Do We Live In a Simulation
Quote: lilredrooster.
if you think we're living in a simulation and that you yourself may be part of that simulation then try this:
stick a knife into your arm - not far enough to cause an injury or cause bleeding but just enough so that you can feel some pain
and then, while you are doing that try to convince yourself that the pain is not real - that it's just a simulation
and see if the pain disappears
Good Luck link to original post
Yeah, that's not how it works. You are assuming that all simulations are pitiful things like what we've invented here. We are talking about a simulation that is so complicated and so layered that we can't possibly comprehend it because we're part of it. Actually there are people in the East who have trained themselves so well that they can do exactly what you described and not feel any pain. They demonstrate it in front of audiences. This is just more proof that we live in a simulation because we can overcome so many of the boundaries if we just put our mind to it.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBob
This is the completed puzzle, no missing piece.
link to original post
LOL C'mon.... There are number of completely plausible explanations for this, and the solution you arrive at is "it's a simulation?"
Like, the person lost the piece, put the note in the box, but then found the piece at the last minute and just didn't take out the note...
Or they thought the piece was lost, and it was just under the box or something else, so they wrote a note saying it was missing but then when they took the puzzle apart to put it back in the box they unwittingly "found" the lost piece and put back in, too....
Or someone else in the house took out one piece as a prank and never told the person, and then put it back after the person was done with the puzzle....
Or someone wrote the note itself as a prank for the next person....
There is nothing mysterious or supernatural about this.
link to original post
Or this is a simulation and the piece of the puzzle is actually missing in a reality that mirrors ours. Now that we have instantaneous world communication where people can constantly compare notes on a global scale it's becoming more and more apparent that living in a simulation is our reality. The evidence accumulates almost daily.
Quote: lilredrooster.
humans are very proud beings
they like to think they know a lot
they don't like to admit that there is great deal that they don't know about the universe and its goings on
so they speculate
they speculate that we live in a simulation
they speculate that there is a God or Supreme Being
these speculations only have value to those who believe them
they have no value for those that don't believe them
link to original post
The thing is there might be actual evidence that we live in a simulation and as far as I've been able to tell there is none for a Supreme Being. Belief with evidence is one thing, belief without it is something else entirely.
Quote: lilredrooster.
𝙃𝙐𝙈𝘼𝙉𝙎 𝘼𝙍𝙀 𝙑𝙀𝙍𝙔 𝙋𝙍𝙊𝙐𝘿 𝘽𝙀𝙄𝙉𝙂𝙎
they like to think they know a lot
they don't like to admit that there is great deal that they don't know about the universe and its goings on
so they speculate
they speculate that we live in a simulation
they speculate that there is a God or Supreme Being
these speculations only have value to those who believe them
they have no value for those that don't believe them
you posted this statement in response to Bill Ryan on Jan. 8 at 1:19 in this thread
Quote: EvenBobYour statement indicates that you really have no idea what reality is.
how very proud you are to dismiss a point of view that you disagree with in this manner
.
Quote: SOOPOOI’ve had this ‘Do I live in a simulation’ thought for decades. But I always come back to this. It is not provable, or at least hasn’t been yet. Kind of like a belief in a God. So given those two truths, I just live my life the same way I have been. If at the end it turns out that either of those two things are true, oh well. But there’s nothing I’ll be going about it NOW!
link to original post
It will never be probable, just like the existence of a Supreme Being isn't provable. To me it's like the Zen master used to say to a student. I can't teach you anything all I can do is point you in the right direction. There are indications that a simulation exists, all we have to do is find them. To me there's no difference between the simulation and a Supreme Being, they are both outside our comprehension. Not much about our existence makes any sense with either of those explanations.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stop-asking-if-the-universe-is-a-computer-simulation/
You can read it if you want to waste your time. It basically says we can never know if we live in a simulation so why even bother trying to figure it out. This is patently ridiculous. They did the same thing around 1905 when the scientific consensus was that we had invented so many things that we were at the end of it, no more useful things could be invented. So why even try.
What they meant was, and what the guy means who wrote this simulation article means, is that at the present time we don't have enough information to predict the future so let's just jump to a whole bunch of erroneous conclusions. We have no idea what kind of breakthroughs are coming that will show us that we live in a simulation. Look how wrong they were in 1905, they were stupidly wrong, embarrassingly wrong, irrevocably wrong. And they're wrong about this.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/i_wFkvXexeY
if we did live in a simulation, would that mean that I too am a simulation____?
or did I somehow manage to stay outside the simulation and just observe it_________?
and are all the other people I interact with just simulations too_______?
.
Quote: DieterQuote: EvenBobDelete
link to original post
A little button happy?
link to original post
Did this on DT a while back, you think it didn't post after a couple minutes so you hit it again come back in a couple minutes and hit it again and eventually you got six posts
Quote: lilredrooster.
if you think we're living in a simulation and that you yourself may be part of that simulation then try this:
stick a knife into your arm - not far enough to cause an injury or cause bleeding but just enough so that you can feel some pain
and then, while you are doing that try to convince yourself that the pain is not real - that it's just a simulation
and see if the pain disappears
Good Luck
**snip**
link to original post
***Personally, I recommend that you DO NOT STICK A KNIFE IN YOUR ARM.***
Quote: lilredrooster.
if we did live in a simulation, would that mean that I too am a simulation____?
or did I somehow manage to stay outside the simulation and just observe it_________?
and are all the other people I interact with just simulations too_______?
.
link to original post
I can't tell if you're kidding or being serious. Of course everything would be the simulation. Makes as much sense as any off the wall religion you can come up with.
what are the theories about who built this simulation_________?
why was it built__________?
what is it's purpose_______________?
.
Quote: lilredrooster.
what are the theories about who built this simulation_________?
why was it built__________?
what is it's purpose_______________?
.
link to original post
That's like a fish trying to figure out the ocean. Or asking what is the meaning of life. Nobody can agree that there even is a simulation let alone what its purpose would be. Why does everything have to have a purpose. Life seems to have no purpose at all except to create more life.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: lilredrooster.
what are the theories about who built this simulation_________?
why was it built__________?
what is it's purpose_______________?
.
link to original post
That's like a fish trying to figure out the ocean. Or asking what is the meaning of life. Nobody can agree that there even is a simulation let alone what its purpose would be. Why does everything have to have a purpose. Life seems to have no purpose at all except to create more life.
link to original post
yes, but you compared it to religions - I think pretty correctly
religions will attempt to give answers to those questions
so, I thought that those who theorize that we live in a simulation would attempt to answer those questions also
but I guess they don't
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: EvenBobQuote: lilredrooster.
what are the theories about who built this simulation_________?
why was it built__________?
what is it's purpose_______________?
.
link to original post
That's like a fish trying to figure out the ocean. Or asking what is the meaning of life. Nobody can agree that there even is a simulation let alone what its purpose would be. Why does everything have to have a purpose. Life seems to have no purpose at all except to create more life.
link to original post
yes, but you compared it to religions - I think pretty correctly
religions will attempt to give answers to those questions
so, I thought that those who theorize that we live in a simulation would attempt to answer those questions also
but I guess they don't
.
link to original post
All the so-called answers I see in organized religion are just guesses because they're all different. Nobody knows why we're here, nobody knows what happens after we die, if anything happens at all. Why do I remember clear as a bell that Jaws girlfriend had braces yet film footage shows she didn't. There are a hundred such cases of weirdness that have probably always been with us but we couldn't compare it like we can now on a worldwide level instantly.
Quote: EvenBobWhy do I remember clear as a bell that Jaws girlfriend had braces yet film footage shows she didn't.
you probably already know this but a great many people say the same thing, and as far as I can tell from googling there is no true image out there showing her wearing braces
many attribute it to what is called "The Mandela Effect" which is the fact that a great many for some reason believe Nelson Mandela died in a South African prison in the 1980s - that didn't happen - he died in 2013 at the age of 95
there are lots of these kinds of things - see link - people swear there is or was a Jiffy peanut butter - there never has been - it has always been Jif peanut butter
the other link is about Dolly, Jaws girlfriend and states that 47% believe that her braces were what made Jaws fall in love with her
but there is all kinds of corroboration that she did not wear braces
.
https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-mandela-effect-4589394
https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/moonraker-dolly-did-not-wear-braces
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: EvenBobWhy do I remember clear as a bell that Jaws girlfriend had braces yet film footage shows she didn't.
you probably already know this but a great many people say the same thing, and as far as I can tell from googling there is no true image out there showing her wearing braces
many attribute it to what is called "The Mandela Effect" which is the fact that a great many for some reason believe Nelson Mandela died in a South African prison in the 1980s - that didn't happen - he died in 2013 at the age of 95
there are lots of these kinds of things - see link - people swear there is or was a Jiffy peanut butter - there never has been - it has always been Jif peanut butter
the other link is about Dolly, Jaws girlfriend and states that 47% believe that her braces were what made Jaws fall in love with her
but there is all kinds of corroboration that she did not wear braces
.
https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-mandela-effect-4589394
https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/moonraker-dolly-did-not-wear-braces
.
link to original post
I have already discussed all of this in great detail here.
'When a rack of clothing was brought in for Morgan and director Victor Fleming’s approval, they liked a clearly second-hand coat for Professor Marvel who Morgan would play in the Kansas portion of the script. Well-worn and slightly beaten up, it felt right for the Professor Marvel character. During shooting, Morgan discovered that sewn into its lining was the name L. Frank Baum, the author of the Oz books.Baum’s widow, Maud, confirmed it being her husband’s coat, as she was still alive and living in Los Angeles at the time.'
I mean, c'mon..
Quote: EvenBobFrank Morgan played the wizard and six other characters in The Wizard of Oz.
'When a rack of clothing was brought in for Morgan and director Victor Fleming’s approval, they liked a clearly second-hand coat for Professor Marvel who Morgan would play in the Kansas portion of the script. Well-worn and slightly beaten up, it felt right for the Professor Marvel character. During shooting, Morgan discovered that sewn into its lining was the name L. Frank Baum, the author of the Oz books.Baum’s widow, Maud, confirmed it being her husband’s coat, as she was still alive and living in Los Angeles at the time.'
I mean, c'mon..
link to original post
This story is a rumor that has never been proven to be true.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobFrank Morgan played the wizard and six other characters in The Wizard of Oz.
'When a rack of clothing was brought in for Morgan and director Victor Fleming’s approval, they liked a clearly second-hand coat for Professor Marvel who Morgan would play in the Kansas portion of the script. Well-worn and slightly beaten up, it felt right for the Professor Marvel character. During shooting, Morgan discovered that sewn into its lining was the name L. Frank Baum, the author of the Oz books.Baum’s widow, Maud, confirmed it being her husband’s coat, as she was still alive and living in Los Angeles at the time.'
I mean, c'mon..
link to original post
This story is a rumor that has never been proven to be true.
link to original post
Doesn't matter, even if it were proven to be absolutely true on a scale of 1 to 10 of coincidences it's a nothing burger. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams both died on the 4th of July exactly 50 years after they signed the Declaration of Independence. Mark Twain was born in the year that Haley's Comet came through and he died in the year when Haley's Comet came through again. It was a common event in World War II for a mother to wake up in the middle of the night knowing her son had just died in combat and finding out a few days later did he indeed had died exactly when she woke up. Coincidences are so common that some call them an example of synchronicity and is further proof that we live in a simulation. Carl Jung coined the term synchronicity and he believed coincidences were examples that we lived in a collective consciousness which is really just another term for simulation.
There are very many other theories and possible explanations for synchronicity, one of the simplest of which is probability theory where synchronic events are explained to have happened and specifically remembered due to random chance dictating it;
Many of the other theories are purely materialistic as well, but there are also plenty of interesting and reasonable theories that are dualistic or idealistic in nature and nearly all of them make more sense than a simulation theory. That is why the simulation theory haven't gotten much traction and followers in neither academic circles nor the general public as an average.
It simply isn't very convincing and is kinda the lazy thinker's choice with not much arguments behind it.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobFrank Morgan played the wizard and six other characters in The Wizard of Oz.
'When a rack of clothing was brought in for Morgan and director Victor Fleming’s approval, they liked a clearly second-hand coat for Professor Marvel who Morgan would play in the Kansas portion of the script. Well-worn and slightly beaten up, it felt right for the Professor Marvel character. During shooting, Morgan discovered that sewn into its lining was the name L. Frank Baum, the author of the Oz books.Baum’s widow, Maud, confirmed it being her husband’s coat, as she was still alive and living in Los Angeles at the time.'
I mean, c'mon..
link to original post
This story is a rumor that has never been proven to be true.
link to original post
I have heard this story recounted on Television by a journalist who claims to have interviewed the principals (Victor Fleming and Stanley Morgan among them.) This is not the gold standard for "absolute proof" but I regard it as sufficient for a coincidence that is not at all impossible.
Quote: gordonm888Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobFrank Morgan played the wizard and six other characters in The Wizard of Oz.
'When a rack of clothing was brought in for Morgan and director Victor Fleming’s approval, they liked a clearly second-hand coat for Professor Marvel who Morgan would play in the Kansas portion of the script. Well-worn and slightly beaten up, it felt right for the Professor Marvel character. During shooting, Morgan discovered that sewn into its lining was the name L. Frank Baum, the author of the Oz books.Baum’s widow, Maud, confirmed it being her husband’s coat, as she was still alive and living in Los Angeles at the time.'
I mean, c'mon..
link to original post
This story is a rumor that has never been proven to be true.
link to original post
I have heard this story recounted on Television by a journalist who claims to have interviewed the principals (Victor Fleming and Stanley Morgan among them.) This is not the gold standard for "absolute proof" but I regard it as sufficient for a coincidence that is not at all impossible.
link to original post
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/coat-of-baums/
Snopes rates it as legend. And, as we know, when the legend becomes fact, print the legend.
Quote: rawtuffCollective consciousness isn't really another term for simulation, far from it actually. There are plenty more and more reasoned explanations.
There are very many other theories and possible explanations for synchronicity, one of the simplest of which is probability theory where synchronic events are explained to have happened and specifically remembered due to random chance dictating it;
Many of the other theories are purely materialistic as well, but there are also plenty of interesting and reasonable theories that are dualistic or idealistic in nature and nearly all of them make more sense than a simulation theory. That is why the simulation theory haven't gotten much traction and followers in neither academic circles nor the general public as an average.
It simply isn't very convincing and is kinda the lazy thinker's choice with not much arguments behind it.
link to original post
This is why people like Elon Musk believe we're living in a simulation, because they are essentially 'lazy thinkers'. You need to look into this a little further..
Quote: cowboyI guess coincidences programmed within a simulation could account for a claim of seeing 18 Yos rolled sequentially in a game of craps.
link to original post
Glitch in the Matrix? Random FOR...NEXT loop?
there are trillions of things happening in our world
of course there will be many eerie coincidences
it's not proof of a simulation or anything else -
Elon Musk is no doubt in some ways brilliant
but he's not brilliant in all things
it's just one man's speculation - not of great value imo
.
He also told me when we were talking about the shoplifting problem that he's not allowed to stop shoplifters from leaving the store. But they now have deputized members of their security crew who have the authority of the county to arrest someone and hold them till the police get there. They went through a training course and have actual Deputy Sheriff badges that are good on Home Depot property only. This is how bad things have gotten. He said certain people walk in and leave with an entire cart full of power tools without going through checkout. They now have most of that stuff locked behind plexiglass but they were pretty much steal anything that's not locked down now.
Quote: lilredrooster.
there are trillions of things happening in our world
of course there will be many eerie coincidences
it's not proof of a simulation or anything else -
Elon Musk is no doubt in some ways brilliant
but he's not brilliant in all things
it's just one man's speculation - not of great value imo
.
link to original post
It will be never proven that we live in a simulation, that's impossible. Just like there will never be proof that a god exists. A fish is convinced that the entire world consists of the ocean and he can never prove otherwise.
Quote: rxwineYou can’t prove elves aren’t making cookies somewhere either.
link to original post
Or that unicorns or leprechauns exist. What's your point. They even keep changing their minds on the origins of the universe and how old and how big it is. I think I can prove that my cats can't read but I'm probably wrong.
Quote: rxwineYou can’t prove elves aren’t making cookies somewhere either.
link to original post
They're welcome to bake cookies or whatever they want in my kitchen. Or clean my house.
Quote: EvenBobIt will be never proven that we live in a simulation, that's impossible. Just like there will never be proof that a god exists. A fish is convinced that the entire world consists of the ocean and he can never prove otherwise.
human beings are not fish
we as humans have tremendous capabilities
we currently have 3 rovers exploring Mars
imagine trying to tell somebody who was alive in 1825 that we will have equipment roaming around on Mars
there is no telling what humans might be able to find out about the mysteries of the universe in 100 years
things that seem impossible now might not seem impossible in 50 years
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: EvenBobIt will be never proven that we live in a simulation, that's impossible. Just like there will never be proof that a god exists. A fish is convinced that the entire world consists of the ocean and he can never prove otherwise.
human beings are not fish
we as humans have tremendous capabilities
we currently have 3 rovers exploring Mars
imagine trying to tell somebody who was alive in 1825 that we will have equipment roaming around on Mars
there is no telling what humans might be able to find out about the mysteries of the universe in 100 years
things that seem impossible now might not seem impossible in 50 years
.
link to original post
Yeah it seems that the more we find out the less we know. Every question we answer provides 10 more questions.
This idea is presented here: is gravity evidence that the universe is a simulation?
Lots of handwaving and zero math or rigorous discussion, but hey . . . its basically a discussion of a concept.
I'm not advocating for any point of view here! Just referencing a new idea.
Quote: MDawgI don't think so given all the out of shape people walking around with bellies. In a simulation, I'd think people would be in better shape. Evidently free will is running rampant.
link to original post
Why do people need to be in shape? I no longer have reasons to run five miles or bench press three hundred pounds. I ride my bike, play pickleball, and swim, but by regular standards, I would not be considered in shape.
The wealthy have been overweight since the dawn of civilization. A recent event is that so many of the poor are obese. Historically, those people are hungry.
As far as a simulation goes, isn't there a legend about an old man who sees all and responds accordingly? Some call him Allah, some call him God, some call him Santa Claus.
That this is a simulation is as good an explanation as any and better than most. It really bothers people that they have no purpose and there is no meaning to being here so they of course make them up. And pretend those are the reasons and convince others onto the platform with them. It's probably one of the reasons I have so many cats because animals obviously have no reason or purpose to be here and cats don't care, they are always having a good time. Dogs are different, dogs are unhappy half the time because they're always wanting you to do something with them or to them. Cats don't care if you pay attention to them or not, they just do their thing and have a good time.
So that's the definition of a simulation- a system that reproduces some of the characteristics of a different system, without actually being that system. And it also suggest that the simulation was built by an intelligent agent with intent, because some of those characteristics were intentionally mirrored. A naturally occurring pond has some, but not all, of the characteristics of the Pacific Ocean, yet we do not call it a simulation of the Pacific Ocean, it is a different kind of body of water. We do not call a man-made pond a simulation of a pond either, because it has all of the characteristics of a pond; we call it a pond, and if someone inquires as to its provenance we say it is man-made.
Another example of a simulation we are all familiar with is a simulation of a casino game. I make them all the time, to run in a computer and it reflects the elements of that game that I am interested in studying. The casino is not simulating the game, they are dealing the game.
Thus, to say something is a simulation is meaningless without answering "What is it a simulation of?" and "Who is the designer and which characteristics of the master object were they trying to simulate?" This very quickly heads towards religious reasoning and in this case, that is fine. Science is far more open to deistic explanations than propagandists of a certain type would want you to believe. What separates science from religion is that a good scientist, upon recognizing a deistic theory in his work, says "This is outside of my training and expertise" and leaves it for someone else to pursue. That the physical world is a reflection, or subset of dimensions of a higher and more true world is an ancient belief, probably first stated during the Zeroth Great Awakening, when Pythagoras, Gautama Buddha, Lao Tze, Confucius, and a bunch of Indian philosophers all walked the earth at the same time.
Quote: AutomaticMonkeyNo. A simulation of what? If I set up an aquarium with fish in it, the aquarium as a concept is a simulation of a pond or lake. But the fish really are fish, the water really is water, the glass really is glass. The only thing that is artificial is the combination of those things, simulating the way the fish and water and plants and stuff would interact in a natural environment. And it's only a simulation to me- I know I am recreating a pond in a shell of glass. But to the fish it is not- they have to swim and eat and do whatever they do just like they were in the pond. And I also cannot prove that the pond isn't someone else's simulation of something else.
So that's the definition of a simulation- a system that reproduces some of the characteristics of a different system, without actually being that system. And it also suggest that the simulation was built by an intelligent agent with intent, because some of those characteristics were intentionally mirrored. A naturally occurring pond has some, but not all, of the characteristics of the Pacific Ocean, yet we do not call it a simulation of the Pacific Ocean, it is a different kind of body of water. We do not call a man-made pond a simulation of a pond either, because it has all of the characteristics of a pond; we call it a pond, and if someone inquires as to its provenance we say it is man-made.
Another example of a simulation we are all familiar with is a simulation of a casino game. I make them all the time, to run in a computer and it reflects the elements of that game that I am interested in studying. The casino is not simulating the game, they are dealing the game.
Thus, to say something is a simulation is meaningless without answering "What is it a simulation of?" and "Who is the designer and which characteristics of the master object were they trying to simulate?" This very quickly heads towards religious reasoning and in this case, that is fine. Science is far more open to deistic explanations than propagandists of a certain type would want you to believe. What separates science from religion is that a good scientist, upon recognizing a deistic theory in his work, says "This is outside of my training and expertise" and leaves it for someone else to pursue. That the physical world is a reflection, or subset of dimensions of a higher and more true world is an ancient belief, probably first stated during the Zeroth Great Awakening, when Pythagoras, Gautama Buddha, Lao Tze, Confucius, and a bunch of Indian philosophers all walked the earth at the same time.
link to original post
sim·u·la·tion
/ˌsimyəˈlāSH(ə)n/
noun
the production of a computer model of something
"Simulation theory says that we are all likely living in an extremely powerful computer program, directed by an entity outside of our physical comprehension."
If you define a house without a bathroom in The Sims, the characters within the simulation take a pee on the living room wall.
Quote: AutomaticMonkeyThat the physical world is a reflection, or subset of dimensions of a higher and more true world is an ancient belief, probably first stated during the Zeroth Great Awakening, when Pythagoras, Gautama Buddha, Lao Tze, Confucius, and a bunch of Indian philosophers all walked the earth at the same time.
link to original post
Zoroaster would like a word. More seriously, I’ve always preferred the Zeroth Law of Robotics.
Quote: gordonm888When I hear the word "simulation" in this context, I inevitably think of "The Sims" - the video game in which you define characters, relationships and environments and the computer then simulates sentient beings interacting within the creation according to its own ensemble of rules.
If you define a house without a bathroom in The Sims, the characters within the simulation take a pee on the living room wall.
link to original post
I remember reading a thread on a BB about the weird situations people would put their sims in. Putting a ladder in an empty swimming pool and when the SIM climbs down removing it. Then it's just stuck in there until it croaks.
Thankfully, so far, when I've done anything, no malicious invisible power has ever magically removed an exit or anything like that. Of course, a simulation could be set to just run untended until it finally reaches some end point or fails.
The world is already dangerous enough, without say, "Hey, a brick wall just appeared in the intersection and all the cars crashed into it." kind of thing.
Quote: unJonQuote: AutomaticMonkeyThat the physical world is a reflection, or subset of dimensions of a higher and more true world is an ancient belief, probably first stated during the Zeroth Great Awakening, when Pythagoras, Gautama Buddha, Lao Tze, Confucius, and a bunch of Indian philosophers all walked the earth at the same time.
link to original post
Zoroaster would like a word. More seriously, I’ve always preferred the Zeroth Law of Robotics.
link to original post
Unclear when Zoroaster actually lived. I suspect it was at least a few centuries before those others though. [Edited: OK I reread and get what you mean, yes he was involved in that too.]
Not a fan of the Zeroth Law because it requires robots to make judgments not within the ken of robots. A robot can treat an individual human as just another mechanical object and be accurate enough to not harm it. But what would a robot commissioned by: a utopian, a millennialist fanatic trying to immanentize the eschaton, a racialist fanatic or a Malthusian determine to be in the best interests of humanity?
Quote: EvenBob
sim·u·la·tion
/ˌsimyəˈlāSH(ə)n/
noun
the production of a computer model of something
"Simulation theory says that we are all likely living in an extremely powerful computer program, directed by an entity outside of our physical comprehension."
link to original post
While computers are often how we produce simulations, they are not the only way.
Do the ants know that they are burrowing inside an ant farm, or do they just go about their ant business within the circumstances of their environment?
Quote: DieterQuote: EvenBob
sim·u·la·tion
/ˌsimyəˈlāSH(ə)n/
noun
the production of a computer model of something
"Simulation theory says that we are all likely living in an extremely powerful computer program, directed by an entity outside of our physical comprehension."
link to original post
While computers are often how we produce simulations, they are not the only way.
Do the ants know that they are burrowing inside an ant farm, or do they just go about their ant business within the circumstances of their environment?
link to original post
Ants are curious creatures. Their brains are tinier than we can imagine yet they function at an extremely high level. How is this possible. They are organized, they're loyal, they exist to preserve the status quo. All on a brain about the size of the head of a pin. Only a simulation could come up with that.
