Simulation Theory
https://youtu.be/I_KJKEYoaoo
_________________
Evidence: The Wigner's Friend experiment.
I watched this video by an author of the book "Simulation Hypothesis" by Rizwan Virk. I recommend it as well:
https://youtu.be/UHlfe2HE_gQ
In it he referenced a famous thought experiment called "Wigner's Friend". This thought experiment was actually completed in Vienna and the result are another bit of evidence that shows reality is NOT objective.
Here is an article:
https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/03/12/136684/a-quantum-experiment-suggests-theres-no-such-thing-as-objective-reality/
Last edited by sitko on 15 Jun 2021, 3:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
https://youtu.be/I_KJKEYoaoo
I'm not, I like watching videos, it's a resource.
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,182
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
NDE?
Apologies, what he said ^^.
Or I might have to say that I'm an atrocious communicator at times.
I believe that our world is absolutely saturated in Darwinian game theory, almost to the point where little else can matter. I don't know if you've listened to Donald Hoffman's lectures at all on truth vs. fitness payouts or read / listened to his book 'The Case Against Reality' - he seems to be absolutely right about what 'this place' and the rules are.
What bothers me about near death experiences, and so much of what seems to come through as mediumship or channeled messages, essentially tells us the same thing - about a cosmos that's infinite love. It doesn't map onto this world at all. That's why I said above - it seems much more congruent to ridicule these ideas as fantasies of weak or whimsical people, until or unless you have enough experiences that force you to contend with the idea that it's real. Taking it then that it's real, and taking the likelihood that the data on reincarnation is accurate, we're either in a situation where a) literally everything is lying to us all of the time and the goal is to wring out energy, attention, whatever 'it' or 'they' can scavenge off of us to feed themselves, or b) if 'heaven', devachan, bardo, or anything like that is real then it's what one could call a cooperative supercluster. You'd use that terminology because that sort of bliss or peace lacks something - Darwinian game theory and evolutionary competition.
The question - is there really an 'outside' to this which is absolutely nothing like the world we live in, or is it all lies and it's evolutionary game theory all the way through? Admittedly it's really difficult to imagine what principals a world could run on where everything isn't a Darwinian fitness game where one's perpetually fighting for their right to exist. With that in mind the whole NDE phenomena is either a) the other side trying to help us around a particular bend in evolution where exponential technology could cause extinction, hard reset, etc. in the next few centuries or b) it's predators who don't know how not to over-farm their prey, in which case all the woo keeps going until we drive ourselves extinct and then when we die it runs out of things, at least on earth, to feed off of. On some level, like most people, I'd hope there's at least some a) but I don't know that for certain, and the pessimist in me considers that we had the WWI, WWII, holocaust, Stalin's regime, Mao's regime, Unit 731, Khmer Rouge, the only thing that changed was our capacity to end it all with nuclear weapons. To that end I find myself reading John Gray, Lev Shestov, etc. right along with the other stuff because we're really in a ghastly / macabre world where - to the best I can tell - it almost seems like this reality is a generator function for making and uplifting psychopaths. Very little of this adds up in any sane manner.
_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin
An especially unusual version of the observer effect occurs in quantum mechanics, as best demonstrated by the double-slit experiment. Physicists have found that even passive observation of quantum phenomena (by changing the test apparatus and passively "ruling out" all but one possibility) can actually change the measured result. Despite the "observer" in this experiment being an electronic detector—possibly due to the assumption that the word "observer" implies a person—its results have led to the popular belief that a conscious mind can directly affect reality.[3] The need for the "observer" to be conscious is not supported by scientific research, and has been pointed out as a misconception rooted in a poor understanding of the quantum wave function ψ and the quantum measurement process,[4][5][6] apparently being the generation of information at its most basic level that produces the effect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)
It's not falsifiable. But, there are many examples that point toward reality not being a base reality but a simulated reality. People here don't really "discuss" things do they, I posted a thing that I hoped would engage other users to maybe discuss this, and you guys, just reply "Nope!"
Not much of a discussion...
For things that we know almost nothing about (like the origins of the universe), there's no clear line between valid abductive argument and making thing up. This reminds me of the probabilistic arguments for god. Simulation theory is better than theism in some ways such as avoiding absurdities like timeless minds but there's not nearly enough evidence, especially for a top-down version like the matrix.
Even if the observer effect were mind-dependent a much simpler explanation than a grand theory like a simulation would be that the phenomena and noumena are much further apart on a quantum scale than on the one we normally perceive, since the quantum scale is not the one our minds evolved to observe.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant ... /#PhenNoum
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,182
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
Not much of a discussion...
It's the same pattern I pretty much see anywhere. Get an discussion of much of anything abstract going (it can even be something as mundane as Bayesian inference), get the attention of the self-appointed morality or rationality police (someone operating from concrete operational mode for life who sees abstract reasoning and exploration as a character flaw), and the whistles, yellow cards, and citations come out.
_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,182
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
It's also possible that there isn't really a base reality to speak of. Something I posted a while back that appeared as a BigThink article: https://bigthink.com/surprising-science ... -existence
_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin
I believe in simulation theory, that we are either NPCs or RPGs, in our reality.
I'll present my bits of evidence in replies, and feel free to add your two cents...
Note: You WILL be able to change your vote in the poll, after I've convinced you.
I look forward to your thoughts, ideas and questions.
So...you're saying that we are all either "rocket propelled grenades", or that we are all members of "the National Press Corp"?
Well, I must say, you sir, are a good discussion person. Now, if I could just understand what your saying.
I think I'll try to paraphase what you said:
People all over, judge discussion topics because instead of having a good discussion they prefer to just "dis" people.
That's one reason, I've been trying to find Wrong Planet. This Judgy behavior is what the NTs do. I just find it remarkable that some autistics will treat other autistics the same way that NTs treat autistics. Maybe they learned the bad habits from them.
Oh, I apologize, I just assumed everyone here knew what RPG and NPC stood for, here you go:
RPG - Role Playing Game, these are games like Skyrim, Fallout, Dungeons & Dragons. In these games, the player (a human) drives a Player Character (Avatar) inside the game, the thoughts/ideas of the Player Character come directly from the Playing Human (outside the simulation).
NPC - Non-Player Character - In RPGs, anytime you see a character who isn't controlled by someone outside of the simulation, it is a non-player character. The idea here, is that instead of people in the simulation being controlled by an entity outside of the simulation, they are instead part of the simulation, and created of 1s and 0s. They "Think" that they are real, because of "I think therefore I am".
It could be possible that lines of code in a computer program have some sort of sentience that we can't even begin to fathom. We'd have no way of knowing. If the same is true for us, then the creators of this simulation might not even be aware that we exist or have consciousness. In that scenario, this world isn't a video game, rather an accidental creation of "life." Perhaps this is why life as we know it could be seen as meaningless, we weren't created to have purpose.
Maybe outerspace and planets are actually the lines of code in this simulation, with the universe being some sort of program. Any "life" that came about on planets was unintentional, possibly unnoticed, and we exist by a programming fluke intended to make the planets operate better.
Some people see a pseudo-scientific idea they like and latch on to it as if it was the most profound idea ever written, not realizing that it is just another Heaven-And-Earth story updated with a few scientific-sounding buzzwords to make it seem plausible.
Characteristically, this "Simulation Theory" is one of those ideas -- another way to present the concept that we are all pawns in some Great Plan in the mind of the High Programmer (e.g., "God").
_________________