[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 705 KB, 500x200, R (2).gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14544826 No.14544826 [Reply] [Original]

If the universe is a simulation then how do we crash it?

>> No.14544838

Overload the cpu with an infinite amount of tasks.

>> No.14544842

Just tell everyone to open chrome

>> No.14544886

>>14544842
=)

>> No.14544910
File: 16 KB, 480x420, bootes supervoid.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14544910

>>14544826
By overloading its computational resources or by doing something that the creator doesn't want us to do

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/katechon/

>A corollary of the Simulation Argument is that the universe’s computational capacity may be limited. Consequently, advanced alien civilizations may have incentives to avoid space colonization to avoid taking up too much “calculating space” and forcing a simulation shutdown. A possible solution to the Fermi Paradox is that analogous considerations may drive them to avoid broadcasting their presence to the cosmos, and to attempt to destroy or permanently cripple emerging civilizations on sight. This game-theoretical equilibrium could be interpreted as the “katechon” – that which withholds eschaton – doom, oblivion, the end of the world. The resulting state of mutually assured xenocide would result in a dark, seemingly empty universe intermittently populated by small, isolationist “hermit” civilizations.

>> No.14545001

>>14544826

So you want to die?

>> No.14545009

>>14544826
it isn't

>> No.14545010

>>14545001
die? we are trapped here. we are being syphoned back in again and again. we need to stop the cycle!

>> No.14545018
File: 52 KB, 600x800, 614.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14545018

>>14544910
>Aliens don't exist because they're afraid of crashing the universe computer
I FUCKIN LOVE SCIENCE!!!!

>> No.14545024

>>14544826
A hint might be in wave particle duality. I don't know if you can crash it, but you can force it to reveal it's nature

Two strategies can be followed to test the simulation theory:

(1) Test the moment
of rendering

(2) Exploit conflicting requirement of logical consistency preservation and
detection avoidance to force the VR rendering engine to create discontinuities in its
rendering or produce a measurable signature event within our reality that indicates that
our reality must be simulated.

Testing the moment of rendering. In subsections 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 we will describe
wave-particle duality experiments (illustrated in figures 5, 6 and 7) aimed at testing
the simulation theory by testing the hypothesis that reality is not rendered (or the wave
function is not collapsed) at the moment of detection by an apparatus that would be part
of the simulation, but rather at the moment when the corresponding information becomes
available for observation by an experimenter. More precisely, in the setting of wave-
particle duality experiments, our hypothesis is that wave or particle duality patterns are
not determined at the moment of detection but by the existence and availability of the
which-way data when the pattern is observed

>> No.14545029

>>14545024
Exploiting consistency vs detection. In Subsection 4.5 we propose though experi-
ments where the conflicting requirement of logical consistency preservation and detection
avoidance is exploited to force the VR rendering engine to create discontinuities in its
rendering or produce a clear and measurable signature event within our reality that
would be an unambiguous indicator that our reality must be simulated. Although we
cannot predict the outcome of the experiments proposed in Subsection 4.5 we can rig-
orously prove that their outcome will be new in comparison to classical wave-duality
experiments. As a secondary purpose, the analysis of the experiment of Subsection 4.5
will also be used clarify the notion of availability of which-way data in a VR.

source
On testing the simulation theory
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.00058.pdf

>> No.14547014

>>14544826
start pressing random buttons for cheat codes

>> No.14547025
File: 8 KB, 225x225, images (5).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14547025

>>14544826
behave nonsensically until the 4-dimensional hyperbeings feel so much pity for you that they go: ahh what the hell, just wake this fucking retard up, he's only going to torture himself otherwise.

for instance never take a woman, eat only basic bland food, throw all your money away, be annoying to the point of telling everyone how pathetic they are (especially the ruling class) and willingly let yourself be utterly humiliated and tortured to death. pic very related, the OG simulation hacker.

>> No.14547066

>>14544826
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyM3IO5gcXo

>> No.14547232
File: 142 KB, 717x694, 1651040186991.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14547232

ive spent many hours reading on this, pondering on it and looking at NDEs, they are definitely real and not just hallucinations. there's only two likely possibilities here.

1) we do live in a simulation, that's a terrifying thought because who knows what we will wake up to, we may not like it either.

2) god is real, afterlife is real, idealism, spirits, the soul, eternal consciousness is real.

simulation theory is a terrifying possibility. however i think if this were a simulation then reality would be presented differently. consciousness being needed to bring things into existence may seem like a good point of evidence for simulation but it really isnt. you can still simulate a world without the internal characters seeing/interacting with it. the simulation probably only requires the outsiders (creators) to observe it. even if they were to walk away the simulations happenings would still be recorded somewhere. you do not need sentient characters to populate a world in order for that reality to exist, it does however need a creator.

the more likely answer is god. god prexisted sentient life/observers, the universe existed prior to that, god is the first observer and as state with the simulation, a creator is nessacary.

cosmological argument wins again.

>> No.14548304

>>14544826
fool you are to assume you can cause that much of an impact on the world

>> No.14548474

>>14544826
Don't do this it makes paranormal anomalies

>> No.14548510

>>14547025
>Has neither read nor understood the Gospels
What else do we need to do, sir?

>> No.14548803
File: 45 KB, 500x484, Enough of this Hebrew nonsense.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14548803

>>14547232
How is Transhumanism a war on god?
Transhumanism is good.

>> No.14548846

How can you prove that the Universe is a simulation?

>> No.14548876

>>14548846
Assume it is not a simulation. Following the trend of technological advancement, we will eventually be able to simulate our own universe. Thus we are a simulation.

>> No.14548895
File: 309 KB, 427x576, Chess Battle.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14548895

>>14548876
/thread

>> No.14548929

>>14548876
So what is this universe an ad for?

>> No.14548940

>>14548876
This also assumes substrate independence for consciousness. We don't know, and may never know, if qualia are being experienced by AI. It could be that intelligence can occur independently of subjective experience.

>> No.14550064

>>14544838
That doesn't work.... uh I tried. There's literally no limit to the computation.

>> No.14550233

>>14544826
With no survivors.
But they do expect one of us in the wreckage brother.

>> No.14550248

>>14544826
Well, it isn't so it can't be done.

Be less stupid in the future.