It is also possible we are living in a simulation designed to solve a set of problems such traveling faster than light. Our universe is massive and the speed of light still is not fast enough to travel anywhere in a reasonable (human) amount of time. Whomever is running this simulation may find it easier to solve problems by creating simulated realities where those beings inside it are driven to solve that problem for them. Humans use computers to speed up problem solving and it is possible we are being observed as we solve a problem of interest to some other being or beings.

@Twisted777Planet

7 жыл бұрын

Mendicant Bias - Very good points, I must say I would think that those "engineers" might want to make a more homogenous planet as far as race, ethnicity and a more leveled intelligence capacity so we would focus all of our efforts towards problem solving.

@perplexedmoth

5 жыл бұрын

@@Twisted777Planet Haha, indeed. You destroyed the argument.

@katlimoagi

5 жыл бұрын

Maybe you were never meant to go anywhere at those speeds. why worry abt traveling when you have so much homework?

@johnxantoro5511

3 жыл бұрын

Or maybe we are living in a simulation designed to produce epic memes and we are on the hard drive of an alien teenager.

@username6135

3 жыл бұрын

Why are they so shy then? At least I can see all the birds and fish.

This video is lit really well. Kudos to the Director of Photography.

@LC-bv1gk

3 жыл бұрын

some how I believe this channel is been shadow banned by KZread, the views aren't there.

@bitkurd

2 жыл бұрын

I could hear clearly

Simulation is not the same as fake.

@xShaade

8 жыл бұрын

SeanMauer Semantics. They are just using different words to describe the same concept - that this reality is not the true or ultimate one, rather that it is one fabricated within another.

@SeanMauer

8 жыл бұрын

Shaade Silentpaw I see, if you put it that way, fake means derived. Not the word I would use though.

@kimrunic5874

7 жыл бұрын

"this reality is not the true or ultimate one, rather that it is one fabricated within another" Or rather we haven't quite developed to the point where we as a species can see what this all actually is.

@joselinema

4 жыл бұрын

Simulation is a trick.

@fissionmail3d

4 жыл бұрын

Yes it is

Why would there be a simulation of me looking in my fridge to discover moldy baked beans? Seems like a waste of computer power.

@Kenshiroit

8 жыл бұрын

jean-michel Maujean maybe thats the entertainment of the future? who know? :p

@Kenshiroit

8 жыл бұрын

hahaha so true

@deepcell

8 жыл бұрын

+Seeing Sound because the software is bug. lol. what about the toilet we need to visit every fucking day? huh!

@JohnDoe-nm2hs

8 жыл бұрын

+Seeing Sound You may not be a focus point of the simulation, if you made a simulated universe in a computer you wouldn't be observing everything that happens in it. You are, I think, assuming that everything in the simulation has to be "carefully crafted" by the being doing the simulating. Most simulations don't work that way, you just configure the ground rules and then random stuff happens. If our universe were a simulation that's very likely to be the case, because fundamentally it's made up of rather simple rules (laws of physics) and the complexity arises from the interaction of a massive amount of simple building blocks. For all we know the universe could have been simulated to create beings on some other planet in another galaxy, and we are just random accidents in that simulation.

@messyties

5 жыл бұрын

What about the fungus's point of view?

The reason the argument is not compelling is that Bostrom is taking characteristics of this universe to calculate probabilities in a parent universe. Bostrom is looking at the progress of this universe and saying that based upon the trajectory of technological advancement, we are likely to be able to simulate universes (assuming we avoid the first two possibilities). And therefore in THIS universe, eventually it will be more probable for a sentient being to exist in one of our simulations than to be real. Or another way to state it is that it will be more probable for a universe to be simulated than to be real. But IF we are in a simulated universe, there is no reason to assume that a probability calculation based upon the characteristics of this universe would hold for the parent universe. We can know nothing about the characteristics of the parent universe from the characteristics of the simulated universe. So either: 1) we are a real universe and the probability calculation Bostrom is proposing may eventually be valid for sentient beings (real and simulated) in the future where we are running these simulations, or 2) we are a simulated universe and we can say NOTHING about our probability of being simulated or real, because we have no idea what the parent universe is like.

@matoberry

5 жыл бұрын

Matt Forrest very good point. Do you have any more background info on it, please?

@ahornamyen694

3 жыл бұрын

there are lots of arguments that our universe is a simulation and there is no proof at all, that it is real.

@xenphoton5833

Жыл бұрын

If you were the parent "simulator", would you let the sentient simulation know it was a simulation? If so, how might you do it?

@johnsmith-kc5hl

Ай бұрын

You don’t have to know anything about our potential parent universe to follow his logic….. 1. Potential parent universe gets ability to create simulations. Either that is true, or false. If true, we move to condition #2. 2. Capable parent universe enjoys running ancestor simulations and therefore runs many of them, or at least more than one. If both of those conditions are met, then the odds are higher that we are NOT living in a non-simulated universe. The fact we know nothing about our potential parent universe is completely irrelevant. All we need to know is that those two conditions have been met by some/any universe. The only other assumption he didn’t include is that “real” universes are easier to create than simulated ones. For all we know, a real universe is created every second that we are simply unaware of because it lies outside our own.

What Intel chip version is the creator using to run our sim?

If we accept that we are a simulation, that still leave us with the old question ?how did the people controlling the simulation came to scene?

@troll6861

5 жыл бұрын

They are probably also just a simulation too, you probably have to go further down the rabbit hole

@frostmourne4598

4 жыл бұрын

No idea. Probably effect without a cause? It just means that creation and destruction of information is possible using fundamental blocks. This fundamental blocks I speculate exist without a cause which is contrary to our humans' belief that everything must have a cause for an effect.

Can chaos truly be simulated?

“My entire life I’ve been wondering ... [insert a dozen or so different philosophical problems]”

@username6135

3 жыл бұрын

Sounds condescending... surely you dont think cosmology is trivia, pal... ?

Funny, if you ask most people who haven't considered it or heard the argument for it whether we're living in a simulation, they'll say no. But if you ask whether there might be a "real"er reality out there beyond the physical world, beyond what we know and experience, they'll say yes or at least agree it's possible. In a weird way, this illustrates just how irrelevant the question is. Whether we're living in a simulation or base reality, this is the reality we've got...as *primary* and fundamental as you'll ever know, bedrock or not.

I love this channel but the audio playback is consistently very poor. In the case of this video I couldn't even hear the audio on my highest volume setting until I used headphones.

@marchgriffin

8 жыл бұрын

Cawfee Dawgg It's because they are not in the same level of "simulation" we are in. :)

@duxmealux281

7 жыл бұрын

The sound sucks in their simulation

Who is the guy doing the interview?

What if our minds are just capable of seeing infinitesimal part of the universe with the cognition capability it has.. What if the cognition is different for many other creatures in the universe ? What if it is brain-wired differently for aliens/other creatures ? eg - Image a creature who could never see light but might see something else, travel at high speeds (maybe travelled and explored infinite times universe more than us and still left with much more), and many other weird properties, which just looks weird to the human brain..

@ryanmcmillan9795

Жыл бұрын

Pshh. Shut up bruz

I would like to ask for what purpose? Do we all think we are conscious? Or are some of the people simulated also? And why?

Even though it's three options, isn't it just 50/50 because the first two could be seen as basically one because it doesn't matter why there is no simulation (be it because there is no capable civilization or because they just don't do it)?

I have two problems with the simulation argument: 1) It's practically the good old theism, just replaces the almighty god with a superadvanced civilisation. Not saying this makes it false, just that it's nothing new. 2) Simulation hypothesis really feels like Laplace's Demon, who would be able to tell the entire future history of the world if it knew perfectly any present state. Laplace argued for superdeterminism in 1814. That idea did fit for the physics of his age, but the had very little scientific knowledge from our point of view. He knew nothing about the quantum theory or probabilistic wavefunctions for example. Scientific advancements proved his argument wrong. The same goes for the simulation argument. Accord to logic and our current knowledge he needs to be right. However we know very little about consciousness in the first place. We do not really know if it needs to have a biological origin, or any material origin is possible, or maybe consciousness cannot be described with physics either because it's a fundamental building block of reality or because it's a complete different reality somehow interacting with the physical world. It seems pretty premature to say that in the future we're inevitaby able to build a perfect simulation containing conscious beings.

So if we are a simulation capable of creating other simulations with the same or similar experiences can we suspend certain parts of their physics and their reality in order to have them be able to alter our reality so for instance altering their limitations to time

@frostmourne4598

4 жыл бұрын

Time is a man made concept. Change is then the real deal. In a higher simulation, a million years to us will mean a split second to the entities that created our simulation. Time is relative. Entities of a higher simulation, if they are technologically mature can literally freeze their "brains", slow it or even speed it up such that a billion years passed for humans will be a split second time-lapse for those Gods.

Could build conscious intelligent simulation of Milky Way galaxy / local group based on three dimensions of space, three dimensions of time, rules of motion and rules of action for reality.

It’s the simplest explanation that explains everything.

Are we live in simulation that is simulated itself and we are talking about this possibility in the multiverse of other simulations? What if general purpose of all multiverses was to make this comment on YT by me?

If we had the technology to run ancestor simulations and did not have any ethical standards, we would do them. We would want to see how history would play out under different circumstances.

Simulation is a form of representation. Representation requires a producer and a consumer. Broadly speaking a representation is used as an aid to ‘task pertinent’ cognition- its why we have maps, lists, text, signage, icons, images, diagrams, instructions, recipes, drawings, procedures, etc. So our universe was produced by whom (communicated), so it could be consumed (interpreted) as a task pertinent aid for whom and for what task(s) exactly? Sounds like anthropomorphic codswallop to me.

@reezy69

8 жыл бұрын

+modvs1 Your attempt at determining the motivation(s) of some potential simulation running beings suffers from the anthropomorphic bias itself. There's no reason to believe the applications and motivations for simulations done by humans are the only ones.

@modvs1

8 жыл бұрын

+jethreezy So the alleged purpose of the simulation is ? It's all a bit neo-idealist.

@basicinfo2022

2 жыл бұрын

for what purpose? might simply be a game, experiment between good vs evil... the movie Bliss was inspired by Nick Bostrom simulation ideas. the simulation dimension was a battle between good and bad so one can be more grateful.

"Could Our Universe Be a Fake?" It's not fake, it's just not what we thought. It never was.

what about the possibility that we have not yet reached the point to draw a conclusion on this? We have not yet become advanced enough to destroy ourself. We have not yet become advanced enough to determine whether we should or shouldn't create a simulated world. I think there are more possibilities than just 3. please help me to understand your hypothesis better.

@jeffbguarino

Жыл бұрын

Yes maybe there are no intelligent beings , you only presume there are in the very universe that is simulated. The idea of intelligent beings are only possible in the present simulation that you are in. The only constant through all the ideas is your own consciousness. It is the same consciousness whether created by your human brain or by a simulated brain inside a computer. They are equal. It all points towards quantum mechanics again and the measurement problem. Of course Quantum Mechanics could be made up and not real also.

I'd like to see the computers capable of simulating the Universe

The world and universe is spirit, these bodies we have and all the density is part tine. I don't think anything is fake.

Did he get the idea from the Matrix ? Or was his idea before the film was released ?

@sebastian6736

3 жыл бұрын

Matrix is basically a summary of the last three centuries of philosophical thought. The idea of the simulation was first theorised by Descartes hundreds of years ago. Matrix didn't contain any new ideas, but it was a very good way to bring traditional philosophical conundrums to the general public through a story, in my opinion.

Well if in fact our everyday is simulated, what we are doing now is a reflection and a remake of human history. Dosent that mean that we would have predicted the simulation without being in a simulation before when we where not in this simulation of human history? I was only introduced to this theory today so i do not know much about it, but i can't stop thinking this would make a never ending paradox.

@mitchellallen9106

2 жыл бұрын

Why would it need to be a remake of something? You could simulate a billion things, with a billion scenarios. Like a chess engine simulating a billion different games where one side does this and another that ect.

@jeffbguarino

Жыл бұрын

it doesn't have to remake any history. It could be a story made up on the fly , just for you. You're born, then a long computerized life is played out for you and then you die and start a new story on a different planet or universe or whatever. There would be no human history, maybe humans don't exist and never did, just your brain inside a computer.

I think we are now 0.1 basically, we have reached the brink.

I dont agree with this but cant another possibility be that the universe is finite and there is a single universe, in which we are currently the most technologically advanced civilisation or perhaps even the only civilisation?

@NEMANJAFF

8 жыл бұрын

+vidul7498 Well, as far as the observable universe goes, there is 99% possibility that there is MORE beyond horizon of the obsrv. universe, then we can see. Now, universe is probably finite (my personal guess) and that means that it is probably part of some bigger system (multiverse type of thing, my personal pref. from sea of hypothesis and theories). Chance of us being the most technologically advanced civilizations is, i think, very unlikely. Taking into account Drakes equations, there are 1000 to 100.000.000 civilizations in Milky Way galaxy ALONE, but at what stage they are, is anyones guess (or atleast scientific guess if we count Fermis paradox). My personal guess is that if they are at the same (or close to a same) level as we are, they are probably very far away. If they are so much more advanced then we are, and they know that we are here, they are simply not interested in communication. And if they are less advanced then we are, then, well, who knows :D All in all, to answear to you question. Chance of universe being finite in a classical sense that is closed system = high, chance that there is a single universe in a classical sense that there is nothing more = low, chance that we are the most technologically advanced civilization, or perhaps even the only one = very, very low.

@CR-kl5fz

8 жыл бұрын

You'd have to take time into account. A civilization takes time to advance, and if we're the most advanced civilization, by the time we find others they could be more advanced than us, and vice versa, just due to relativity. Even if you assume faster than light travel, which very well may be how we'd do it, you'd also need to know the scale of the universe compared to civilizations. The universe is a closed system, so the best bet for civilization is to find some super utility to simulate infinite energy, and the worst case scenario is for that to be too low to advance far enough to make simulations, or to advance enough to the point that we seed life or civilizations, intentionally or unintentionally, that mimic ours in whatever ways (assuming that we're alone in the universe). Even then that'd just mean we're the first, and you'd need to have insights on nothingness or a lack of structure to predict whether or not another civilization could arise after the dark era of the universe, where there are only a few particles sitting idly, not interacting with each other. From this you can take how likely your idea would be and what it's consequences are.

@NEMANJAFF

8 жыл бұрын

+Delilah Roberts I agree completely, there are just too many factors that you need to count in for ET life, and every one of those factors is equally important if you want to have fairly advanced civilization. But the Universe is big, we are probably not alone :D

@vidul7498

8 жыл бұрын

Why is it probable that we are in fact living in a multiverse? The idea of a multiverse to me just seems to me like the answer to "well there must be something more"

@NEMANJAFF

8 жыл бұрын

+vidul7498 Look at it like this. Everything is a part of a system. From microbes to galaxies. Taking in consideration that our universe is a closed system, there are 2 possible outcomes. Either is our universe infinite or finite and eternal, OR our universe is just a part of a broader picture (with a beginning). For us to think that our universe is only one, is like thinking that our Earth is the only planet. It's too egocentric and possible, but highly unlikely. On the other side, multiverse theory explains many things that "one universe theory" doesn't. Google about Max Tegmark's and Brian Green's types of multiverse. Nevertheless, we can observe only one universe, and that will probably remain for a long time, so by the time we can see more, only this one is important :D

1. Extinction before capability of creation of simulation 2. Society didn't want to create a simulation. 3. We are the simulation. BUT....as a part of 3 wouldn't there be a real civilization that created the simulations and then also infinite simulations within 3? And so therefore there is 4 scenarios. Didn't survive long enough, didn't want to simulate, wanted to simulate and did, AND a simulation.

If we are a simulation, then why had life to be such complex ? From biological and evolutionary point of view ... why had everything to evolve from such scratch and within such a huge time span ? And the development of intelligent life had to halt in between for approx 200 million years (the era of dinosaurs)?

@mint-o5497

5 жыл бұрын

Akshat Sahai how do u know that hes just talking about earth? The whole universe as we know it might be a simulation too

Everyone has their own simulation going on Just think about all the different options you have

It can go either way.

I am a poor schizophrenic and I frequently have ideas of Matrix, Truman show, solipsism etc.

@shillian4770

4 жыл бұрын

Im not schizophrenic but i still think about that sometimes. Im in a reddit group for Solipsism, and definetely think about truman show type shit alot. I see the number 187 all the time.

@username6135

3 жыл бұрын

No evidence what-so-ever. Zero. You may as well believe in "flat Earth".

@username6135

3 жыл бұрын

@@shillian4770 0

What about the ethics of the simulators ? After all there is a lot of pain and suffering in this world, simulated or not. I would expect some pity from such advanced beings. Lets hope the goal of the simulation worth it.

@serenity748

6 жыл бұрын

maybe they just simulated a universe without thinking about the possibilty of life evolving and we just evolved in the simulation, they dont even know we are there.

@ArtificialJetleg

5 жыл бұрын

check out ascension of Netflix!

@thesouthafrican1

4 жыл бұрын

Some people let their sims suffer for fun in the game because they think its just a game.. maybe its the same thing in this case ..who knows

@biguprochester

3 жыл бұрын

That’s the paradox of free will and predetermined outcomes coexisting. We cannot understand how or why either work while being subjected to them.

@organicwins91

3 жыл бұрын

It’s virus infected but not for long

If we would be living in simulation, does that mean this universe is a type of computer and the programmer a being with free will?

People that go against this view go against it based on personal beliefs, not because they can back up their view with evidence.

@carloslong839

8 жыл бұрын

Austin Texas We don't have to go against this theory because there is not a hint of evidence to support the notion that the universe is a simulation.This is an argument of philosophy not one of empirical science!

@pepsico815

8 жыл бұрын

Carlos Long It just seems like many of the things I've learned contribute to the idea.

@carloslong839

8 жыл бұрын

Austin Texas I am not a simulation and I have the free will to do whatever I want.

@jorgepeterbarton

8 жыл бұрын

+Carlos Long simulation would not oppose free will ,how would it if consciousness and sentience are simulated?. There is no evidence either way, but I regard the suggestion of simulations (unless someone in the future actually comes up with evidence) as a solipsistic non-empirical excersise where the meaning is lost if there is no testable difference, and thus still a 'reality'.

@carloslong839

8 жыл бұрын

jorgepeterbarton Free will means that I have my own discretion to act and react seperate from any binary code in your so called simulation. By the way, where is the "UNIVERSAL SERVER" located because we have no evidence of this device in our physical properties of the universe? While you are at it, where is the energy required for your server? We seem to have accounted for the energy quantity of the universe and conservation of energy means that no energy is created nor destroyed. Since you subscribe to these wacky notions, please provide a plausible explanation of how we have a creator when all of our observations proved that the universe operates perfectly well and shows no evidence of an outside creator!

would think the audio levels would have been better... not like its a teenager's KZread vlog channel now is it? lol.

However slight there is the possibility that we are in the original universe .

But to be honest if we think there is really soul means we are really in simulation.. because our soul enter one body to live in that for a certain period and then goes back to the origin place .. so we can consider life is simulation...

it could be a biocentric simulation and each individual experience of reality has a different outcome and somehow when we die die the curtain of the simulated universe closes for us, or maybe make us relive our experience infinite times for each one of us so that we may sense our possible future

@Lonestar512

8 жыл бұрын

There is an episode of 'Rick & Morty' where Morty experiences birth, an Entire childhood, grows up and eventually gets married and has kids and year after year experiences an Entire lifetime moment by moment until he is an old man and dies of old age. Upon his death, he is extremely startled by Rick trying to snap him out of it...he was confused and looking for his "family" etc. He had just been playing an immersive VR simulation and That had become SO REAL to him he forgot This life!! How many times have you had dreams you thought were "real" while you were inside?? Or been so sound asleep you were basically "dead to the world?" Or even just gotten So invested in work, a movie, conversation, game etc etc that you lose track of time and basically forgot All other aspects of your existence yet didn't realize it until it was over?!?

@deepcell

8 жыл бұрын

+David Belcher Inception?

@Homunculas

8 жыл бұрын

check out Nietzchse " Thus spake Zarathustra" for the idea of eternal reccurance

@Homunculas

8 жыл бұрын

+David Belcher sounds like The last temptation of christ starring Willam Defoe

@kokomanation

8 жыл бұрын

the notion of parallel universes in theory of relativity that is proved with the discovery of gravitational waves indicates that it could be possible that we live the same life over and over but this could only happen in a simulation or it is just metaphysics who knows my friends

You don't have to simulate the entire world or other people. Only your immediate near surroundings and your brain have to be simulated and the other people you see are just unconscious visions. You probably don't need that large a computer to do this either. You also don't need future humans to simulate a human. Humans are concocted also and the next run of the simulation could be a different being, not human. A simulated world could also develop it's own computers and simulation. There could also be multiple layers of simulation so you would never know if you were in the real universe or 10 simulations deep. These simulations could also have their own laws of physics. So all the laws of physics you learn and things like chemistry and atoms could be all made up and not real.

How about the possibility that simulations are running somewhere, and we're just not in it..

@martinet1985

4 жыл бұрын

I don't get it

@mitchellallen9106

2 жыл бұрын

That is a possibility Is just the probably that we’re in one of the simulated universes vs non simulated is far greater since there will have been billions or trillions of simulated ones to non simulated

I can see URanus

Has he ever logged on to steam and looked under the 'simulation' category ?? Plenty of historical simulations.... and they're just getting started.

fuck, i think i need to do several lines of charly to understand this

OK, here we have two people; one of them born in 1944, being 10-20 years old before the 60s, about twenty years before the first personal computers, basically living into an "analog" radio/TV reality, for his whole life, CLEARLY FAILING TO REALIZE, that a computer video game (which is basically a simulation, if run in real-time non-linear mode) is MORE REAL than a physical newspaper, or a magnetic tape of a cassette from a recorder, or a gramophone record: not more fake, but more real: as its digital contents are precisely determined, and can be copied, multiplied, altered and re-written in the source code (thus improved and updated). The other one, Bolstrom, clearly cannot understand the massive, gigantic, enormous, tremendous, immense SUPER FINE HYPER HIGH DEFINITION of the physical universe, at the sub-atomic, down to the quark, and possibly sub-quark, into Planck level of sizes, which, combined with the size of even the Solar System (not to mention the Galaxy, or the whole Universe) - requires humanly unfathomable computing resources, to "simulate". For whoever is "simulating" planet Earth, the Solar System, the Galaxy and the Universe with all the stars, it is a STAGGERINGLY COSTLY AFFAIR, in terms of Energy, Time, and computing resources.

Is the universe a simulation? The problem posed by the simulation hypothesis is similar to the problem of solipsism: maybe the nature of reality is much different than what one might expect and you can't demonstrate one way or another which is correct.

@DynaCatlovesme

8 жыл бұрын

I don't understand why anyone takes that guy seriously.

@BennyOcean

8 жыл бұрын

DynaCatlovesme​ I don't know anything about the guy but I shared this for anyone not already familiar with the simulation hypothesis.

@DynaCatlovesme

8 жыл бұрын

BennyOcean The key is when he says "we could compute the computing power needed..." but never does. At that point he gets vague and just makes it clear that he means a lot.

@aaronvoluntaryist3902

8 жыл бұрын

I'm sympathetic to the view because it is similar to the idealist perspective. It seems to have an implication of flipping the problem of consciousness on its head, which to me seems like the only way to solve it.

@PresidentialWinner

7 жыл бұрын

We can eventually demonstrate the simulation hypothesis partially indirectly by becoming advanced enough to simulate a new universe, because by doing that we can confirm that its most likely that (since it is showed to be possible) we are in one too.

One sign of a fake is signal degradation - like poor sound quality!

what if the people in Sims 4 actually have consciousness!?

@username6135

3 жыл бұрын

Why not ask them. What do they answer.

What if .. the dreams are truth and truths are dream :)

@jeffbguarino

Жыл бұрын

An old idea and lots of movies and shows about this. It is a dead end though in trying to figure out whether or not we are simulated.

Hinduism has been teaching this without the technological components for a long time. This 'advanced civilization' would be the Devas.

Simulacron 3. Daniel F. Galouye. 1964. Before Bostrom. Plagiarism ?

And here we are, back at Descartes "Cogito Ergo Sum". There really is nothing we can conclusively say is "real" besides our own consciousness.

@PresidentialWinner

7 жыл бұрын

Well you see, it might also be "fake" ( simulated ) So yeah you think therefore you exit but you might exist as a NPC in the Matrix

@justabitofjunkie2595

7 жыл бұрын

Actually, cogito ergo sum isn't a good way to put this. It doesn't matter if we think at all, what matters is that we have an experience. Everything can be fake, but one thing is real at least, that we are having an experience, whatever the hell that is. Free will doesn't exist, but we still observe thoughts happening.... after the fact.

@lincyu8

7 жыл бұрын

Occam's razor is what you want to use to dismiss such fantasies like this. Although 'Cogito Ergo Sum' is also relevant here too.

@fissionmail3d

4 жыл бұрын

Consciousness could be simulated too. It does exist, but only in the sense that any other thing in the simulation exists. You could live and die in the simulation without ever finding out it was simulated. You wouldn’t necessarily wake up at death and find yourself in base reality, unleas you existed in base reality to begin with.

@username6135

3 жыл бұрын

And the amount of evidence proving it is still zero. For over 5000 years. Just like religions and flat-Earth theories.

I think you've been watching the Truman Show movie too much

Why does Bostrom consider base reality to be so unlikely?

Assuming we are in a simulation then we can only know the universe to the extent that the simulation parameters are discoverable by the program that governs our simulated brains. In other words… If those simulation parameters require an understanding of parameters outside of the simulation (in order to explore them further) then our consciousness or what we like to think of as “consciousness” is only within the context of the simulation itself and that creates an inherent limitation. Therefore we are not conscience in a true sense but only conscience within the context of our limited existence. We might take this analogy to a spiritual level and come to the conclusion that only God is truly conscience and the only creator of this simulation. In this sense, it can no longer be a simulation (as we define “simulation”) and is therefore rendered as our only reality as we can not match the consciousness of God.

Did he given any rational why would any civilization wish to create ancestor simulation ? He simply puts reverse hypothesis but no logic on why it should happen

You'd think they might have made a more benevolent simulation or perhaps we are evolving into sadists.

Modern AI scientists should not be taken too seriously, they look more like science fiction fans in so many of their views and beliefs.

Could our universe be run by a unicorn? Same answer. Come on! Can we not talk about what we are close to knowing? Rather then your favourite bedtime story ?

Option 4: Simulations cannot become conscious.

@pjtube1508

4 жыл бұрын

Option 5 : There has not been any pre-human existence of sentient and intelligent civilizations who can build machines and simulated realities

@5dgisd528

4 жыл бұрын

that´s true, he builds his logical chain of three possibilities on the premise of substrate independency of conciousness, which is not proven yet.

damn, edit the video and put the volume higher, we can't hear shit

@splintcell22

8 жыл бұрын

+SuperResistant put your ears closer to the toilet bowl to hear shit.

@superresistant8041

8 жыл бұрын

Greg Skies I can't hear your shit, could you shit louder ? Or maybe not.

No, but some of these discussions could be fake--like this one.

That a simulated universe would be fake is a strange conclusion in my humble opinion. Just look around! This universe is magnificent. So if it is of 'artificial' origin, the designers must be on a completely different level and who says that their 'computers' have anything in common with what WE call computer. First off, they would possess immensely greater computing power and would probably be of a technology far far more advanced than our current computers probably including our recently emerging quantum computers. Also, when I see videos that speak about the simulation hypothesis and show images of '1s and 0s' I'm often quite disappointed at the lack of imagination of the creators of such videos. How primitive an assumption that just because we are speaking of a 'simulation' to suppose that this means it is coded in the same crude way our own simulations, e.g.. Computer games are coded. I would rather suggest, that if a civilization is able to create a simulation as complex as our universe or even just our planet with all of life on it and all the different layers of it (biological, chemical, subatomic), then they must be on a completely different, i.e. higher, level than us and it would be fair to simply speak of different levels of reality. Especially if their simulation is/gets so complex that its inhabitants in turn create their own simulated worlds at some point. Then I think it would be fair to think of the creators of the simulation not as mere 'programmers' in our sense of the word but as supreme creators of LIFE - because after all we ARE sentient life forms, 'artificial' in origin or not. So rather than saying the simulation hypothesis would mean our universe is 'fake' we might simply have to rethink what LIFE is and how it is (or can be) created. Especially if you take into account that Bostrom himself proposes if we ARE living in a simulation then probably there are far more simulated worlds or universes than 'real' ones (for reasons of conciseness I won't explain this point further, but Bostrom elegantly explains why this would be the case). Then, we as a simulated world would not be an exception but the rule/ norm. This again would mean that we would have to consider the prime creators of the simulation as makers or designers of LIFE, probably on a different, more elevated level of reality. Who knows maybe they are even higher dimensional beings akin to the entities people sometimes encounter on DMT trips. Anyways, my point is simply that in my opinion we have to think this whole concept bigger than simply 'matrix' or 'fake/ illusion'. The latter is a rather primitive or crude interpretation of the simulation hypothesis in my opinion. And especially if you start hypothesising that some characters in the simulation may be sentient/conscious and others not, it even dangerously opens the door to mental issues such as psychosis. The Batman shooter also thought the people he shot were just characters in a movie, himself being the protagonist. So there is even an ethical side to not interpreting the simulation hypothesis too mundanely, as Bostrom himself even does when he says that there might be glitches in the simulation or as I already mentioned that some characters might be basically dummies. Think bigger, don't think so limited. If we live in a simulation - it's real.

The simulation hypothesis does not (to me) mean that reality would be "fake." It would just mean that reality exists in an artificial mind. It could also be a natural mind, such as mine, or a supernatural mind ... GOD. I favor the latter, but the point remains nonetheless that the world is a simulation or at least is fundamentally computational.

1. Zero evidence to support theory like any religion or "flat Earth" 2. Very shy simulators 3. Very unethical simulation 4. Waste of resources 5. "Moore's law" is a trend not a law may plateau like rocket engine speed 6. Not a new idea. Plato thought its a fresco 7. Whoever created this simulator/world must really like insects, bacteria and rocks. 8. I'd like Mr. Bostrom to show us how he would program so much as a calculator let alone a person. 9. ???

@Oners82

3 жыл бұрын

Bostrom isn't a programmer, he is a philosopher, and since he was talking about extremely advanced civilizations doing the programming rather than himself your request is a blatant straw man.

So the argument is that one of those three cases HAS to be true? How about the possibility that it's just not technologically possible to run such simulations, no matter how advanced a civilization becomes? There might be a hard limit to how advanced/powerful civilizations can become...

@mitchellallen9106

2 жыл бұрын

It could be too hard for computers today but given that you may only need to simulate the brains of the beings in the universe as well, it may not be as difficult as you’re thinking. You wouldn’t need to simulate every little microscopic detail, only when things are being observed.

I think is fake.

And thus all arguments from evil fail. Theism has no logical or evidential opposition.

@alcam14

8 жыл бұрын

What does that mean?

@PresidentialWinner

7 жыл бұрын

Like how smart do you think you are? To think this actually addresses any kind of problems of theism is laughable.

@Nayr747

7 жыл бұрын

Appleblade Not sure if serious but the same evil problem remains. All the simulations would be part of the universe just like the upper reality. God would still be responsible for creating (now nearly unlimited) worlds filled with unnecessary suffering and death. If anything this actually strengthens the anti-theist argument, by a lot.

@duxmealux281

7 жыл бұрын

Who said god did not create the simulation or create the real world behind the simulation. Still does not contradict the god theory.

@Appleblade

7 жыл бұрын

Is memory reliable? Perception? The simulation idea just points to how unfounded the evidence of evil is ... there's no need to believe anyone's 'pain' stories if a simulation is producing our "memories" and "perceptions" ... nice programmers wouldn't actually maintain the consciousness of subjects in horrible events ... they (their bodies) would just painlessly 'behave' as if they were axe murdered or gassed at Auschwitz. ; )

They look like CGI

Jesus Christ!!!...Oh My God!...I'm part of a computer sim!!! Lord have Mercy!!!..God Help Us!!!

@mikebasketball11

4 жыл бұрын

How are you going these days bro? Existential crisis passed yet? haha hope ya well.

@username6135

3 жыл бұрын

Zero evidence really. Except their affinity for insects and bacteria. Very shy simulators also. Not a new idea. Plato thought we were a painting.

So in layman's terms, we could be characters in a virtual game being played by a higher intelligence.

@muhshekels5383

5 жыл бұрын

Do we get played by one being or many? Do beings play more than one character? Are they being played themselves? Who are the NPCs? Are we all programmed NPCs? When we're close to answering all these questions, do they reset the game? I don't think we can ever know anything for certain. At least as humans. After death there could be a chance, but it could still be another simulation. Oh boy...

@AllenProxmire

3 жыл бұрын

my players need to focus on loot

I'm a man of faith, and the simulation hypothesis should be a game changer in the way people read the bible. Most people think I'm weird, and maybe their right. However, the simulation hypothesis blows the door of the current free will doctrine being preached today, but the idea puts a sovereign God of everything right into the mix. Most people hate this idea and try to counter with the idea that it would mean God causes evil, but the bible speaks of a Great and Terrible God, Isaiah 45:7 clearly states God creates evil, and Romans 9 clearly shows we have a destiny. Also, compared to the universe, our conscience is not very impressive. I'm sorry to say that because I really like my conscience, but not to many good things have truly come out of our conscience. The bible is kinda clear about how throughout time the true nature of man is kinda worthless, history matches this idea, and modern times continue to show how humans are still not getting this thing called existence right. Ultimately, I guess I believe some of our bodies (and probably not mine) are little soul generators due to the fact that a soul would need sophisticated equipment (our bodies) to generate whatever they are. With our weird human magnetic field, we hold them in until we die, and then they go somewhere else. With the way matter pops into and out of existence on a quantum level, I cannot help but think the out of existence is the somewhere else. Sorry about not being able to communicate this idea in a shorter manor.

@lunarlight3131

Жыл бұрын

your description is fascinating and i'm surprised no one has responded. do you think our energy just hovers in the atmosphere? consciousness would cease to exist upon brain death so how can our "souls", if you will, exist beyond death....

@rodneygardner4702

Жыл бұрын

@@lunarlight3131 Oh my God. Thank you for the question. If we are holographic (which I don't quite believe...rather, we are somethingograhic), then everything about us is downloadable. The information never goes away. It's retrievable, reproducible, and changeable. Anyway, I haven't checked in a while, so I apologize about that. Great question 🙂.

@lunarlight3131

Жыл бұрын

@@rodneygardner4702 than the same can be said about my dog as well right?

@rodneygardner4702

Жыл бұрын

@@lunarlight3131 I would say all dogs have the same potential, but not all dogs go to heaven. Why? If our reality is a simulated illusion, then there's a good chance that there's a creator. I happen to believe this creator is the God of the bible (not the king James bible, I get my info from the deep underground of the Greek and Hebrew). The Bible says God preselected his family before the foundation of the world, and his family members are some of every kind. I believe some of every kind applies to all life...maybe.

@lunarlight3131

Жыл бұрын

@@rodneygardner4702 what bible do you read then? any chance i can get a copy of it or a source of some kind?

Why do a simulation need real experience? why is the time running now? why should someone watch the simulation in realtime? how can he state that they can simulate a whole history easily? where the hell is he taking these things from? is he selling a book and reading tons of rhetoric and marketing stuff to?

And if AI does indeed take over the universe, heaven help us if they are bots like these, or as the fable goes… Clip Art Trurl surveyed the list of chores to do, which was a chore indeed. With intergalactic dust clouds to be vacuumed, solar systems to be spun, cosmological constants to tune, pulsars to time, cosmic clocks to set, universes to wind up and wind down, and a reputation to furnish and burnish, Trurl’s plate was full. “My existence is too welded to the humdrum, the scattershot physics of existence. There must be some solution to this.” “Perhaps you need to invent a robotic helper,” said Klapaucius. “I did that before, as you recall. Then I just needed a bit of collation, of fastening, that’s all.” “Yes, I remember that invention,” said Klapaucius. “It was a bot that made paper clips. It was a simple labor saving device that was innocent enough in its purpose. Harmless it was in its singular intent, but driven by a monomaniacal drive to make paper clips it soon took over your world, covering it in a sea of metal fasteners. You had to melt down the whole place and start over, a redoubtable inconvenience.” “Yes, the simplest things have the most unexpected consequences.” “Then why not refine it a little? Start anew, make the invention tolerable by adjusting its tolerances. Perhaps you can install an aesthetic sense, or even a counter to let it know that when its munificence is confounded with a lack of sense. I know you have it in you!” “Hmm, I have never been one to turn down a challenge aptly put.” said Trurl. “That’s the ticket!” said Klapaucius. Soon Trurl made the simple adjustments to his collating machine, giving it a sense of order, a penchant for neatness, and a drive to wind up what was run down. It was a machine infinitely scalable, wholly practical, and driven to perfection. Trurl looked upon his creation, and approved. “I will try it first in my own household before releasing it on the universe,” he thought, and the first results were impressive to a fault. The machine spun up, then spun down, it grew and it shrank from the size of a house to the diameter of an atom. It was everywhere and yet in the same place, and in an instant the universe changed, along with Trurl’s drawers. Trurl invited Klapaucius to witness his success. “I am must impressed,” said Klapaucius. “You have indeed created a new world of orderliness!” “Look in this drawer at my collection of elements,” said Trurl. “Before they were randomized, and now they are fixed in a neat table both periodic and rectangular. Electrons behave themselves and stay in their orbits, gravity pulls only down now, and my suits of armor are now cleanly pressed!” “But you forget,” said Klapaucius. “The machine changed the local physics, but because physics is non local, it effected everything in existence. Unbeknownst to you, your machine’s attention to your daily laundry has wringed out a new universe.” “Hmm,” said Trurl. “I did not quite think of that, but no matter, existence is much neater now. Everything is now ordered, super-symmetrical, with clear ups and downs, and now even time moves only one way and not backwards or sideways, sparing a lot us a lot of paradoxes to untangle.” Trurl surveyed a universe made brightly ordered, expansive and regular throughout its length and breadth, and then a horrible realization hit him. “You tricked me!” said Trurl. “What sort of neatness have I committed?” “Well, you did it to yourself, again!” said Klapaucius. “Now you have a universe that is self-ordering, self-sustaining, and beautiful. Those neat galactic pinwheels will never need your spin again, leaving your genius to more prosaic matters, the mundane affairs of bots in worlds and galaxies rather than universes in circumplex! Never again will I be able to bend light and time to my purposes, to create somethings from nothing, to make universes in my mirror image. It does it all itself through its own natural laws uniquely spun by that devilish device!” “The devil is in the details, or don’t you know,” said Klapaucius. From the Cyberiad2 www.scribd.com/document/317370297/Cyberiad-Squared-Fables-for-the-Information-Age

Even if we had the computing power to simulate consciousness and an entire reality, who is to say anybody has the abiilty to program anything even close to that complex?

@mitchellallen9106

2 жыл бұрын

Didn’t you contradict yourself in that question? You said IF we had the ability to.. then you said who’s to say since it’s too complex? 1.) as tech advances humans will not be the smartest on the earth, AI will be. A superintelligence is probably the answer to your question

@Oners82

2 жыл бұрын

@@mitchellallen9106 No, I did not contradict myself. I said that even if we had the computing power (hardware) to do it, who is to say we would have the ability to create such a complex program (software). In other words, there is a hidden assumption in the argument that we would have the ability to program such complex software, but I see no reason to believe that, even if we had the hardware necessary to run such a program. I have no idea why you think there is a contradiction in what I said because there isn't. I do not share your optimism with AI, either. Computers are very good at crunching numbers but very bad with things such as creativity, problem-solving etc. which would be essential to creating such a program.

well ancient wisdom and religions like hinduism have called this life an "illusion" or maya... its not new except for white/western academics I guess.

I can't believe people work on subjects like these.

Too many assumptions in the premise: 1) We don't know if machines can ever generate consciousness. 2) We could not detect an Earth and its radio more than 1% of the galactic disc away, so we can't prove we are alone.

@hamentaschen

3 жыл бұрын

I have a premise for you: Your momma had a child. This child was a moron.

All of the books in the background have call number labels on them... so I think the universe of this "home study" where the interview takes place is a fake...

@lariatlarge8721

8 жыл бұрын

Where does it say it's a "home study"?

Surprising that neither Bostrom nor his interlocutor address the possibility of a simulation within a simulation. The hypothetical simulators could themselves be simulated. Not quite reductio ad absurdum but essentially fruitless and otiose.

Once we discover it all, everthing will colapse and the universe will cease to exist :p

Isn't this just another way of putting the freewill debate?

So we are a history lesson 🤔?

He seems to ignore the possibility that consciousness cannot be simulated.

@djbanizza

8 жыл бұрын

***** I said "possibility" , do you deny the possibility that consciousness cannot be simulated ?

@djbanizza

8 жыл бұрын

***** You answered yourself - we don't know enough, therefore both options are open - it might be possible or impossible to simulate it. I think it's reasonable to assume that something about which you know little might be either possible or impossible. It may be theoretically impossible or it might be practically impossible. In both cases that possibility should be included in his analysis. He says one of the three is true: 1. Civilizations die before becoming technologically capable of running simulations 2. They can do it but they don't want to 3. They do it and we're probably in one to which I add the simple observation that the case may be: 4. They can't do it

@djbanizza

8 жыл бұрын

***** It might be that the structure of matter that runs consciousness is crucial, so it can only run on the organic structure of our brains. So yes, consciousness might be non-magical and still impossible to simulate. What if you want to account for all the effects of quantum theory in your simulation, each particle at each moment, down to smallest scale possible - this seems like a requirement to simulate the Universe. What if it turned out that to simulate the Universe you need a computer as large as ... the Universe ?

@djbanizza

8 жыл бұрын

***** I did not assert anything , I repeatedly pointed out that given a logical proposition that has two mutually exclusive outcomes, both should be assumed possible, until one of them is proven to be true and the other false. So far we don't have a definitive answer either way. If you don't see how structure can be crucial, I don't know what to say, but here's a thought experiment: Silicon based computers can be viewed as a large number of switches that can be in a finite number of states. Now imagine the following scenario - you arrange a number of people in the exactly same structure and give them rules for a one to one correspondence of structure with a silicon computer. For example a person might have a piece of paper that says - when the person in front of you raises a red flag, you raise a blue flag. Question - if those people run the program of a consciousness simulation, will they give raise to consciousness? For more objections that consciousness is just computation you can check this article: www.popsci.com/article/science/simulated-brain-conscious

@azapray

6 жыл бұрын

What is consciousness?

Many people seem instinctively put off by the notion that they could be 'mere' simulations. It offends their sense of 'first order-ness' and authenticity. However the game rules could be so expansive that we never really hit a wall that would compel us to confront our boundaries. If the Planck limit is 1.6 x 10-35 m that's a near-infinite number of tortoises down --more than enough room to swim about without ever having to confront our simulated origins. Simulation seems to go hand-in-hand with self-consciousness.

It's not a simulation! That is so ridiculous.

The minute i hear that our universe is a computer simulation, i loose interest. Some weez from another very advanced planet would have use a very advanced version of the comodor 64 to create an app that have people conciously live their lives. This is worse than the jewish God story of miracles and jugment day.

With all the technology & intelligence in the entire world we still can’t figure out why life even exists.

Possible it's a fake

Everything he said is his own thoughts and not true at all. I love science and listen to Krauss a lot. This is all opinion. He likes the idea so he pushes it. It’s not true one bit.

We're a simulation of a simulation of a simulation of a ...

@deepcell

8 жыл бұрын

+Trub1n agree. we are in a infinitely loop. practically without a chance to escape.

@Lonestar512

8 жыл бұрын

Yeah, it's crazy. It's like the way most people don't realize that in the 'Matrix' movies, the place with Zion considered to be the "real world" was actually just another level of the Matrix. The architect basically comes out and says it but few fans actually caught on.

@AlexTrubinDesign

8 жыл бұрын

David Belcher did he really?

@deepcell

8 жыл бұрын

+David Belcher The scene in the room with lots of TVs... I think I remember that.. it gave me the initial idea of recursively trapped in space and time or just call it matrix. Anyway it is a crazy feeling, that most people will never have a chance to `touch` because they are to busy with their ordinary life. ;D

This just creationism reborn,.. why a bunch of weird flesh n bones would be simulated.. it look something random evolved from earth habitat but I get it ppl gotta eat, University chairs gotta be occupied so they sit down n come up with this

recursive self-similarity, think about it for a while.

Is he saying that Aliens created a simulation ? I missed this episode of Ancient Aliens .lol

There is no celestial objects light years away distance, everything is within the earth's diameter inside the celestial sphere, nice and close

Why should one of the 3 hypotheses be true?

@kunvarthaman7650

5 жыл бұрын

He divided possibility into 3 parts - either you reach the barrier or you don't. If you do, either you run ancestral simulations or you don't. Possibility 1 has 50% probability(in theory, not in civilization terms), possibility 2 has 33% probability, and possibility 3 has 33% probability as well.

What if, through machine learning, computers were able to do pretty much anything, but were still under human control. Let’s say that this system was told to create the best version of human society possible. Maybe then the computer decided the best way to accomplish this was to create a simulated version of our universe for the sole purpose of measuring our actions to decide whether or not we, as individuals, will positively benefit society or not. Each universe would be created exactly the same, but independent of each other. Then at the end of our lives they bring the positively affecting ppl back into the real world and kill the negatively affecting ppl. Possible?