Comment on [deleted]
YoFrodo@lemmy.world 4 months ago
No
www.popularmechanics.com/…/not-in-a-simulation/
This recently publicized study provides support that we are not living in a simulation.\
Also the idea that a shower thought you had 15 years ago that developed into a hypothesis is now somehow ‘concrete proof that we live in a simulation’ is pretty silly on its own.
Agreed. However the linked article has the same problem with unprovable assumptions. At least in the way they described it to this amateur. The thing that stuck out to me the most was their assertion that everything must be algorithmic in nature. I would say, as someone living in the supposed simulation, it is impossible to determine something we’ve seen or measured is NOT algorithmic in nature, because we have no access to the algorithms.
But yeah… this ain’t a showerhought.
“because we have no access to the algorithms.” Exactly this
IF there are algorithms. So still…. nothing proven either way.
Mander@lemmy.world 4 months ago
There is a critical flaw with this study though. Why would we assume the math of our reality reflects that of the dimension outside? Also how can you prove that something is not algorithmic? Alan Watts deemed this reality to be a dream, and Hinduism and Buddhism both make reference to the Maya which is the illusion of reality, so let’s use the term simulation loosely here. In this context it is simply to say that this reality is not base reality, and if that’s the case how can one possibly explain the way base reality works using the laws of a created one?