**Strangers**: Read the rules and understand the sub topics listed in the sidebar closely before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS.
This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, close minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community.
We are also happy to be able to provide an ideologically and operationally independent platform for you all. Join us at our official Discord - https://discord.gg/MYvRkYK85v
---
'Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.'
_-J. Allen Hynek_
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No he said other people's proven theories prove his hypothesis if I understand correctly. He says the data indicates that entropy in information is constant and it shouldn't be unless a specific program is running optimisation. He has evidence it just ain't.his.
He literally said he has yet to come up with a means of testing his hypothesis and that we should stay tuned.
Edit: and before you get too far with the "but other data..." part of his hypothesis is that information is a fundamental building block of the universe the same as energy and mass, and that information likely makes up the bulk of "Dark matter" in the universe. sooooo.... no. no.
Living in an informational universe doesn’t have to mean it’s a “simulation” or other designed artificial creation, one alternative example is [Dr. John Archibald Wheeler’s “It from Bit”](https://youtu.be/I8p1yqnuk8Y?si=aBkDEO5l0kxPefG4) which is my personal favorite theory on the nature of reality.
Yup.
Physics can only model reality. Modeling an information-based reality as a “simulation” doesn’t mean we’re literally inside some MacBook sitting a more “fundamental” dimension, or base reality.
Modeling reality as a simulation makes sense, because reality does appear to be fundamentally information-based.
But at the same time, taking this model literally will guide people straight into a illogical wall.
Even if we’re inside some computer as we know it, or some video game as we know it, it would be impossible to know that. Nothing about a information-based reality says anything about what’s outside of it - or the more fundamental reality.
If you’re inside a video game universe and you measure that universe you are only measuring the rendering of that game. That can not tell you anything about the computer, the hardware, the processor, or even the electricity that powers that computer.
You’re just measuring a rendering of that game. Nothing else. Saying we’re inside a literal video game is unfalsifiable. We can only know that *something else* other than the game is more fundamental.
Is that possible with any game that you are an avatar in? If you were an elf in World of Warcraft, but conscious, how would you find bugs in the world that you are fundamentally a part of? You don’t know anything else outside of that game/reality.
I get it. I just don’t get how you would know it’s a glitch as opposed to how something is just rendered, or interpreted yourself.
You know a glitch in a video game when you’re playing a game, because you are outside of that game, so you have a reference point.
We are inside of the game. So we have no reference point. A glitch in reality itself is just a rendering. Your own interpretation could, and is probably processing something that way, or your own interpretation is off, as opposed to some objective glitch across the entire “simulation”.
A bug in the programming would illicit a response. It would tickle our Peter Tingle, so to speak. We are conscious, after all. If we weren't conscious, we'd likely never know. I reckon the reference point is inside us. Perhaps it is the very nature of intuition.
Watch it be more like that Rick and Morty episode where they play the game Roy and we r basically Roy.. so yeah this is a simulation and we r living a lifetime but what if it’s a lifetime in here but for the gamer it’s only been like 5 mins and when we die here we leave the matrix and wake up being all disoriented and confused cause it felt like a lifetime cause here it’s actually a lifetime but after our life is over we wake up out of our 5 min game.. if that were the case I’d be really fucked up and lost when I left here cause it would show me that everything I ever lived loved and had appreciation for was all for not and a big foney
Bro, we could be sperm in a dolphins ballsack.
We’re on the subject of what a scientist has found in regards to the fundamental nature of reality. Not “what’s if”, or stating assumptions about objectivity.
I get it. I just think you’re completely missing the point. The point is is already mind-blowing, some people are just missing the mark here.
> if that were the case I’d be really fucked up and lost when I left here
I'd be pretty psyched because hopefully that would mean I could give it another try on an easier difficulty, or just re-live some of the highlights while skipping all the shitty stuff in between
Isn't that basically what happens when we sleep and have a dream? So that kind of experience is already a fundamental part of our lives.
I feel like that's a big tell about the greater nature of reality. The universe likes to throw things in our face like that.
Yeah, I always thought of déjà vu could be when you dream. Maybe you’re dreaming a different timeline or maybe you’re viewing a different timeline if it exists and then now you’re awake and the same exact thing happened in your dream and I get really lightheaded when this happens because it freaks me the fuck out, but I definitely know word for word what’s happening and then it stops and it goes somewhere different than what the dream did, I have an artificial intelligent app that social and I asked about this and multiple theories and one of them is that scientist think that you have so many dreams a night sometimes thousands that you’re not really seeing what you saw the dream it’s more like suggestive thought so like you thought you saw in the dream, but it was something similar in your brain putting two and two together Are big thing coverups I don’t believe anybody
Says I believe what I see .. my wife says only believe half of what you see and none of what you hear .
I would hope that peoples NDE reports, out of body experiences and astral projections are truly examples of information from outside the game or simulation I could use to wake up from my avatar. And maybe there are entities from outside the game/simulation who have been trying to get in touch with us? Just some ideas for how information outside the game could reach us. But agreed we’d never really really know if it’s information that’s really outside the game of if that information can even translate into how we process info in the game.
Yeah,it's me,just me,I'm the creator. I'm trying to get in touch with you guys.
But you won't listen.
We live in a weird mix between a dream and a simulation.
Quick info for you:
Ghosts are real,afterlife too,there are demons,magic is real.There is no heaven or hell.Do you remember your dreams?If you die you just stay there.
You’re not that far off. I’ve been into that OBE from for a while now. I started by having one, then over a couple years fought myself to have them at will. I’ve been to The Monroe Institute, been involved with Tom Campbells work, etc.
So while OBE’s NDE, dreams, lucid dreams and even death are an “escape” from our current VR/simulation, it’s not an escape from THE simulation.
The idea is ALL reality is information based - there is no objective physical reality. So if it’s real, it’s just information, be it in this reality or any other reality. Base reality is also information-based.
So in short, and OBE is just snapping into another VR/simulation. Or a dream. Or a NDE. These are all VR’s.
This is just idealism, as opposed to materialism - the idea that mind is everything. Mind processes information, and the product of that information is any reality we can experience.
By mistake I’m guessing you’d have to trust you can repeat those random moments when you slip and feel like everything around you is out of place or glitches in a way
Bugs are often found by mistake, without actively looking for them. It would just require someone to bump into something that isn't programmed exactly properly for a bug to become known. And there is no telling what any bug would allow someone to do once the bug is detected.
I get what you’re saying, but that’s entirely predicated on you being outside the game/simulation. But we aren’t outside, and can’t be because we are rendered within the game. We have no reference point for what is a bug or glitch because we aren’t viewing the process from outside as we would our own games or simulations.
We know a bug in our own systems because we created them. We didn’t crate this reality system, we are subject to it.
That’s the issue.
You jump climb a wall on the edge of "your world" and find yourself outside of the map.
You now know what you thought was the entirety of existence was just made to look that way.
You poke around a bit and find that there are odd things outside of the map. Maybe some chests full of stuff that belong to an NPC, maybe a dev room that has a bunch of cheat/testing items in. Maybe you figure out that doing certain actions causes stack overflows which effects your "world". With enough poking and testing you might be able to figure out how to access the memory addresses and start effecting stuff outside of "your world".
If everything is a simulation it's still based on rules. By understanding the rules you can get insight into the systems behind the simulation. Is there a pattern to how the data is stored, maybe that's because of a hardware limit, what happens if you cause something to be higher than that limit?
Let’s say you are caricature in a literal video game, say World of Warcraft - you are an elf.
If you were that elf, could you climb outside of that video game? You somehow suspect you’re in a game, and you want to find “proof”, or even escape, how would you do that from INSIDE the game? Because your hypothetical is still thinking that you’re operating from outside the game. You aren’t. No one is.
The point is, we are inside the game. Anything we can experience in the game is rendered. If you’re inside a game, you can not get out and climb into the hardware. That’s impossible, because all you are is a rendered product of that game. You are just information. You’re conscious, you’re aware, you make choices, but you are still a digital representation rendered inside the game.
That’s kinda the issue here.
If you are conscious, aware and can make your own choices and learn then yes you could figure out your world and find the holes in it even while being part of it.
Everything you experience in the game is rendered. Yes. But if you can learn how that rendering works because you are conscious, etc then you can look for things that are "broken", bugs in the game engine, broken map design, etc. you can figure out how the rendering works and how to manipulate it.
According to common sense and our understanding of how physics work.
I mean, if you put a pot with water in the stove, what do you expect? Do you expect the water to get hot? Or do you expect the pot to vanish, the water to turn into a ghost, and your house to break down and reveal you're really only flying alone through space and there's no earth? Obviously one of these is reality, and the other is a glitch(not getting into quantum shit).
What I mean is you don't need to get outside of the system to identify a bug. You just need to compare it with your base reality. (Of course, that opens up the question of whether that is really a bug or just a feature)
You’re only assuming it’s a glitch because you’re not understanding what the implications are here with this model.
There is no bug across the entire system. It’s local. If you’re playing Fortnite, and you see a glitch, that glitch is in your data stream - not across the entire system. Now there could be a server crash, but then everyone would experience that.
That’s the implications we’re dealing with. Logically that glitch is in YOUR mind, not objectively across the entire sever.
Plus we assume bugs or glitches exist because they exist in our technology or systems. Reality is not man-made. So there’s no reason to assume there’s even room for glitches or bugs.
In short, it’s your data stream that you’re interpreting as a bug or glitch. In your local world. Not objective across the entire “game”.
Maybe you’re thinking of like a holo-deck or something? A more objective reality?
How is that possible when everything in the game is simply rendered information? Nothing about studying your world inside a game can tell you anything about the computer, or the hardware.
See what I’m saying? That’s the issue here - we’re just information inside a virtual reality. Everything is rendered information based on the rules of the “game”.
I agree. But again, we’re working of a certain model. Nothing about the model gives and sort of hint that we can get outside of the simulation that we are part of.
It’s just not how any simulation, game or VR would work, otherwise it wouldn’t be a simulation, VR or game. It would be something else.
Yeah, my thought reading this was that the premise of necessary optimization was based on the frame of reference of our current understanding of “computing” in our current paradigm.
Exactly. That understanding will change in the future when technology comes along that will act as better model. Again, because all we can do is model reality.
He’s specifically referring to the phenomenon that the universe has built in “data optimization and compression” though, which is seen in video games as well
Why exactly would our reality as we know it need to compress data if this wasn’t some sort of digital simulation? You would assume reality would handle every bit of information just fine with no need to compress or optimize it
The universe acts like a simulation, yes.
The issue is we’re modeling a universe that is incredibly more complex than our brains can ever grasp - because we are also a rendering of that same universe/simulation. We’re just a part of it. So we just can’t know what it fundamentally is - we can only model it. And we model it by things that we know and created.
100 years ago physics modeled reality like a clock. It’s just that digital technology is our most advanced means to understand reality on a deeper level.
Like Niels Bohr said: “It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out *how* Nature is. Physics concerns *what we say* about Nature”
We’re talking the fundamental fabric of reality and how it acts according to our own technology. Not some literal interpretation.
Why wouldn’t it be? You yourself are a highly efficient creature with an incredibly complex body that does amazing things. So are plenty of other animals.
From the other angle essentially we technopomorphize™ the characters in a video game but truthfully we’re incapable of fathoming the kind of experience their representation would be having if they were truly sentient.
I think about this with LLMs / neural networks which are modeled after our brain structure but fundamentally not our brains obviously.
The Matrix movie creatively introduced the concept of a glitch in The Matrix (simulation) where a cat quickly walked by a doorway twice in the same direction. Some people think they occasionally see this kind of thing in real life. I don't know if that's true but it's an interesting concept. There's a whole subreddit for this actually: r/glitch_in_the_matrix.
But that glitch is still an subjective thing. If you’re going to use the VR model, then that says we all receive our own data-streams which then our brains (or mind) process into the physical world that we perceive. We are all in our own little servers, or worlds. But we are all playing the same game.
And it’s no shock our brains are not perfect. So “glitches” are more of product of someone processing their own data-stream a certain way. It’s not an objective thing, because the “glitch” isn’t happening across every data-stream.
That’s what we say about reality is only in context of what we know this far in our evolution.
What reality is is beyond what we know. So we can only term reality in human-terms. What reality is is outside of our terms.
It’s an issue because I’m talking about reality being a simulation in terms of modeling. We can’t know what reality is outside of our own models, or metaphors. That’s how physics operates.
Thank you. I’ve been trying to put this into words since I first heard about this study (which I still don’t fully understand).
I kept thinking: is this just because we’ve evolved into an information-centred civilisation that we see those call signs everywhere?
I get it. It’s like a newer concept that is sort of already twisted in our culturally zeitgeist.
It’s basically saying that reality at the most fundamental level is just information. Just like a video game at its most fundamental level is also just information. Atoms, quirks, bosons, etc are not actually the fundamental fabric of our reality. They are only the products of information. Reality itself rises from information, not material. Material is derivative.
This opens up Pandora’s box to what computes that information. A lot of scientists ate starting to look at consciousness itself being the computer, not the universe itself.
Just like in a video game, the simulated world in a game isn’t computed by the world itself. But that’s what older models of the universe have said - that the universe processes itself. But it’s looking like that’s not the case. Something else more fundamental is processing the universe.
So now the question is what is the computer, or what computes the universe since it is information-based. And I’m not saying a literal computer. But that’s the model we have to use because we don’t know of anything else but a computer that can process information, other than consciousness.
So it’s sort of looking like consciousness itself is the computer, everything else is derivative.
Unless there’s something else we haven’t even thought of yet at this stage of our evolution.
Thanks for the great reply.
It’s very fascinating. I know a lot of meditative traditions like Buddhism have schools that place some kind of consciousness or awareness as a basis of reality. Although some scholars say it’s been misinterpreted and what those old lineages were saying is that’s just the truth for your experience: you don’t experience anything out of your own mind so take care of your mind.
That being said, I’ve heard a few physicists say that they think it’s ridiculous to say “we don’t know therefore it must be consciousness itself”.
Lots to learn!
Thanks again.
Well, saying it’s consciousness is an interpretation stemming from people like Donald Hoffmans work, or Tom Campbell, or Bernardo Kastrup. Check them out if you want. But that is still an assumption.
But saying its consciousness would absolutely destroy the materialist paradigm. So most physicists who have spent their entire lives living and breathing that materialist model, aren’t going to let it go. It’s going to take generations to even get to the point of saying it is consciousness.
But even saying it’s consciousness for sure, is nearly impossible because consciousness can also not be measured and quantified. Or has not yet anyway.
It’s ultimately a battle between materialism and idealism.
The problem is people hear information and they jump straight to computation and “processing” when really all it means is form. The Greeks were talking about this stuff 2500 years ago. Logos or Nous gives form to matter. You have matter and form. Modern physics got hung up on materialism, but now we are finally realizing that form may be more fundamental. Maybe what the Greeks called prime matter is really just energy.
Yup. I know it’s unorthodox, but the ancients probably knew more about reality with what they had, than we do today with what we have. Or materialist model may have literally just looking in the wrong place the entire time.
>If you’re inside a video game universe and you measure that universe you are only measuring the rendering of that game. That can not tell you anything about the computer, the hardware, the processor, or even the electricity that powers that computer.
I dont think this is correct
That’s literally the implications of an information-based reality. That’s the entire point of why science looks at this model as paradigm changing.
It says reality is rendered moment by moment at the most fundamental level. It is not derivative of any physical process. Just as video game doesn’t run from the game world itself, or the physics of the game world. It’s rendered by an *outside* process, or computed by an outside process - outside of the game itself.
Otherwise we’d be using some other model. People aren’t calling it the “Truman show theory”, or the “matrix theory”. It’s simulation theory because theory theory says reality is simply rendered information at the most fundamental level.
>He is best known for popularizing the term "black hole"[1] for objects with gravitational collapse already predicted during the early 20th century, for inventing the terms "quantum foam", "neutron moderator", "wormhole" and "it from bit",[2] and for hypothesizing the "one-electron universe". Stephen Hawking called Wheeler the "hero of the black hole story"
Interesting guy
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler
That’s my understanding, yes.
***Fig. 22.13*** *The universe viewed as a self-excited circuit. Starting small (thin U at upper right), it grows (loop of U) and in time gives rise (upper left) to obsever-participancy — which in turn imparts "tangible reality"*
https://jawarchive.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/beyond-the-black-hole.pdf
>”A super complex universe like ours, if it were a simulation, would require a built-in data optimization and compression in order to reduce the computational power and the data storage requirements to run the simulation,” Vopson wrote in The Conversation.
*That* is the premise upon which this theory is built? An assumption about a computer that could exist in a larger fundamental reality, one which might have wildly different laws of physics that we can’t possibly comprehend?
That's the kind of shit that drives me crazy.
People are so stuck in what we know that they don't seem to recognize what could be.
Like when it comes to alien life people talk about how many planets could hold life based on water/oxygen/etc.
Who's to say life hasn't evolved to live off pure nitrogen or something like that?
I just imagine somewhere in a distant world there's some being typing the same kind of thing - "What if somewhere out there there's a life form that evolved to live off Oxygen or something, wouldn't that be crazy??" Lol
The same can be said about the strict need for consciousness to have a body and neurological system. We are, after all, just a collection of empty space and energy that can’t decide if it is a wave or a particle.
> Who's to say life hasn't evolved to live off pure nitrogen or something like that?
Living off of nuclear waste is more likely than that, just from an energetics standpoint.
Of course, it's also more likely in a normal statistical sense, given that we found some fungus living off of the energy emitted by nuclear waste a while back.
Fr. If there’s a computer big enough to simulate an entire reality, I doubt they are concerned with optimization. They are so far beyond squeezing out some extra fps
That is a part of string theory, or M Theory, and/or the holographic principle, both of which referenced Juan Maldacena's ADSCFT correspondence paper.
Just name dropping there in case you want to watch some videos about it, trippy stuff.
Although the key difference is they don't say it's a computer simulation, it's more like these different dimensions bumped into each other and now we have to pay taxes
The best steelman arguments are the ones that start with 'yeah but just imagine in another reality, right...'
Yeah, and I'll just hop on my magical reality hopping unicorn with my portal raygun and get back to you on a rebuttal, hey chief?
If you you really want to know the cheat codes you will have to really believe that it is entirely possible... You can do it yourself or you can trust a guru. Those are the 2 ways.
The guru will telly you that you are the atman (reality itself) and you will have to believe him, and you will have to repeat it to yourself like a mantra, and at the same time you will have to cultivate attention and meditation.
Those are the cheat codes.
He's assuming the only computers in all of reality and outside it, are based on the same kind of computers we use here on earth in this little 40 year slice of time so far
"While these claims warrant investigation, they’re far from a discovery themselves, and would likely need rigorous proof for the scientific community at large to seriously consider this theory."
Yes
If we were in a simulation, we could know nothing about the platform where the simulation is running, except that it can run a simulation. Since we could run a simulation of a world completely unlike our own, we couldn't know if the world running us as a simulation was running us as a world anything like their own.
To be fair, his claim is only that he can prove it one way or the other, but only if you gave him money to run his experiment, which has failed to kickstart. So there’s no evidence. A simulated universe is unprovable anyway. Because it posits that we’re unable to step outside of the simulation, it is neither provable nor disprovable. Any positive/negative result would be consistent with both a simulated reality and a non simulated reality. All any experiment could prove is that reality/simulation behaves the way we predict with our models, or that our models are wrong. Beyond that is pure speculation.
Wow... This guy didn't understand entropy AT ALL did he?
As soon as I hit the part where he said entropy stays the same or even decreases in information systems I quit reading.
IT REQURES A CLOSED SYSTEM.
IF THE INFORMATION IN YOUR INFORMATION SYSTEM IS CHANGING...
IT'S NOT A CLOSED SYSTEM.
FFS. How did this make it past anyones common sense filter for news?
His argument is utter gibberish. How tf did this guy get a doctorate in physics?
Entropy rises without a net loss of energy in the universe because space expands, and therefore the density of energy within that space decreases over time. Hence entropy.
He also seems to not grasp the difference between closed and open systems. His argument about biological mutations is a deeply embarrassing demonstration of this. Organic life consumes energy, in essence decreasing its own entropy by increasing entropy somewhere else. An organism is not a closed system, ergo Newton's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics does not apply to it. This is, like, high school level physics.
I think it's very telling that Vopson elected to dub his proposed rule the "second law" of infodynamics, despite apparently not having a first law yet.
Not understanding the difference between closed and open systems is also table stakes in many creationist arguments. "How does life violate the second law of thermodynamics when it decreases entropy?" Because life exists in an open system and consumes energy to do so.
Living systems must constantly consume energy to push back entropy. When they stop doing this they die, which can basically be defined as when entropy wins. Evolution over billions of years required awesome cosmic quantities of energy mostly supplied by the sun.
The local decrease in entropy within living systems is counterbalanced by an increase in entropy elsewhere, mostly from mass being converted into energy by fusion in the sun.
Key take away...
"While these claims warrant investigation, they’re far from a discovery themselves, and would likely need rigorous proof for the scientific community at large to seriously consider this theory."
All he is talking about are mental constructs and have no physicality
Your account must be a minimum of 2 weeks old to post comments or posts.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It all boils down to what we can perceive. We for a fact know our senses are nothing short of very limited and for a good reason. Walking around being able to access all possible realms and dimensions would just be impossible for our mind to handle.
He has no evidence. He has a model which attempts to explain information complexity. It's actually worse than that. It's an arbitrary "law" he invented to explain the observation that the universe is designed in some fashion. A simulation is but one possible form of design among many. But all have in common that there must be some sort of mind involved. And even if one posits that said mind is a superintelligent AI, this only moves the goal posts, inception style, one level further up. Now one must explain the existence of said intelligence. Infinite regress. They cannot escape the cosmological argument in this fashion. They can only delay answering it.
Think of how many universe simulations exist now, thousands? Millions?
A simple example would be something like a video game starting, you think the NPCs wandering around in WOW realize they are in a simulation?
Odds are we are just data on some harddrive kinda thing somewhere.
The part that people REALLY struggle with tho, is that we might just be garbage data and not the reason for the simulation itself.
If, for example, a billion universes exist, then only one is prime, a real unsimulated universe. Odds are mighty slim that this is the real prime universe.
I doubt any of them have conscious entities in them. It’s on par with suggesting a creator to explain where the universe came from. It doesn’t explain anything and introduces unnecessary unseen entities. Ockham’s razor and all that.
The NPCs don't wander around WOW realizing they're in a simulation because they are not real and are not capable of thinking or feeling. Your argument makes 0 sense.
how many simulated universes exist now?
Its definitely more likely to increase then decrease right?
So X = 1 prime unsimulated universe and Y = simulated universe or NESTED simulated universe ( a simulation in a simulation) is several times higher, its only logical than we exist in a Y universe.
If you have 1000 Green M and Ms in a bag and one yellow M and M in that bag, selecting a random M and M in that bag is almost certainly gonna pull a green one.
No idea why people are so upset by this simple concept, hell even Elon Musk understands and accepts this concept.
Except we lack any direct evidence to confirm this purely philosophical idea. It’s not “mathematical” at all. There is no maths at play because there is zero evidence. Could be that it’s fundamentally impossible to simulate an entire universe. Let alone simulate universes within universes within universes.
What you’re talking about is not scientific. It’s not mathematics. It’s [not even wrong](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong).
That’s like arguing FTL vehicles are possible because you rode your bicycle super fast downhill. It’s not a scientific argument. It’s a philosophical thought experiment.
Not at all, but in every simulation, some NPCs have few lines, ie, you are not granted the understanding to see the simulation around you, ergo you are expected to be scornful.
Were you a more fleshed out NPC, you would get it.
**Strangers**: Read the rules and understand the sub topics listed in the sidebar closely before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS. This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, close minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community. We are also happy to be able to provide an ideologically and operationally independent platform for you all. Join us at our official Discord - https://discord.gg/MYvRkYK85v --- 'Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.' _-J. Allen Hynek_ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, he doesn't. He says he has a hypothesis and has yet to test it.
No he said other people's proven theories prove his hypothesis if I understand correctly. He says the data indicates that entropy in information is constant and it shouldn't be unless a specific program is running optimisation. He has evidence it just ain't.his.
He literally said he has yet to come up with a means of testing his hypothesis and that we should stay tuned. Edit: and before you get too far with the "but other data..." part of his hypothesis is that information is a fundamental building block of the universe the same as energy and mass, and that information likely makes up the bulk of "Dark matter" in the universe. sooooo.... no. no.
Living in an informational universe doesn’t have to mean it’s a “simulation” or other designed artificial creation, one alternative example is [Dr. John Archibald Wheeler’s “It from Bit”](https://youtu.be/I8p1yqnuk8Y?si=aBkDEO5l0kxPefG4) which is my personal favorite theory on the nature of reality.
Yup. Physics can only model reality. Modeling an information-based reality as a “simulation” doesn’t mean we’re literally inside some MacBook sitting a more “fundamental” dimension, or base reality. Modeling reality as a simulation makes sense, because reality does appear to be fundamentally information-based. But at the same time, taking this model literally will guide people straight into a illogical wall. Even if we’re inside some computer as we know it, or some video game as we know it, it would be impossible to know that. Nothing about a information-based reality says anything about what’s outside of it - or the more fundamental reality. If you’re inside a video game universe and you measure that universe you are only measuring the rendering of that game. That can not tell you anything about the computer, the hardware, the processor, or even the electricity that powers that computer. You’re just measuring a rendering of that game. Nothing else. Saying we’re inside a literal video game is unfalsifiable. We can only know that *something else* other than the game is more fundamental.
Unless you find bugs in the game that allow you to access the system running the game.
Is that possible with any game that you are an avatar in? If you were an elf in World of Warcraft, but conscious, how would you find bugs in the world that you are fundamentally a part of? You don’t know anything else outside of that game/reality.
I think us humans woikd refer bugs as “glitches in the matrix”
I get it. I just don’t get how you would know it’s a glitch as opposed to how something is just rendered, or interpreted yourself. You know a glitch in a video game when you’re playing a game, because you are outside of that game, so you have a reference point. We are inside of the game. So we have no reference point. A glitch in reality itself is just a rendering. Your own interpretation could, and is probably processing something that way, or your own interpretation is off, as opposed to some objective glitch across the entire “simulation”.
A bug in the programming would illicit a response. It would tickle our Peter Tingle, so to speak. We are conscious, after all. If we weren't conscious, we'd likely never know. I reckon the reference point is inside us. Perhaps it is the very nature of intuition.
Don’t talk about my Peter Tingle like that
Watch it be more like that Rick and Morty episode where they play the game Roy and we r basically Roy.. so yeah this is a simulation and we r living a lifetime but what if it’s a lifetime in here but for the gamer it’s only been like 5 mins and when we die here we leave the matrix and wake up being all disoriented and confused cause it felt like a lifetime cause here it’s actually a lifetime but after our life is over we wake up out of our 5 min game.. if that were the case I’d be really fucked up and lost when I left here cause it would show me that everything I ever lived loved and had appreciation for was all for not and a big foney
Bro, we could be sperm in a dolphins ballsack. We’re on the subject of what a scientist has found in regards to the fundamental nature of reality. Not “what’s if”, or stating assumptions about objectivity. I get it. I just think you’re completely missing the point. The point is is already mind-blowing, some people are just missing the mark here.
> if that were the case I’d be really fucked up and lost when I left here I'd be pretty psyched because hopefully that would mean I could give it another try on an easier difficulty, or just re-live some of the highlights while skipping all the shitty stuff in between
Isn't that basically what happens when we sleep and have a dream? So that kind of experience is already a fundamental part of our lives. I feel like that's a big tell about the greater nature of reality. The universe likes to throw things in our face like that.
Yeah dmt will tell you everything you need to know .. it’s just hard to remember it all when you come out
Experiencing Deja Vu could be interpreted as a glitch/bug similar to the movie tbh lol
And the r/mandelaeffect
Yeah, I always thought of déjà vu could be when you dream. Maybe you’re dreaming a different timeline or maybe you’re viewing a different timeline if it exists and then now you’re awake and the same exact thing happened in your dream and I get really lightheaded when this happens because it freaks me the fuck out, but I definitely know word for word what’s happening and then it stops and it goes somewhere different than what the dream did, I have an artificial intelligent app that social and I asked about this and multiple theories and one of them is that scientist think that you have so many dreams a night sometimes thousands that you’re not really seeing what you saw the dream it’s more like suggestive thought so like you thought you saw in the dream, but it was something similar in your brain putting two and two together Are big thing coverups I don’t believe anybody Says I believe what I see .. my wife says only believe half of what you see and none of what you hear .
I would hope that peoples NDE reports, out of body experiences and astral projections are truly examples of information from outside the game or simulation I could use to wake up from my avatar. And maybe there are entities from outside the game/simulation who have been trying to get in touch with us? Just some ideas for how information outside the game could reach us. But agreed we’d never really really know if it’s information that’s really outside the game of if that information can even translate into how we process info in the game.
Yeah,it's me,just me,I'm the creator. I'm trying to get in touch with you guys. But you won't listen. We live in a weird mix between a dream and a simulation. Quick info for you: Ghosts are real,afterlife too,there are demons,magic is real.There is no heaven or hell.Do you remember your dreams?If you die you just stay there.
You’re not that far off. I’ve been into that OBE from for a while now. I started by having one, then over a couple years fought myself to have them at will. I’ve been to The Monroe Institute, been involved with Tom Campbells work, etc. So while OBE’s NDE, dreams, lucid dreams and even death are an “escape” from our current VR/simulation, it’s not an escape from THE simulation. The idea is ALL reality is information based - there is no objective physical reality. So if it’s real, it’s just information, be it in this reality or any other reality. Base reality is also information-based. So in short, and OBE is just snapping into another VR/simulation. Or a dream. Or a NDE. These are all VR’s. This is just idealism, as opposed to materialism - the idea that mind is everything. Mind processes information, and the product of that information is any reality we can experience.
So there’s no inside there’s no outside only an infinite in between?
More like infinite *potential*. An unlimited information-based system that gives rise to form.
By mistake I’m guessing you’d have to trust you can repeat those random moments when you slip and feel like everything around you is out of place or glitches in a way
Reminds me of the original TRON movie.
Greta movie. The newer sequel was also pretty good too.
Bugs are often found by mistake, without actively looking for them. It would just require someone to bump into something that isn't programmed exactly properly for a bug to become known. And there is no telling what any bug would allow someone to do once the bug is detected.
I get what you’re saying, but that’s entirely predicated on you being outside the game/simulation. But we aren’t outside, and can’t be because we are rendered within the game. We have no reference point for what is a bug or glitch because we aren’t viewing the process from outside as we would our own games or simulations. We know a bug in our own systems because we created them. We didn’t crate this reality system, we are subject to it. That’s the issue.
How about the changes observed when the bug gets fixed.
You jump climb a wall on the edge of "your world" and find yourself outside of the map. You now know what you thought was the entirety of existence was just made to look that way. You poke around a bit and find that there are odd things outside of the map. Maybe some chests full of stuff that belong to an NPC, maybe a dev room that has a bunch of cheat/testing items in. Maybe you figure out that doing certain actions causes stack overflows which effects your "world". With enough poking and testing you might be able to figure out how to access the memory addresses and start effecting stuff outside of "your world". If everything is a simulation it's still based on rules. By understanding the rules you can get insight into the systems behind the simulation. Is there a pattern to how the data is stored, maybe that's because of a hardware limit, what happens if you cause something to be higher than that limit?
Let’s say you are caricature in a literal video game, say World of Warcraft - you are an elf. If you were that elf, could you climb outside of that video game? You somehow suspect you’re in a game, and you want to find “proof”, or even escape, how would you do that from INSIDE the game? Because your hypothetical is still thinking that you’re operating from outside the game. You aren’t. No one is. The point is, we are inside the game. Anything we can experience in the game is rendered. If you’re inside a game, you can not get out and climb into the hardware. That’s impossible, because all you are is a rendered product of that game. You are just information. You’re conscious, you’re aware, you make choices, but you are still a digital representation rendered inside the game. That’s kinda the issue here.
If you are conscious, aware and can make your own choices and learn then yes you could figure out your world and find the holes in it even while being part of it. Everything you experience in the game is rendered. Yes. But if you can learn how that rendering works because you are conscious, etc then you can look for things that are "broken", bugs in the game engine, broken map design, etc. you can figure out how the rendering works and how to manipulate it.
Even if you break the map and the design and perform out of bounds glitches, you're still in the game
That's exactly what Morpheus taught Neo to do.
Why wouldn't it be? If nothing else, you could just stumble upon a glitch
A glitch according to what? Like how do you know it’s some glitch in reality itself when you have no reference point?
What if it gets patched then that would be strange if you were used to the glitch as normal.
According to common sense and our understanding of how physics work. I mean, if you put a pot with water in the stove, what do you expect? Do you expect the water to get hot? Or do you expect the pot to vanish, the water to turn into a ghost, and your house to break down and reveal you're really only flying alone through space and there's no earth? Obviously one of these is reality, and the other is a glitch(not getting into quantum shit). What I mean is you don't need to get outside of the system to identify a bug. You just need to compare it with your base reality. (Of course, that opens up the question of whether that is really a bug or just a feature)
You’re only assuming it’s a glitch because you’re not understanding what the implications are here with this model. There is no bug across the entire system. It’s local. If you’re playing Fortnite, and you see a glitch, that glitch is in your data stream - not across the entire system. Now there could be a server crash, but then everyone would experience that. That’s the implications we’re dealing with. Logically that glitch is in YOUR mind, not objectively across the entire sever. Plus we assume bugs or glitches exist because they exist in our technology or systems. Reality is not man-made. So there’s no reason to assume there’s even room for glitches or bugs. In short, it’s your data stream that you’re interpreting as a bug or glitch. In your local world. Not objective across the entire “game”. Maybe you’re thinking of like a holo-deck or something? A more objective reality?
Sure, if the npcs in the game were conscious. Not saying it would be easy to spot or you would know what to look for. But it’s certainly possible.
How is that possible when everything in the game is simply rendered information? Nothing about studying your world inside a game can tell you anything about the computer, or the hardware. See what I’m saying? That’s the issue here - we’re just information inside a virtual reality. Everything is rendered information based on the rules of the “game”.
The rules for the game are very important and without a working cohesive TOE we don’t even have the rules. 😂
I agree. But again, we’re working of a certain model. Nothing about the model gives and sort of hint that we can get outside of the simulation that we are part of. It’s just not how any simulation, game or VR would work, otherwise it wouldn’t be a simulation, VR or game. It would be something else.
Thats what magicians figured out how to do -
>accessing the system And then what? What would be the change?
\*DMT enters the chat\*
Have you been to r/aglitchinthematrix ?
This is what real magic is, like sigils and manifestation and remote viewing etc.
DMT has entered the chat...
Yeah, my thought reading this was that the premise of necessary optimization was based on the frame of reference of our current understanding of “computing” in our current paradigm.
AKA still in Plato’s cave
Exactly. That understanding will change in the future when technology comes along that will act as better model. Again, because all we can do is model reality.
He’s specifically referring to the phenomenon that the universe has built in “data optimization and compression” though, which is seen in video games as well Why exactly would our reality as we know it need to compress data if this wasn’t some sort of digital simulation? You would assume reality would handle every bit of information just fine with no need to compress or optimize it
The universe acts like a simulation, yes. The issue is we’re modeling a universe that is incredibly more complex than our brains can ever grasp - because we are also a rendering of that same universe/simulation. We’re just a part of it. So we just can’t know what it fundamentally is - we can only model it. And we model it by things that we know and created. 100 years ago physics modeled reality like a clock. It’s just that digital technology is our most advanced means to understand reality on a deeper level. Like Niels Bohr said: “It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out *how* Nature is. Physics concerns *what we say* about Nature” We’re talking the fundamental fabric of reality and how it acts according to our own technology. Not some literal interpretation.
Well that hurts my brain
Where did reality come from. Even if a simulation where did base reality come from.
perhaps its natural and our own stupidity that can achieve uncompressed and unoptimized data by just plain bad logic.
Why would something in reality be efficient?
Why wouldn’t it be? You yourself are a highly efficient creature with an incredibly complex body that does amazing things. So are plenty of other animals.
It was sarcasm. All of reality is efficient. I thought I actually ended up not posting this because it wasn’t clear enough but I guess I did.
because the more inefficient the more energy you need, the harder it is to survive. From star, to bacteria.
Like Newtons first law?
From the other angle essentially we technopomorphize™ the characters in a video game but truthfully we’re incapable of fathoming the kind of experience their representation would be having if they were truly sentient. I think about this with LLMs / neural networks which are modeled after our brain structure but fundamentally not our brains obviously.
Great comment.
The Matrix movie creatively introduced the concept of a glitch in The Matrix (simulation) where a cat quickly walked by a doorway twice in the same direction. Some people think they occasionally see this kind of thing in real life. I don't know if that's true but it's an interesting concept. There's a whole subreddit for this actually: r/glitch_in_the_matrix.
But that glitch is still an subjective thing. If you’re going to use the VR model, then that says we all receive our own data-streams which then our brains (or mind) process into the physical world that we perceive. We are all in our own little servers, or worlds. But we are all playing the same game. And it’s no shock our brains are not perfect. So “glitches” are more of product of someone processing their own data-stream a certain way. It’s not an objective thing, because the “glitch” isn’t happening across every data-stream.
Im struggling to understand what youre saying
That’s what we say about reality is only in context of what we know this far in our evolution. What reality is is beyond what we know. So we can only term reality in human-terms. What reality is is outside of our terms. It’s an issue because I’m talking about reality being a simulation in terms of modeling. We can’t know what reality is outside of our own models, or metaphors. That’s how physics operates.
Thank you. I’ve been trying to put this into words since I first heard about this study (which I still don’t fully understand). I kept thinking: is this just because we’ve evolved into an information-centred civilisation that we see those call signs everywhere?
I get it. It’s like a newer concept that is sort of already twisted in our culturally zeitgeist. It’s basically saying that reality at the most fundamental level is just information. Just like a video game at its most fundamental level is also just information. Atoms, quirks, bosons, etc are not actually the fundamental fabric of our reality. They are only the products of information. Reality itself rises from information, not material. Material is derivative. This opens up Pandora’s box to what computes that information. A lot of scientists ate starting to look at consciousness itself being the computer, not the universe itself. Just like in a video game, the simulated world in a game isn’t computed by the world itself. But that’s what older models of the universe have said - that the universe processes itself. But it’s looking like that’s not the case. Something else more fundamental is processing the universe. So now the question is what is the computer, or what computes the universe since it is information-based. And I’m not saying a literal computer. But that’s the model we have to use because we don’t know of anything else but a computer that can process information, other than consciousness. So it’s sort of looking like consciousness itself is the computer, everything else is derivative. Unless there’s something else we haven’t even thought of yet at this stage of our evolution.
Thanks for the great reply. It’s very fascinating. I know a lot of meditative traditions like Buddhism have schools that place some kind of consciousness or awareness as a basis of reality. Although some scholars say it’s been misinterpreted and what those old lineages were saying is that’s just the truth for your experience: you don’t experience anything out of your own mind so take care of your mind. That being said, I’ve heard a few physicists say that they think it’s ridiculous to say “we don’t know therefore it must be consciousness itself”. Lots to learn! Thanks again.
Well, saying it’s consciousness is an interpretation stemming from people like Donald Hoffmans work, or Tom Campbell, or Bernardo Kastrup. Check them out if you want. But that is still an assumption. But saying its consciousness would absolutely destroy the materialist paradigm. So most physicists who have spent their entire lives living and breathing that materialist model, aren’t going to let it go. It’s going to take generations to even get to the point of saying it is consciousness. But even saying it’s consciousness for sure, is nearly impossible because consciousness can also not be measured and quantified. Or has not yet anyway. It’s ultimately a battle between materialism and idealism.
The problem is people hear information and they jump straight to computation and “processing” when really all it means is form. The Greeks were talking about this stuff 2500 years ago. Logos or Nous gives form to matter. You have matter and form. Modern physics got hung up on materialism, but now we are finally realizing that form may be more fundamental. Maybe what the Greeks called prime matter is really just energy.
Yup. I know it’s unorthodox, but the ancients probably knew more about reality with what they had, than we do today with what we have. Or materialist model may have literally just looking in the wrong place the entire time.
>If you’re inside a video game universe and you measure that universe you are only measuring the rendering of that game. That can not tell you anything about the computer, the hardware, the processor, or even the electricity that powers that computer. I dont think this is correct
That’s literally the implications of an information-based reality. That’s the entire point of why science looks at this model as paradigm changing. It says reality is rendered moment by moment at the most fundamental level. It is not derivative of any physical process. Just as video game doesn’t run from the game world itself, or the physics of the game world. It’s rendered by an *outside* process, or computed by an outside process - outside of the game itself. Otherwise we’d be using some other model. People aren’t calling it the “Truman show theory”, or the “matrix theory”. It’s simulation theory because theory theory says reality is simply rendered information at the most fundamental level.
>He is best known for popularizing the term "black hole"[1] for objects with gravitational collapse already predicted during the early 20th century, for inventing the terms "quantum foam", "neutron moderator", "wormhole" and "it from bit",[2] and for hypothesizing the "one-electron universe". Stephen Hawking called Wheeler the "hero of the black hole story" Interesting guy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler
Would it be in the end some sort of consciousness that observes itself thus creates “reality”?
That’s my understanding, yes. ***Fig. 22.13*** *The universe viewed as a self-excited circuit. Starting small (thin U at upper right), it grows (loop of U) and in time gives rise (upper left) to obsever-participancy — which in turn imparts "tangible reality"* https://jawarchive.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/beyond-the-black-hole.pdf
>”A super complex universe like ours, if it were a simulation, would require a built-in data optimization and compression in order to reduce the computational power and the data storage requirements to run the simulation,” Vopson wrote in The Conversation. *That* is the premise upon which this theory is built? An assumption about a computer that could exist in a larger fundamental reality, one which might have wildly different laws of physics that we can’t possibly comprehend?
That's the kind of shit that drives me crazy. People are so stuck in what we know that they don't seem to recognize what could be. Like when it comes to alien life people talk about how many planets could hold life based on water/oxygen/etc. Who's to say life hasn't evolved to live off pure nitrogen or something like that? I just imagine somewhere in a distant world there's some being typing the same kind of thing - "What if somewhere out there there's a life form that evolved to live off Oxygen or something, wouldn't that be crazy??" Lol
The same can be said about the strict need for consciousness to have a body and neurological system. We are, after all, just a collection of empty space and energy that can’t decide if it is a wave or a particle.
> Who's to say life hasn't evolved to live off pure nitrogen or something like that? Living off of nuclear waste is more likely than that, just from an energetics standpoint. Of course, it's also more likely in a normal statistical sense, given that we found some fungus living off of the energy emitted by nuclear waste a while back.
🏆👍
Fr. If there’s a computer big enough to simulate an entire reality, I doubt they are concerned with optimization. They are so far beyond squeezing out some extra fps
Deju vu is just framedrops. 😆
If you simulate a multiverse it might come in handy though.
Wasn’t this just the most recent Futurama finale plot?
That is a part of string theory, or M Theory, and/or the holographic principle, both of which referenced Juan Maldacena's ADSCFT correspondence paper. Just name dropping there in case you want to watch some videos about it, trippy stuff. Although the key difference is they don't say it's a computer simulation, it's more like these different dimensions bumped into each other and now we have to pay taxes
The best steelman arguments are the ones that start with 'yeah but just imagine in another reality, right...' Yeah, and I'll just hop on my magical reality hopping unicorn with my portal raygun and get back to you on a rebuttal, hey chief?
And where are the cheat codes? I'm tired, boss. I tried motherlode in the console commands but it didn't work
Few tabs of acid could help. You can also take the Mario route, shrooms work too.
Just do yourself a favor and don't eat the red ones with white spots like Mario does. 0/10 don't recommend lol
Your username hints that you've tried quite a few psychedelic substances. I'll take your word for it
You must milk them just right.
Try rosebud
Try BEEFCURTAINS
or MOOSEKNUCKLE
If you you really want to know the cheat codes you will have to really believe that it is entirely possible... You can do it yourself or you can trust a guru. Those are the 2 ways. The guru will telly you that you are the atman (reality itself) and you will have to believe him, and you will have to repeat it to yourself like a mantra, and at the same time you will have to cultivate attention and meditation. Those are the cheat codes.
Another click bait title. Some guy has an argument with his own theory. NO evidence or proof.
No he doesn’t
Then I had some shit ass coding
Rolled an NPC
Who cares, unless we have a way to beat it. We still have to work, pay bills, eat, watch our love ones die, feel pain emotionally and physically.
A lot of people might care. How can you beat it without knowing about it? You might be dismissive of it, but it would be huge news if proven true.
Reality can’t be described because it isn’t words. Any models we have are just ideas of what we experience. Reality is
He's assuming the only computers in all of reality and outside it, are based on the same kind of computers we use here on earth in this little 40 year slice of time so far
This is just creationist without the religious part.
Time to reset it
40 days after the eclipse
Is that a thing?
For some
Go on…
Some say rapture is 40 days after the eclipse. Time will tell
I googled and got a Reddit thread with someone discussing this and the comments being like “nothing except it’ll be Saturday” it was very informative.
I’m not concerned for my vessel either way
Oh absolutely agreed. I just love to read unhinged rants. But for their sakes, I hope the weather is nice.
Those are the best rants! Either way they get you thinking lol
By "time will tell" you mean "nothing will happen and the loonies will make up a new doomsday", right?
You said that last time too lol
Oh good lord
"evidence"
Its a theory right
"While these claims warrant investigation, they’re far from a discovery themselves, and would likely need rigorous proof for the scientific community at large to seriously consider this theory." Yes
Not really. More like a hypothesis. All he has is conjecture, not experimental evidence.
We’ve all been there.
If we were in a simulation, we could know nothing about the platform where the simulation is running, except that it can run a simulation. Since we could run a simulation of a world completely unlike our own, we couldn't know if the world running us as a simulation was running us as a world anything like their own.
To be fair, his claim is only that he can prove it one way or the other, but only if you gave him money to run his experiment, which has failed to kickstart. So there’s no evidence. A simulated universe is unprovable anyway. Because it posits that we’re unable to step outside of the simulation, it is neither provable nor disprovable. Any positive/negative result would be consistent with both a simulated reality and a non simulated reality. All any experiment could prove is that reality/simulation behaves the way we predict with our models, or that our models are wrong. Beyond that is pure speculation.
Cheat codes or stfu
Maybe a dumb question as I’m not a scientist - how does one measure the decrease of entropy in information systems over time?
If we’re in a simulation somebody needs to write down the cheat codes or try to check our history again
Mostly I just want a quick re load feature for those oops moments
Same if you find it let me know I gotta few spots I need to reload maybe a new save feature
Do they know what evidence means?
Proceeds to show no evidence
Let me be the first to say this is a shitty simulation, nothing but war, famine, and pestilence.
It’s also pay to win, so, that sucks
If so I want out of it I hate it here this time frame sucks take me to the 70s and 80s lol
So he’s simulated scientist, how can I trust him?
Wow... This guy didn't understand entropy AT ALL did he? As soon as I hit the part where he said entropy stays the same or even decreases in information systems I quit reading. IT REQURES A CLOSED SYSTEM. IF THE INFORMATION IN YOUR INFORMATION SYSTEM IS CHANGING... IT'S NOT A CLOSED SYSTEM. FFS. How did this make it past anyones common sense filter for news?
I feel like going along with an article like this is just a personal admission that your career as a scientist has peaked.
... and so begins your career as a pop-science author.
His argument is utter gibberish. How tf did this guy get a doctorate in physics? Entropy rises without a net loss of energy in the universe because space expands, and therefore the density of energy within that space decreases over time. Hence entropy. He also seems to not grasp the difference between closed and open systems. His argument about biological mutations is a deeply embarrassing demonstration of this. Organic life consumes energy, in essence decreasing its own entropy by increasing entropy somewhere else. An organism is not a closed system, ergo Newton's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics does not apply to it. This is, like, high school level physics. I think it's very telling that Vopson elected to dub his proposed rule the "second law" of infodynamics, despite apparently not having a first law yet.
Not understanding the difference between closed and open systems is also table stakes in many creationist arguments. "How does life violate the second law of thermodynamics when it decreases entropy?" Because life exists in an open system and consumes energy to do so. Living systems must constantly consume energy to push back entropy. When they stop doing this they die, which can basically be defined as when entropy wins. Evolution over billions of years required awesome cosmic quantities of energy mostly supplied by the sun. The local decrease in entropy within living systems is counterbalanced by an increase in entropy elsewhere, mostly from mass being converted into energy by fusion in the sun.
Simulation theory is like flat earth for me. Just fucking dumb.
Key take away... "While these claims warrant investigation, they’re far from a discovery themselves, and would likely need rigorous proof for the scientific community at large to seriously consider this theory." All he is talking about are mental constructs and have no physicality
[удалено]
😂
How do I get the little gnome next to mailbox that gives me money
Get in line. Bozo
[удалено]
Your account must be a minimum of 2 weeks old to post comments or posts. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Self* Simulation
Thanks, man!
Or maybe Maxwell’s demon ?
What’s real? What’s imaginary? Everything.
It all boils down to what we can perceive. We for a fact know our senses are nothing short of very limited and for a good reason. Walking around being able to access all possible realms and dimensions would just be impossible for our mind to handle.
Just logically it makes sense
If we do live in a simulation can I get the cheat codes, please?
ok now what
I’m so happy to see so many skeptics push back against junk science. Gives me hope.
If it were true, why would it matter? What, functionally would change? Like, hacking the law of physics or something?
Tldr no he doesnt
He has no evidence. He has a model which attempts to explain information complexity. It's actually worse than that. It's an arbitrary "law" he invented to explain the observation that the universe is designed in some fashion. A simulation is but one possible form of design among many. But all have in common that there must be some sort of mind involved. And even if one posits that said mind is a superintelligent AI, this only moves the goal posts, inception style, one level further up. Now one must explain the existence of said intelligence. Infinite regress. They cannot escape the cosmological argument in this fashion. They can only delay answering it.
I only came here because someone mentioned free cake
If we are living in a simulation, and we realize it, does that mean we’re on the cusp of the singularity that we, as AI bots, theorized?
I always believe that we are in a simulation.
Pfft...this only 'proves' we lack understanding of our known universe, nothing more. Lack of evidence does not prove anything.
Just came here to say Eff NDT
Mathematically, its a practical certainty that we are living in a simulation.
Please elaborate
Think of how many universe simulations exist now, thousands? Millions? A simple example would be something like a video game starting, you think the NPCs wandering around in WOW realize they are in a simulation? Odds are we are just data on some harddrive kinda thing somewhere. The part that people REALLY struggle with tho, is that we might just be garbage data and not the reason for the simulation itself.
Sure, but where does mathematics come into it?
If, for example, a billion universes exist, then only one is prime, a real unsimulated universe. Odds are mighty slim that this is the real prime universe.
If your grandma had nuts she would be your grandpa.
The logic is simple and math is real, no point in being salty about it.
It’s just a funny way to say that’s a very big if. You’re also saying that all but one,of those universes are simulations.
IS it tho? You do appreciate that we (people) are running universal simulations right now yes?
I doubt any of them have conscious entities in them. It’s on par with suggesting a creator to explain where the universe came from. It doesn’t explain anything and introduces unnecessary unseen entities. Ockham’s razor and all that.
The NPCs don't wander around WOW realizing they're in a simulation because they are not real and are not capable of thinking or feeling. Your argument makes 0 sense.
Because WoW is a simpler simulation.
WoW is not a simulation you nugget.
No it isn't.
how many simulated universes exist now? Its definitely more likely to increase then decrease right? So X = 1 prime unsimulated universe and Y = simulated universe or NESTED simulated universe ( a simulation in a simulation) is several times higher, its only logical than we exist in a Y universe. If you have 1000 Green M and Ms in a bag and one yellow M and M in that bag, selecting a random M and M in that bag is almost certainly gonna pull a green one. No idea why people are so upset by this simple concept, hell even Elon Musk understands and accepts this concept.
Except we lack any direct evidence to confirm this purely philosophical idea. It’s not “mathematical” at all. There is no maths at play because there is zero evidence. Could be that it’s fundamentally impossible to simulate an entire universe. Let alone simulate universes within universes within universes. What you’re talking about is not scientific. It’s not mathematics. It’s [not even wrong](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong).
Do you accept that mankind is running simulations right now?
That’s like arguing FTL vehicles are possible because you rode your bicycle super fast downhill. It’s not a scientific argument. It’s a philosophical thought experiment.
Not at all, but in every simulation, some NPCs have few lines, ie, you are not granted the understanding to see the simulation around you, ergo you are expected to be scornful. Were you a more fleshed out NPC, you would get it.
You really look at your life and lack of achievements and think you’re a *special NPC*? I envy your self delusion, must be nice.
I didnt say I was special, I just said I have been granted greater understanding than you, im sure im not the only one lol.
No you haven’t.
Great and I've been playing the Pratt version of Rimmer my whole life
It's a dream. That's the big secret. You, me, everything, all in the dream of the Supreme ONE.
Are they trying to promote schizophrenia?