Yes, kind of, but I don’t think that’s necessarily a point against it. “Why are we here? / Why is the universe here?” is one of the big interesting questions that still doesn’t have a good answer, and I think thinking about possible answers to the big questions is one of the ways we push the envelope of what we do know. This particular paper seems like a not-that-interesting result using our current known-to-be-incomplete understanding of quantum gravity, and the claim that it somehow “disproves” the simulation hypothesis is some rank unscientific nonsense that IMO really shouldn’t have been accepted by a scientific journal, but I think the question it poorly attempts to answer is an interesting one.
Comment on Mathematics disproves Matrix theory, says reality isn’t simulation
inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 1 month agoSimulation theory is the long way around to creationism for atheists.
queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 month ago
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Creationism usually implies the creator put a lot of thought, care, and love into the creation. Knowing what I do of software development, fucking lol.