HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Religion & Spirituality » Religion (Group) » Science and Religion co-e...

Sat Aug 11, 2018, 11:02 AM

Science and Religion co-exist in the Simulation Hypothesis

Seems like more and more serious scientists are entertaining the idea that we are living in a hologram or dream reality:


If these people are correct, Why are we projecting Trump in our shared simulation and how do we get him out?

13 replies, 1057 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 13 replies Author Time Post
Reply Science and Religion co-exist in the Simulation Hypothesis (Original post)
sagesnow Aug 2018 OP
Dr Hobbitstein Aug 2018 #1
DetlefK Aug 2018 #2
marylandblue Aug 2018 #3
Voltaire2 Aug 2018 #4
DetlefK Aug 2018 #5
Jim__ Aug 2018 #6
MineralMan Aug 2018 #7
uriel1972 Aug 2018 #8
Lordquinton Aug 2018 #10
Act_of_Reparation Aug 2018 #11
Voltaire2 Aug 2018 #13
Iggo Aug 2018 #9
DetlefK Aug 2018 #12

Response to sagesnow (Original post)

Sat Aug 11, 2018, 11:18 AM

1. "Serious scientists"

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sagesnow (Original post)

Sat Aug 11, 2018, 11:32 AM

2. He's supporting his idea with Philip K.Dick? That guy was a mentally ill drug-addict!

Seriously!

And how come we never talk about the thousands of ways ancient philosophers have been wrong? Why do we only talk about the dozen ways they have been right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #2)

Sat Aug 11, 2018, 11:42 AM

3. I Love Philip K. Dick's stories, but I wouldn't want to live in one!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #2)

Sat Aug 11, 2018, 11:54 AM

4. I don't know about this guy but the simulation

hypothesis is serious.

That plus Phillip K Dick wrote some great sci fi.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sagesnow (Original post)

Sun Aug 12, 2018, 10:20 AM

5. So, so many mistakes: (But understandable ones, because those topics are super-hard for amateurs.)

Well, first, Karl Marx worked in politics and economics. We have no reason to assume that his Dialectic Materialism was meant to apply to the universe as a whole.

Second: Philip K. Dick was crazy due to neurological damage from doing too much drugs. He shouldn't be taken serious on this topic either.

4:00
Where do these propositions come from? And for their estimated probabilties: These are bayesian probabilities, not frequentist probabilities. How the f**k did he calculate them?

6:00
Proposition Two ignores that intelligence and consciousness are not hard thresholds. They are both sliding scales.
Do we feel bad about killing virtual people in a game? No. So why would we assume that such a civilization would feel bad about the misery of a virtual civilization? Why would we assume that they would even regard us as "intelligent" or "alive" enough to merit their mercy?

6:45
He trusts the scientists up to this point. But when the scientists dare to think that consciousness is a result of our brain-structure and that a similar artificial brain would automatically also have consciousness, that's suddenly a bridge too far.

The maker of this video really wants to believe that consciousness is a hard threshold and that shows his bias.

9:00
Once again playing fast and loose with bayesian probabilities. The odds are not 1 : 1 million. He totally forgot that there are Prior-probabilities. Just like Occam's Razor, they massively tilts the odds of something being true towards scenarios that require little effort to be true.

10:22
Quantum-mechanical experiments do not depend on whether a consciousness observes the results. They depend on whether ANYBODY, INCLUDING ANOTHER CONSCIOUSNESS-LESS PARTICLE, observes them. The consciousness only enters after that, when we, somebody with a consciousness, observe the interaction between the particle and its other observer.

10:30
Light is not either wave or particle. It is both at the same time. Grab a f**king physics-book.

12:00
A BIG claim without any citation.

13:20
That is f**king gravitational time-dilation and it not only f**king happens around f**king stars and f**king black holes, but also around f**king Earth, which is the reason why the f**king clocks of f**king satellites go f**king out of sync after a f**king while.

F**king seriously. Grab a f**king physics-book.


15:00
Okay, now we have to get in really deep. What we understand as "mathematics" is just ony way of doing mathematics. For example, we have a certain kind of trigonometry with angles and ratios and sine and cosine. Recently, an ancient babylonian astrological chart was translated and it contained also trigonometry, but with a mathematical structure that is different from how we do trigonometry. The Babylonians tried to solve the same problem as Pythagoras and Thales, and they found their own distinct way of solving the problem because they write the problem in a totally different fashion. The solutions are the same, but the ways of getting there are different.
Similar with the equations by Claude Shannon that this physicist found in the equations that he uses to describe String-theory: Just because you can use the same kind of math to tackle two problems, that does not mean that these problems are physically related to each other in the real world.
And, correct me if I'm wrong, but Strings have not been proven yet. So there is no proof yet that String-theory in general (much less HIS version of String-theory) is correct.

17:20
And again with probabilities. Without any explanation where these numbers do come from, whether they are gut-feeling or from calculations or what Priors they are based on.
WHAT MAKES THESE PEOPLE EVEN COMPETENT TO MAKE SUCH AN ESTIMATE? BEING RICH AND FAMOUS DOES NOT EQUAL KNOWING SHIT!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sagesnow (Original post)

Sun Aug 12, 2018, 03:44 PM

6. It's an interesting idea to consider.

If we were living in a simulation, would there be any way to know? It seems that if the simulation runs correctly, you couldn't. If we are in what he called base reality, how is our situation ultimately any different than it would be in a simulation?

When he reached the point where the guy says none of this is real, I'm gonna go get drunk, I thought about Camus and his statement that the only serious philosophical problem is the problem of suicide. Is this life worth living? I don't believe that Camus had any idea that we might be living in a simulation, but he did believe that life was absurd. I'm not sure that life in a simulated universe is any more absurd than life in a pointless universe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sagesnow (Original post)

Sun Aug 12, 2018, 05:49 PM

7. When I was about 12, I thought a great deal

about the idea of one atomic model of the day (1957) as a reason to compare it with the solar system and, then, the universe. It all made sense to me. Then, I learned that the atomic model was incorrect. I realized that I needed to be more careful about my musings. This is like that. It's tempting, but wrong, just as was my naive thinking then.

There are connections of the microcosm to the universe, but they are much more complicated than we can imagine. The same is true with the hypothesis you mention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sagesnow (Original post)

Sun Aug 12, 2018, 11:13 PM

8. *snerk* Overwhelming....

Until someone can come up with a falsifiable method to test this theory, it like string theory should remain tucked away in the archives.

Oh and P.K.D. never my favourite author... his misogyny was overwhelming I found.

For a fun read try Norman Spinrad and "The Iron Dream" (I think that was the title) Adolf Hitler as a sci-fi writer it was a hoot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uriel1972 (Reply #8)

Mon Aug 13, 2018, 03:00 AM

10. The best part of working in a book store

was when people came in asking for his stuff, and you could legitimately ask, with a straight face "So you're a big fan of Dick?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lordquinton (Reply #10)

Mon Aug 13, 2018, 08:59 AM

11. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uriel1972 (Reply #8)

Mon Aug 13, 2018, 04:55 PM

13. Here you go...


Can the theory that reality is a simulation be tested? We investigate this question based on the assumption that if the system performing the simulation is finite (i.e. has limited resources), then to achieve low computational complexity, such a system would, as in a video game, render content (reality) only at the moment that information becomes available for observation by a player and not at the moment of detection by a machine (that would be part of the simulation and whose detection would also be part of the internal computation performed by the Virtual Reality server before rendering content to the player). Guided by this principle we describe conceptual wave/particle duality experiments aimed at testing the simulation theory.


http://www.ijqf.org/archives/4105

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sagesnow (Original post)

Mon Aug 13, 2018, 12:22 AM

9. Seems like more and more...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sagesnow (Original post)

Mon Aug 13, 2018, 12:16 PM

12. There is a sci-fi-novel where this is the foundation of an extremist religion:

IIRC it's "The Algebraist" by Iain Banks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Algebraist

In this novel, the simulation-hypothesis is a widespread religion among society. It's a religion because you can neither prove nor disprove it and because it provides a convenient excuse for anything you want to be true.
The biggest problem is that its believers don't really care about what is going in their life: Why would they? It's just a simulation!



(I can actually totally recommend the novel: It's an interstellar treasure-hunt for an ancient theatrical script, against the back-drop of a dystopia, an interstellar war where you don't who's the good guys, and an alien race with a really weird culture.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread