Simulation Hypothesis

[_subgenius]

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/neil ... 00649.html



So at this year's 2016 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate at the American Museum of Natural History, which addressed the question of whether or not the universe is a simulation, the answers from some panelists may be more comforting than the responses of others.

Physicist Lisa Randall, for example, said she thought the odds that the universe isn't "real" are so low as to be "effectively zero."

A satisfying answer for those who don't want to sit there puzzling out what it would mean for the universe not to be real, to be sure.

But on the other hand, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, who was hosting the debate, said that he thinks the likelihood of the universe being a simulation "may be very high."
...
The question of whether or not we know that our universe is real has vexed thinkers going far back into history, long before Descartes made his famous "I think therefore I am" statement. The same question has been explored in modern science fiction films like "The Matrix" and David Cronenberg's "eXistenZ."

But most physicists and philosophers agree that it's impossible to prove definitively that we don't live in a simulation and that the universe is real.

Tyson agrees, but says he wouldn't be surprised if we were to find out somehow that someone else is responsible for our universe.
...

still image from the debate mentioned above



nothing to see here

[_canpakes]

We should go for a ride and talk about this.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=M_ZUBTQ_4hw

[_honorentheos]

Even funnier, Sam Harris once hypothesized on his blog that the odds of the universe being a simulation where Mormonism is actually "true" could be incredibly high. Why? If one takes the idea that future human civilizations could have access to computing power magnitudes higher than our own that allow for simulated worlds at the level of home computing so anyone could run countless models at the same time; then takes into account the number of future Mormons creating simulations to watch great-great-great-granddad live out his life compared to whomever else might be interested in a more or less mundane computer model of the 20th/21st century and...the odds start getting pretty high that the person who put in the conditions for the computer model honestly believes in the Book of Mormon in some way. Now, why wouldn't they also program in real Nephites living in the America's from 600 BCE to 400 CE? Who knows. Possibly a different kind of Mormonism makes it into that future where it's not a big deal to have things play out the way they are.

Anyway, while I am in the "I doubt it" camp it also falls in with my views on free will. How I live my life is based on assuming both a real universe and free will, even if philosophically there is reason to believe both are unlikely or an illusion.

[_subgenius]

I found the use of sunglasses and neutral colored clothing to be most uplifting. Visually the imagery works....it works.

[_subgenius]

... How I live my life is based on assuming both a real universe and free will, even if philosophically there is reason to believe both are unlikely or an illusion.

and how does one "live" their life differently should they assume both a fake universe and predestination?
The "fact" of reality seems exclusive to your point here.

[_moksha]

Possibly a different kind of Mormonism makes it into that future where it's not a big deal to have things play out the way they are.

Don't be hesitant to coin the phrase Fuzzy Mormonism.

[_honorentheos]

... How I live my life is based on assuming both a real universe and free will, even if philosophically there is reason to believe both are unlikely or an illusion.

and how does one "live" their life differently should they assume both a fake universe and predestination?
The "fact" of reality seems exclusive to your point here.

One doesn't assume a fake universe. One mistakes the perceptions they have that are functionally approximations for being objective reality. Living life blind to the implications this has for one's belief paradigm tends to narrow one's perspective to the point they get even further away from reality. It's a beautiful little paradox, really.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Soooo... a religionist is turning to a scientist to once again lend credibility to the former's notion that someone made all this crap up?



Well, when you don't have any proof of your truth claims and you're suggesting this all can be a computer simulation in order to salvage any semblance whatsoever of Mormonism I think you could do well to self-reflect a bit.

- Doc

[_subgenius]

Soooo... a religionist is turning to a scientist to once again lend credibility to the former's notion that someone made all this s*** up?



Well, when you don't have any proof of your truth claims and you're suggesting this all can be a computer simulation in order to salvage any semblance whatsoever of Mormonism I think you could do well to self-reflect a bit.

- Doc

[_honorentheos]

Soooo... a religionist is turning to a scientist to once again lend credibility to the former's notion that someone made all this s*** up?



Well, when you don't have any proof of your truth claims and you're suggesting this all can be a computer simulation in order to salvage any semblance whatsoever of Mormonism I think you could do well to self-reflect a bit.

- Doc

?