
Science is self-correcting.
Woo is self-contradicting.
alfaniner 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 19th December 2020, 12:11 PM   #171
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,661
I woke up this morning and the sky was the color of telvision tuned to a dead channel.
theprestige 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 19th December 2020, 02:25 PM   #172
Spektator
Watching . . . always watching.
 
Spektator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 1,938
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I woke up this morning and the sky was the color of telvision tuned to a dead channel.
Drink a Gibson and enjoy the new romance, sir.
Spektator 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 19th December 2020, 04:40 PM   #173
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,846
Originally Posted by Spektator View Post
Drink a Gibson and enjoy the new romance, sir.
Recipe please.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer 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 19th December 2020, 05:05 PM   #174
Spektator
Watching . . . always watching.
 
Spektator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 1,938
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
Recipe please.
Simplest : 2.5 oz of gin (vodka if you insist), .5 oz of vermouth. Stir or shake in a well-chilled mixing glass. Pour into a chilled martini glass and garnish with a cocktail onion.

Bear in mind that I do not myself drink ardent spirits, though I did work as a bartender for two summers.

And really the labored pun referenced William Gibson's SF novel Neuromancer.
Spektator 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 19th December 2020, 06:09 PM   #175
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
How about less likely explanations? Say for instance, I dunno, glitches resulting from living in a simulation?
The obvious debunking point to this is that if the universe is a simulation, what is it a simulation of......the universe? That makes no sense.

Secondly, nor does quantum mechanics apply to teleporting party hats. If I measure a dual waveform/particle, I am collapsing that waveform and at extreme narrow probabilities I get some weird results. However quantum mechanics has no mechanism for making a large compound object turn into a recoverable dual waveform/particle thingee, where every subatomic particle remembers to form a party hat again. when that wave form collapses again.
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 19th December 2020, 09:10 PM   #176
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
The obvious debunking point to this is that if the universe is a simulation, what is it a simulation of......the universe? That makes no sense.
Makes sense to me, especially if I were a Matrix fan. There is a Real World, and a simulation to keep the Coppertops happy and healthy. Or a grand sociological or evolutionary experiment. Remember, to a 14 year old, the Universe is not that big a place. Never saw Egypt or Antarctica. Pictures and writings are the only proof they are even there. Also, we could propose a multidimensional thingy that this Universe pales in comparison to.

Not advocating this, of course. But that the proposed simulation appears to be the Universe we know is no show-stopper.

Quote:
Secondly, nor does quantum mechanics apply to teleporting party hats. If I measure a dual waveform/particle, I am collapsing that waveform and at extreme narrow probabilities I get some weird results. However quantum mechanics has no mechanism for making a large compound object turn into a recoverable dual waveform/particle thingee, where every subatomic particle remembers to form a party hat again. when that wave form collapses again.
Right. OP is 14. Working the straightforward angle here, although I alluded to the compound nature problem with the black and pink hat thing.
__________________
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 19th December 2020, 11:03 PM   #177
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Not advocating this, of course.
As You don't advocate this I'll offer a debunk.

Hypothetically to have a simulated universe that gives all the illusion of being the entire universe, with "real" humans in it, the simulation machine would have to be bigger than the actual universe. The simulation machine would have to still calculate and have all the same historical, quantum & otherwise events, that have had to occur everywhere in the real universe. For example, the simulated 13 billion year old photon from just after the big bang, still has to be in dual waveform particle state as the same photon in the real universe or it wouldn't make sense mathematically.

In the Matrix all humans still shared the same simulated world, so the entire universe would have to remain consistent. That sort of doesn't make sense when you introduce controlled quantum probability

Secondly, the Matrix made no sense whatsoever. What energy can you obtain from keeping humans that you can't with, say, elephants or dogs?

I guess that's why the Wachowski sisters said it was a coming out cry about their future simultaneous sex changes from being male.....and not a science fiction film.


"The Matrix is a 'trans metaphor', Lilly Wachowski says"
https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-53692435


Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
OP is 14. .
Which is an odd claim as Elon Musk's magazine article, on simulated universes was five years ago and the OP was supposedly reading at 9.
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, 10:28 AM   #178
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by*Thermal*
OP is 14. .

Quote:
Mathew Ellard

Which is an odd claim as Elon Musk's*magazine article, on simulated universes was five years ago and the OP was supposedly reading at 9.

We could assume he read the musings of Musk at any point after 2015.

If the anecdote is a genuine attempt to describe actual events, it would seem that the glitch is in the matrix of his mind.

Also, my apologies for the name calling. I mostly just wanted to see if the OP knew who Matlock was.

Last edited by Nakani; 20th December 2020 at 10:38 AM.
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 20th December 2020, 10:39 AM   #179
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,527
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
As You don't advocate this I'll offer a debunk.

Hypothetically to have a simulated universe that gives all the illusion of being the entire universe, with "real" humans in it, the simulation machine would have to be bigger than the actual universe. The simulation machine would have to still calculate and have all the same historical, quantum & otherwise events, that have had to occur everywhere in the real universe. For example, the simulated 13 billion year old photon from just after the big bang, still has to be in dual waveform particle state as the same photon in the real universe or it wouldn't make sense mathematically.

In the Matrix all humans still shared the same simulated world, so the entire universe would have to remain consistent. That sort of doesn't make sense when you introduce controlled quantum probability
Your take assumes a physical simulation. As I recall the movie, the humans were literally plugged in to an electronic simulation. Kind of like the Sims. The Sims world didn't build real houses, right? The Matrix shot electrical impulses to the brain that mimiced sensory input. In theory, the machines who created the Matrix did so on a laptop or whatever. No real ages of photons were needed; just the sensory input that convinced the subject that it was there.

Quote:
Secondly, the Matrix made no sense whatsoever. What energy can you obtain from keeping humans that you can't with, say, elephants or dogs?
Brain processing power? Neural activity? Humans have dramatically larger brains than other animals. Plus my recollection of the movie's premise was that machines and humans were battling it out, so the machines had all these perfectly good humans to harvest power from that they needed to get rid of anyway. Two birds , one stone.

Quote:
I guess that's why the Wachowski sisters said it was a coming out cry about their future simultaneous sex changes from being male.....and not a science fiction film.

"The Matrix is a 'trans metaphor', Lilly Wachowski says"
https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-53692435
Yeah, I heard that before. And much like calling a banana taped to the wall 'art', they can call it whatever they want. To the rest of us, it is indisputably and by any definition a sci-fi fantasy action movie.

Movie discussion tho: I expected the character Switch to have some kind of different real-world appearance, because of the name and the only one appearing in all white. I read somewhere that she was originally written to be a male in the real world?

Quote:
Which is an odd claim as Elon Musk's magazine article, on simulated universes was five years ago and the OP was supposedly reading at 9.
Ok, skeptical argument against your criticism here:

Our unreliable narrator claimed that it was both a magazine article and a pop up link, as well as saying he was not sure. He thought it might have been the space.com story he posted earlier, from 2018. Why do you ignore his link and require the article he doesn't cite?

Now, only you are trying to lock him onto the SciAm article from 2016. You also lock him onto reading it immediately upon its original paper publication date. Why? In an America doctor or dentist's office, the waiting rooms are filled with old magazines. Years old. Why do you require that he read that specific article when it first came out?

Say he meant an online magazine, as opposed to a paper publication. Reasonable enough. You are surely aware that he could be linking to magazine articles that are older than he is, no? I can refer to a newspaper article I read from the freaking 1800s, while literally meaning a link to a website archive. Although we have valid criticisms of the OP's claims, this isn't one of them.
__________________
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, 02:38 PM   #180
CORed
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by DebunkThisPls View Post
I really need an answer from a skeptic. This just happened about 20 minutes ago. I had a Santa hat that I left on the couch. It was there for maybe 2 hours, at least I know for a fact it was, and walked in and out of the living room several times between 8-10. But at around 10, i started watching a movie with my sister. I was on the couch the whole time, didn't move once. I am 99.999% sure the Santa hat was beside me. I have a memory of looking at it, in the dark with the TV on. The room was only dark during the movie, when I didn't move, and I haven't had the hat since the first when I put it in the closet by mistake and just never felt like getting it. Ok, but the big part is that I walked into my bedroom at around 11 when the movie was over (it was a TV special but same thing) I saw it sitting on my bed. Now, between 8-10 I walked into my room at least 5-10 times. I don't have a memory of moving it, and my sister nor my mom saw me do so, but it is possible I moved it and forgot about it, which I've doing a lot recently. Yet that doesn't explain why I remember seeing it. It's really, really, scaring me. I'm kinda freaking out right now, and I know I can't get a definitive answer, I just could really use some speculation about this

Edit: Now that I think about it, between 8-10, the last time that I know for a fact that I saw it, I only got up once, and I did go in that area, but I don't remember walking over far enough to grab rhe hat, as I wouldve had to walk over at least another 5-10 feet

Edit 2: Just had the Hat in my room, right next to a shirt on my bed. I was laying down. I got up once but I can't remember if it was before or after I had placed it here. It's not there. Found it in the same place I thought saw it the other time. I'm scared out of my mind. No one's playing a prank on me, I was with the whole family the whole time, except for my dad but he was in my parents room and never got up once. We only have two hats and one has a much bigger pom pom, so it's very easy to tell the difference between the two. My mom and sister remember seeing the Hat before the movie started so I couldn't have hallucinated the whole thing, it's still possible I hallucinated or misremebered one part, but it was there at one point in time. And for the second one I know for a fact I had it there because I even took a picture, as i was so scared what happened the first time might happen again and i wanted to be skeptical and sure I had it. Now, I don't know when I went in the other room, I just know that i walked to around that area of the couch , talked to my mom, and said told her I was going to bed. I don't remember, at least 100% if I saw the Hat when I went into my room, as my memory there is a bit foggy since I cut the lights off and i tend to forget when i can't see well. But look, I'm really, really scared right now. I don't think this is real anymore, I think this may be a simulation. I know I've had lots of these issues over the last couple months as a result of my depression and anxiety, but those times I had possible explanations, this time I have people who saw it with me and I can't wrap my head around either one
Well, clearly Santa came down the chimney while you weren't looking, took his hat back, and went back up the chimney and back to the north pole.

Either that or you forgot what you really did with it.

Seriously, I have lost track of something that I was sure I knew the exact location of so many times that either I am haunted by an goddamn army of poltergeists, or I'm just an absent-minded fool. It couldn't possibly be the second one. I regret to inform you that it will likely get worse as you get older. I guess poltergeists like old farts.

Last edited by CORed; 20th December 2020 at 02:46 PM.
CORed 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, 03:43 PM   #181
DebunkThisPls
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Originally Posted by*Thermal*
OP is 14. .




We could assume he read the musings of Musk at any point after 2015.

If the anecdote is a genuine attempt to describe actual events, it would seem that the glitch is in the matrix of his mind.

Also, my apologies for the name calling. I mostly just wanted to see if the OP knew who Matlock was.
Sorry I just now saw this. Im confused with the comment you quoted here. I gave the article I read, which was posted in 2018, and said that I saw it at the beginning of the year
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, 03:44 PM   #182
DebunkThisPls
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Your take assumes a physical simulation. As I recall the movie, the humans were literally plugged in to an electronic simulation. Kind of like the Sims. The Sims world didn't build real houses, right? The Matrix shot electrical impulses to the brain that mimiced sensory input. In theory, the machines who created the Matrix did so on a laptop or whatever. No real ages of photons were needed; just the sensory input that convinced the subject that it was there.



Brain processing power? Neural activity? Humans have dramatically larger brains than other animals. Plus my recollection of the movie's premise was that machines and humans were battling it out, so the machines had all these perfectly good humans to harvest power from that they needed to get rid of anyway. Two birds , one stone.



Yeah, I heard that before. And much like calling a banana taped to the wall 'art', they can call it whatever they want. To the rest of us, it is indisputably and by any definition a sci-fi fantasy action movie.

Movie discussion tho: I expected the character Switch to have some kind of different real-world appearance, because of the name and the only one appearing in all white. I read somewhere that she was originally written to be a male in the real world?



Ok, skeptical argument against your criticism here:

Our unreliable narrator claimed that it was both a magazine article and a pop up link, as well as saying he was not sure. He thought it might have been the space.com story he posted earlier, from 2018. Why do you ignore his link and require the article he doesn't cite?

Now, only you are trying to lock him onto the SciAm article from 2016. You also lock him onto reading it immediately upon its original paper publication date. Why? In an America doctor or dentist's office, the waiting rooms are filled with old magazines. Years old. Why do you require that he read that specific article when it first came out?

Say he meant an online magazine, as opposed to a paper publication. Reasonable enough. You are surely aware that he could be linking to magazine articles that are older than he is, no? I can refer to a newspaper article I read from the freaking 1800s, while literally meaning a link to a website archive. Although we have valid criticisms of the OP's claims, this isn't one of them.
I said that it was a pop up add that lead to an online article. I have the link, I don't believe i ever said it was a magazine, at least not a physical one, it was online. Also, thank you for agreeing with me and defending me
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, 04:24 PM   #183
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Also, my apologies for the name calling. I mostly just wanted to see if the OP knew who Matlock was.
Matlock Police is a 70's TV Show in Australia, so some anachronisms don't cross international borders with the same meaning. However I understand what you mean.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Matlock police.jpg (10.0 KB, 49 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, 04:44 PM   #184
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Your take assumes a physical simulation.
You can't make a mathematical simulation of quantum mechanics can you? That's the whole point of "half life" and you can't predict an individual particle's radioactivity. That's why a simulation can't just be mathematical or it wouldn't make sense in the long run.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
As I recall the movie, the humans were literally plugged in to an electronic simulation. Kind of like the Sims. The Sims world didn't build real houses, right?
The simulation was meant to reproduce the real world to all "kept humans" simultaneously, so the same simulation would have to be consistent with all humans simultaneously. Therefore a scientist looking at 13billion year old photons in the USA would have to match the same interference problem to another scientist doing the same in Russia. You can't mathematically predict collapsing dual waveform/ particle interference patterns.


Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Brain processing power? Neural activity? Humans have dramatically larger brains than other animals.
Brains suck energy. They don't generate surplus electricity. Humans get energy from burning oxygen, generally as the end chain of photosynthesis in plants. The whole Matrix story is complete rubbish. and could have used elephants.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Our unreliable narrator claimed that it was both a magazine article and a pop up link, as well as saying he was not sure.
Our OP first told the hat story in a different way two weeks before telling the story again, with changes, and posting that it frightened him 20 minutes earlier. My analysis was sent to AAH.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Say he meant an online magazine, as opposed to a paper publication.
He didn't mention that in his created quantum thread, did he? In fact, he hasn't addressed the article's content at all, despite numerous requests. Perhaps he would like to offer us a summary of its content, now.
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, 04:59 PM   #185
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Your take assumes a physical simulation. As I recall the movie, the humans were literally plugged in to an electronic simulation. Kind of like the Sims. The Sims world didn't build real houses, right? The Matrix shot electrical impulses to the brain that mimiced sensory input. In theory, the machines who created the Matrix did so on a laptop or whatever. No real ages of photons were needed; just the sensory input that convinced the subject that it was there.
I wonder what the "profit margin" would be with such a system? Is there enough electricity produced by a human to power the computer required to create the simulation, not to mention the machine world.

I would think the matrix would require considerable computing power to give each human a unique perspective and allow for interaction. You would think the machines would have just gave everyone the same life to save power. Why do humans need to be entertained in order to produce power anyway? Wouldn't a person in a coma produce the same amount of electricity?
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 20th December 2020, 05:10 PM   #186
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Matlock Police is a 70's TV Show in Australia, so some anachronisms don't cross international borders with the same meaning. However I understand what you mean.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matlock_(TV_ series)

In North America, Matlock is a lawyer who always wins the case.

Last edited by Nakani; 20th December 2020 at 05:14 PM.
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 20th December 2020, 05:17 PM   #187
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by DebunkThisPls View Post
Sorry I just now saw this. Im confused with the comment you quoted here. I gave the article I read, which was posted in 2018, and said that I saw it at the beginning of the year
I was talking to Mathew Ellard.
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 20th December 2020, 05:25 PM   #188
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
You can't make a mathematical simulation of quantum mechanics can you?
A civilisation sufficiently advanced to simulate an entire universe will obviously know a method of simulating QM. After all, we have experimental results confirming QM and we know that it is a necessary component of a universe's function.

The simulation hypothesis assumes that the simulators know how to simulate our universe.

If you could prove mathematically that QM cannot be simulated, that would be disproof of the simulation hypothesis. But I don't know how or if you could do that.
__________________
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, 05:26 PM   #189
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
In North America, Matlock is a lawyer who always wins the case.
That's alright. I knew the show. I worked for Beyond Ltd, the Aussie production company that produced Mythbusters.
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, 05:32 PM   #190
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
A civilisation sufficiently advanced to simulate an entire universe will obviously know a method of simulating QM.
A civilisation that advanced would know to use solar power rather than suck energy from human brains.

However, that's a very bold claim that future technology will predict and imitate the double slit experiment results, when Heisenberg's mathematics says the exact opposite. It's like claiming an advanced civilisation will solve time travel, when there is no evidence for that either.
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, 05:38 PM   #191
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I wonder what the "profit margin" would be with such a system? Is there enough electricity produced by a human to power the computer required to create the simulation, not to mention the machine world.
Humans burn carbon fuel (food) and oxygen ( breathing). We use energy. We don't make energy. Animals only evolved 500 million years ago, because plants converted the atmosphere to burnable oxygen.

That was one of the dumbest things about the Matrix. Why wouldn't the aliens simply make energy from nuclear fusion?
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, 05:56 PM   #192
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
A civilisation that advanced would know to use solar power rather than suck energy from human brains.
That only occurs in a fictional series of movies. It is not a requirement for the simulation hypothesis to be true.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
However, that's a very bold claim that future technology will predict and imitate the double slit experiment results, when Heisenberg's mathematics says the exact opposite. It's like claiming an advanced civilisation will solve time travel, when there is no evidence for that either.
We certainly don't know how to do it. But I don't think you can say that it is impossible in principle.
__________________
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, 06:00 PM   #193
DebunkThisPls
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I was talking to Mathew Ellard.
Oh I apologize, I misunderstood.
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, 06:06 PM   #194
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
That only occurs in a fictional series of movies. It is not a requirement for the simulation hypothesis to be true.
We are trying to apply science to the fictional story about a teleporting Christmas hat, so either we stick to the factual world or we don't. (In the Matrix it is a cat that teleports and makes Neo go "whhhhoooaaa Ted, was that")


Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
We certainly don't know how to do it. But I don't think you can say that it is impossible in principle.
Hang on, Heisenberg specifically says, in principle, we can't do it. We already know you can't do it. It's mathematics.

As for time travel, we know it is not possible or where are the time travellers from the future?
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, 06:46 PM   #195
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Humans burn carbon fuel (food) and oxygen ( breathing). We use energy. We don't make energy.
I never really stopped to think about it. We make electricity but we are using it at the same time, what extra were they harvesting?

Quote:
That was one of the dumbest things about the Matrix. Why wouldn't the sentient machines simply make energy from nuclear fusion?
I'm sure part 4 will explain everything.

Last edited by Nakani; 20th December 2020 at 06:49 PM.
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 20th December 2020, 07:12 PM   #196
Nakani
Muse
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
That only occurs in a fictional series of movies. It is not a requirement for the simulation hypothesis to be true.
Yes, advanced beings could have us locked into a simulation for a multitude of reasons. None which would make much sense though

Last edited by Nakani; 20th December 2020 at 07:21 PM.
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 20th December 2020, 07:33 PM   #197
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
We are trying to apply science to the fictional story about a teleporting Christmas hat, so either we stick to the factual world or we don't. (In the Matrix it is a cat that teleports and makes Neo go "whhhhoooaaa Ted, was that")
The simulation hypothesis doesn't require any of the Matrix to be true. If the universe is a simulation, it does not follow that it necessarily must be powered by sucking energy from living brains. The Matrix movies are irrelevant to this discussion.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Hang on, Heisenberg specifically says, in principle, we can't do it. We already know you can't do it. It's mathematics.
As far as we know we can't do it. But a civilisation capable of creating a computer capable of simulating an entire universe to the level of detail we observe might have worked out a way around it. Remember, if the universe is a simulation, whoever is doing the simulation is not part of the universe as we know it and may not be bound by our universe's laws. The uncertainty principle is part of our universe, and is therefore part of what the simulators programmed. But it doesn't follow that it must be a part of all possible universes.
__________________
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, 07:34 PM   #198
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
Yes, advanced beings could have us locked into a simulation for a multitude of reasons. None which would make much sense though
How about simple curiosity? We do things just to see if we can do them. Why shouldn't they?
__________________
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, 08:28 PM   #199
Matthew Ellard
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
The simulation hypothesis doesn't require any of the Matrix to be true. If the universe is a simulation, it does not follow that it necessarily must be powered by sucking energy from living brains.
I ask either DebunkthisPlease or yourself to write down what you think Elon Musk's simulation hypothesis about the universe actually is.

To me it is like picking up a cat and saying "this is a perfect simulation of a cat"....which means it is just a normal cat.



Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
...But a civilisation capable of creating a computer capable of simulating an entire universe to the level of detail we observe might have worked out a way around it.
To work out the activity of every particle and event in the universe requires a machine bigger than the universe. Every quark or electron or quantum wave's, possible location and velocity in the real universe would have to have a directing equal controlling thingee in the simulator, otherwise we wouldn't have split screen experiment in our real universe. You then have to use another thingee to convert all that information into a simulation that can be loaded into a human.

It's the same logic why God can't control the universe, as he would have to be bigger than the universe. He'd have to have something to monitor every particle and waveform in the universe, something to calculate what should happen next for everything in the universe and something to control everything in the universe.



Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Remember, if the universe is a simulation, whoever is doing the simulation is not part of the universe as we know it and may not be bound by our universe's laws.
Then what is the point in simulating the universe, if it isn't everything and not truly representative? You may as well make a half arsed, contradictory, science fiction film like the Matrix.
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, 09:24 PM   #200
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 ask either DebunkthisPlease or yourself to write down what you think Elon Musk's simulation hypothesis about the universe actually is.
I don't know a great deal about it, but I do know that it's not Musk's hypothesis but was proposed in its current form by the Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom in 2003.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
To me it is like picking up a cat and saying "this is a perfect simulation of a cat"....which means it is just a normal cat.
Okay. That's not the simulation hypothesis.

The Simulation Hypothesis states that if it is possible to simulate universes, then simulated people would so vastly outnumber real people that it is very likely that you are a simulation.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
To work out the activity of every particle and event in the universe requires a machine bigger than the universe. Every quark or electron or quantum wave's, possible location and velocity in the real universe would have to have a directing equal controlling thingee in the simulator, otherwise we wouldn't have split screen experiment in our real universe. You then have to use another thingee to convert all that information into a simulation that can be loaded into a human.

It's the same logic why God can't control the universe, as he would have to be bigger than the universe. He'd have to have something to monitor every particle and waveform in the universe, something to calculate what should happen next for everything in the universe and something to control everything in the universe.

Then what is the point in simulating the universe, if it isn't everything and not truly representative? You may as well make a half arsed, contradictory, science fiction film like the Matrix.
Let me remind you of the actual simulation hypothesis again. The existence of the simulation is assumed a priori and draws a conclusion based on that assumption. It does not go into whether it is possible or not. In Bostrom's words:

Originally Posted by Nick Bostrom
Many works of science fiction as well as some forecasts by serious technologists and futurologists predict that enormous amounts of computing power will be available in the future. Let us suppose for a moment that these predictions are correct. One thing that later generations might do with their super-powerful computers is run detailed simulations of their forebears or of people like their forebears. Because their computers would be so powerful, they could run a great many such simulations. Suppose that these simulated people are conscious (as they would be if the simulations were sufficiently fine-grained and if a certain quite widely accepted position in the philosophy of mind is correct). Then it could be the case that the vast majority of minds like ours do not belong to the original race but rather to people simulated by the advanced descendants of an original race.

...

It is then possible to argue that, if this were the case, we would be rational to think that we are likely among the simulated minds rather than among the original biological ones.

Therefore, if we don't think that we are currently living in a computer simulation, we are not entitled to believe that we will have descendants who will run lots of such simulations of their forebears.
- Nick Bostrom, Are you living in a computer simulation?, 2003.

A quick trip to Wikipedia could have told you all of this. It did to me.
__________________
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
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 10:28 PM.
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.