/sci/ - Science & Math

This is consistent with a 'lazy-loaded' universe, but why does this prove that just because the universal engine is evaluated JIT (just-in-time), why does that mean it is simulated?

Couldn't it be "real" and JIT?

>>11711704
If humans are part of this universal engine then surely that would make our subjective experience "simulated"?

>>11711704
If the hypothesis in OP is answered by JIT compilation then that is proof the universe is run on some sort of computer and therefore similar to simulation theory even if not a deliberate simulation by an advanced species/humanity

>>11711696
those who know do not speak and those who speak do not know

>>11711728

My point is that evaluation being deferred doesn't necessarily mean the process is simulated.

By analogy, genetic information is encoded on a digital storage medium, but it has nothing to do with computers.

>>11711696
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXCUenE0b5A

>>11711696
If this universe was created it's obvious the creator doesn't want us to know about it, considering it would be very easy for them to insert a couple clues. So why would they leave this one particle behavior open ended. Certainly if they can design and calculate all the intricacies of our biological process, they can slap a patch over this single phenomenon. I'm open minded that something weird is happening, but I don't see the logical extrapolation to say this is any proof of a simulation

>>11711769
he left clues everywhere mate for those with eyes to see and ears to hear

>>11711769
We're just background noise in the simulation, not the reason why it's being run in the first place.

>>11711696
Good theory, well done very nice. But you know we can always fall back on the entire modern physics knowledge, that gives a testable explanation,and was tested.

>>11711696
>drawing electrons as round-shaped particles
AHahahahahahahah

>>11711778
What is the clue here?

>>11711778
got any examples of clues?

>>11711823
>>11711822

>>11711696
Retard

>>11711832
>a magnetic field that is made out of vibrating light

okay, so its like magic?

>>11711832
cringe

>>11711696
Simulation theory is nothing more than a religion, scientology if you will

>>11711696
Maybe read about a field before you pick an experiment out of context to push some bullshit.

>>11711854

>>11711850
http://esotericawakening.com/what-is-reality-the-holofractal-universe

>>11711874

>>11711879
The Universe is electric, the frequencies shaping the electric plasma into what we perceive as matter are expressed in the form of magnetism on the cosmic level, the profane often refer to this as gravity but there is no such thing as “gravity” separate from magnetism, it is simply an expression of electromagnetism. Basically the planets are massive magnets that emit electromagnetic frequencies that govern the nature of our little patch of the Universe here on Earth.

Oh i see, so you just don t understand what electric, magnetic and electromagnetic means. That was my second guess. New-age shit loves these words because they dont know what it means so they use it as magic words.

>>11711882
>>11711898
>Oh i see, so you just don t understand what electric, magnetic and electromagnetic means.

>>11711928

>>11711747
Did you just say something?

>>11711832
puke

>>11711696
Doesn't make sense because allowing superpositions to evolve in time makes everything much more computationally expensive than if everything was a definite (classical) state. Computing all possibilities and the results of them interfering with each other is insanely expensive compared to just computing the time evolution of a classical state.
So it really isn't something that would arise naturally in a simulation.
Also, if you lived inside a lazily evaluated simulation you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from an eagerly evaluated one unless you had access to a debugger or something "metaphysical" like that.

>>11711696
Matter goes backeards in time, mayter goes forwards, and massless particles go perpendicular.

>>11711696
Matter goes backwards in time, antimatter goes forwards, and massless particles go perpendicular.

>>11711755
If the universe is a simulation then it has everything to do with computers and is a simulation on a digital storage medium simulation

Also that genetic information exists whole predetermined and isn’t “JIT” so the analogy doesn’t fit

>>11711769
Yo, maybe there were clues left, but not clues left for us and we’re unintended

>>11711832
Schizo word salad

The double slit experiment is the biggest normie bait for people who never looked beyond the results and just picked the explanation that best fits their personal sci-fi fantasy about what the universe is.

>>11713125
to morons like you I imagine so, I imagine anything more complex than a cereal box leaves you quite dumbfounded

>>11711769
>If this universe was created it's obvious the creator doesn't want us to know about it
well...
>>11711720
>If humans are part of this universal engine
we are.
the best explanation for conciouness I have seem comes from the bible:

>“In the beginning was logos, and logos was with God, and logos was God. "HE" was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men”

Logos: Logic, reason, computation, inward debate of the soul...discussion, debate, deliberation, proportion, language, word...Wisdom of God personified as his agent in creation, in the New Testament identified with the person of Christ

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=lo%2Fgos&la=greek&can=lo%2Fgos0#lexicon

conciousness is intrinsic to the univere, is not "just a secundary" property from neuronal networks or silicon chips.

>>11713417
if you like tesla, I would go with this quote.

>>11711786
This. We're all part of a gigantic cellular automata that is running on some autistic alien kid's trillion core gamer rig.

Also remember in GTA III and Vice City, because of the very limited power of the PS2 (32 MB memory I think) every time you were walking on the street the cars and NPCs behind you would be removed to save memory. This resulted in shit like you make a 360 and everything behind you disappears. Something similar is happening with electrons and particles in our simulated world. When you're not looking, the path isn't generated, only the point of arrival on the screen. However when you are looking, the path is already generated and you end up with no interference.
>inb4 muh wave function collapses
>>>/x/

>>11713462
you wouldn't even know who Tesla was if it wasn't for me faggot

>>11711696
>t. retard who's just watched Devs

This problem is completely, and satisfactorily, solved with Pilot Wave Theory.

>>11713501
Rage was infamous for it, even on PCs.

>>11713501

Does that autistic alien kid live within a super autistic super alien man's quadrillion core crypto-miner? Or to impatient contemporaries just point to God/Matrix/etc. to satiate their discontent with the incompleteness of knowledge?

Forgive me if I sound like an idiot, but isn't the whole point of the experiment to prove that electrons have some sort of measurable interaction with other particles?

we are currently in a simulated reality generated by AI and you're all going to be forever tormented throughout many infinite iterations, repent now.

>>11713501
Wave function collapse is the only non->>>/x/ viewpoint.

>>11714314
Honestly I wonder if von Neumann had the same idea and converted to Christianity on his deathbed because of it.

>>11713501
It doesn't save memory to replace a definite path with a superposition of a bunch of possible paths. It's completely the opposite, it increases memory and CPU demands dramatically, by a massive fucking order.
This analogy fails completely. In fact it's fucking retarded and demonstrates a complete and utter misunderstanding of QM.
In QM, a superposition requires each component to be evolved in time subject to the Schrodinger equation. There is so much more information to maintain. Each eigenstate (possibly infinitely many) has its own coefficient that changes in time.
It's not even remotely comparable to an unloaded object in a video game, but instead closer to loading every possible version of that object into existence (each with a different "weight") and letting them interfere with each other.
This brainlet pseud analogy needs to die. Its the complete opposite of reality.

>>11711696
>>>/x/

>>11713996
It shows that electrons behave like a wave, and exhibit constructive/destructive interference, provided nothing from the environment interacts too strongly with them.
The act of interacting with them in a "sufficiently strong" manner is often called observing or measuring the electron, which trips up a lot of pseuds because they misinterpret the meaning of "observing" in this context (it has nothing to do with humans or consciousness).

>>11713040
You know what else doesn't make sense in a simulation? Dreaming

It would make sense for power/computation saving reasons if humans and mammals slept to conserve energy of the simulation but when we sleep our brains are at times just as awake and active as when we are not sleeping, add dreaming to the mix as well for further complexity and power draw, and then theres also lucid dreaming which can see a person conscious in a dream that feels as real as real life and able to create complex environments and situations all under their control, with incredible complexity and vividness.

It would seem pointless from the standpoint of a simulation to have something like this instead of having brains instantly shutting off when asleep to conserve energy, so that at any time one-half of the world's simulated beings aren't consuming energy/simulation time but that is exactly what is happening when we sleep

Not one simulationist has ever touched on this matter, if so they will just explain it away as the simulation being capable of handling such constant load/power draw regardless of why it happens in the first place.

Simulationist arguments fall apart at even the slightest critical thinking and scrutiny

>>11713501
This is as retarded as those clueless morons who say the speed of light limit (information limit) is the tick rate of the simulation they so ardently believe in

>>11715023
>provided nothing from the environment interacts too strongly with them.
that something being light as stated here right? >>11711836

>>11711696
>>11715097
>>11715087
>>11715023
YES

we are in simulation

dubs prove the thread i created predicting the pandemic and response:

https://www.fireden.net/sci/thread/8961788/#8961991

http://prawd.sweb.cz/filo/pandemic-hcq-cancer-profit-genocide.htm

>>11715087
You're assuming a simulation to run on a high abstraction level, like "let's simulate individuals with the ability to think", so you want your observations to have an abstract use, too. But they could also be just an unintended side effect, like "simulating quarks and a few forces" cause "elements to manifest, combining in molecules, creating metabolisms having brain activity"... but maybe dreaming has no intended use, nor has metabolism, and instead, the simulation does not even care about life?

>>11715152
You have to assume a lot more things in order to propose a simulation theory model of reality rather than simply proposing reality is at it is, random emergent elements like that make more sense then as elements of a non-simulated rather than as unintentional byproducts of a simulated reality.

And if that is the case that humans and human activity, biological life, etc are unintentional byproducts of a simulation then that defeats the purpose of an anthropic simulation theory as some simulationists propose where we are the subjects.

Occam's Razor applies here - you are adding one more unnecessary element (simulation creators) to a universe that as far as we can know and test does not require them, so why have them at all? This becomes a matter of religion and faith and not of science.

>>11715197
Look into cellular automata you weeb retard.

t. Gery

I'll just stick to believing in the Lord, thank you

>>11711696
>>11713462
according to Wolfram
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps5wovm3OQ4

28:00 theres no real matter, matter is a features of space, SPACE IS THE REALITY OF THE COSMOS

30:36 space and time aren't fundamentally the same (although they become related)

39:45 the observer (conciousness) has to be in itself part of the universe, governed by the same rules as the rest of the universe

42:00 we still get relativistic effects like time dilation because the every step on the graph will still be the same even if the "observer" is in a different frame of reference

45:50 basically energy is the communication of activity in the network through time, momentum is the communication of activity in the network through space. mass ends up being kind of the propensity of activity to not be transmitted, rest mass do not spreads to other parts of the network it is localized in a particular region.

50:00 ONLY one part in 10E121 is matter the rest of it is just to do with the maintenance of space, electrons are though of "as point particle" but their size would be 10E-81 meters

54:45 quantum observations are related to "choosing" which level of causality you are interacting with, making a measurement in quantum mechanics is picking a quantum observation frame that has certain properties "I want to measure this particular thing, I want to decide the outcome of this so I'm going to pick a quantum observation frame in which essentially time freezes after that state has been produced and once you've tried to force that particular coordinate it doesn't quite work that's essentially quantum decoherence happening"

the observer themselve is one of these multi way systems, so essentially: an observer who is themselves a multi way system observe what's happening in this multi way system.

why does anything definite happen in the world? ultimately there's causal invariants and that causes to be a definite outcome.

>>11715315
>>11715197
>>11715152
>>11715123
>>11715087
>>11715023
>>11715004
>>11713501
>>11713462
>>11713040
>>11711898
>>11711769
>>11711704
>>11711696

Wall of text. Take your meds schizos.

>>11715087
if a video game has procedural generation, then random shit will happen a lot of times. random shit like dreams happening in reality doesnt disprove this is a simulation

>>11715087
I mean it could just be the result of hundreds of millions of years of genetic drift. Only species that are fit to survive will survive, but not all the traits of the species that do survive are necessary.

>>11715645
Wall of numbers. Take your meds schizo.

>>11715645
You have to write a decent amount of text in order to get a more complex viewpoint across.

Or perhaps the instruments are wrong. Do people really believe everything at face value?

>>11711747
back to pol pablo

>>11711832
Anything that tries to describe god as something, such as light, is fucking dumb. God is literally nothing. He is infinite potential which comes from the fact that he is NOTHING meaning he is not held down by any law because he is the one who creates the laws. You can't describe him as an object in the world he created because that would mean he didn't create it.

>>11713417
t. blue-collar worker who thinks he's extremely smart but lazy

>>11715645
seethe more lithiumlet.

>>11717737
nah you're dumb retard, you are telling what you think, I told you what I can prove. Big diff you should figure out if you want to be on a /sci/ forum even once this retarded

>>11717737
But we know God created man in his image, so we at least know what he looks like.

>>11711696

If the world was a simulation then it wouldn't be simulating clouds that disrupt launch simulations

>>11718023
nah I'm not lazy I actually did the work and published it all and the only reason you morons discuss any of this on this board is because for the last 5 years I have literally spoonfed you this knowledge.

>t. autistic anime forum poster who always talks shit about his intellectual superiors he is jealous and stupid

>Thinking consciousness is an emergent property of the brain and one can simulate it ever
Imagine having a god complex this heavy

>>11711696
So Deutsch was wrong? A simulation of the universe would need less size and resources.

>>11724595
>Can't type into a google searchbar: What part of the brain is linked with consciousness?

>>11711879
>http://esotericawakening.com
Sounds credible.

>>11725398
yah it is, if you weren't a hack you know it already

>>11711696
proof by conjecture lmao

>>11711778
>He
Implying a black woman cannot into universe creation n shit

>>11724595
>Goes into mathematica, throws a bunch of formulas in
>I'VE DISCOVERED GOD

>>11725281
Believing that the brain generates consciousness is dilirous

I see the lithium corona shortage hit our board electric schizo hard.

>>11711696
The scale of the simulation just doesn't make sense.
Unless we're talking about a higher dimensional universe wherein this simulation takes place (which does not answer the question of how that universe is simulated) and assuming that this universe is finite, you'd still need a way to represent all the wave functions of the universe at any point in time.
From an information theory standpoint you're ultimately still left with the conundrum that the simulation would have to run on an Turing machine.
In conclusion, this simulation, if it is one, can only be created by an infinite Creator, i.e. God.

>>11715087
Why can't the simulators be us? What if an advanced human species wanted to learn about there past and included everything relevant about there evolution. Some people got crazy ideas from dreams. I would believe it's important to our evolution as a species.

>>11726625
Okay but then you've just presented what is really a religious argument, providing ideas for why our "creators" made us and included these things in the simulation and there is nothing different nor testable evidence to suggest this is more plausible than any other religion

Exact simulation is impossible, you can't create more computing power than it takes to simulate the same amount of matter. (I.e. a 1kg computer could at best simulate 1 kg of matter, but most likely much less.)

>>11729102
Sure you can. You can just borrow computing power from the infinite number of parallel universes.

>>11711696
>Simulation theory is fully proven

>>11715087
Cut scene

>>11711696
>When unobserved, it only calculates the end result

Wrong, and the opposite is true, it calculates ALL possible results.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation

Quantum mechanics points towards simulation theory being incorrect, if anything. More here:

https://motls.blogspot.com/2013/03/we-dont-live-in-simulation.html

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2017/03/no-we-probably-dont-live-in-computer.html

In a game an unobserved object wouldn't do anything at all though, would it? It'd just be frozen in time unless it had some specific script to carry out in the meantime (which would also happen independently of the object)
In fact, since it works through probabilities, it implies that all possible results might also be calculated, which would be even more inefficient for a computer.

>>11713462
That's a good perspective. I also like this Tesla quote, but I don't believe we're capable of understanding the reason we're here, if there even is a reason. But we can still develop a purpose for existing; a meaning to life, subjectively, even without believing in a God or afterlife. When we die, if there isn't a God or afterlife, we'll just become lifeless matter again. Which means when we die, we'll be no different from the rest of the dead universe. We're just a part of the universe that "woke up". And we're surrounded by billions of other beings that woke up too. So even if there is no God or afterlife, we can at least believe and take pride in ourselves and each other, and maybe even hope to wake up again one day. I don't personally believe in a God, but I do believe in humanity. And if you need to know the "why" for that question, then you really ought to get out more.

>>11729680

>>11729903
nice quote he worked with tuned circuit so its quite clear where hes coming from

tuned circuits are beautiful

>>11729831
no, apparently the probability would be intrinsic to the cosmos (if I could say it that way) it doesn't need to be calculated... the experiments indicate that only when it is needed the "waveform" becomes a "particular object" a particle... when it is not needed theres only a probability, this probability does not requiere more "computation" because its only a pre-writen script just waiting to be executed, when it is needed it gets executed and the particle is manifested (to use computer terms)...

>>11731060
There's still a probability which provides multiple results to be calculated.

>>11711836
OP blown the fuck up

>>11731670
I'm not so sure about having to be ""multiple results calculated"" when they do the experiment the particule seems to just fallow a predetermined script so theres obviously an apparent interaction with the next particle because the script is already there! (the probability distribution)... but all this is just computacional analogies anyways...