HOW DO WE KNOW WE'RE NOT LIVING IN A SIMULATION?

File: shrug.png (499KB, 449x642px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 449x642px

We don't know, so why does it matter?

>>721884466
we don't

My controls aren't inverted.

>>721884466
If it's possible to simulate a universe, it's almost inevitable that we are simulated. And it's possible. (Nick Bostrom, simulation-argument, 2003)

>>721885313
Possible? In our time? Probably not.

But if we assume that we survive long enough, it makes sense to assume that we will be able to create our own universes.

Now, assuming the latter is real, then it's only logical to assume that it is possible that beings that live in the "real" universe lived long enough to create their own simulated universe, in which we live in. Hell, there can be an infinite loop of simulations, but the thing is, what's the point of it all?

If we do manage to create our own simulated worlds, what would we do with them? Contrary to the "real" universe, which *probably* exists by chance, our own simulations must have a purpose, since they were created by beings, us.

File: 1486640948509.jpg (16KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 225x225px

>>721884466
because we would not be able to think about this idea if we were in a simulation

File: bam!.jpg (21KB, 675x380px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 675x380px

>>721884466
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/12/controversial-experiment-sees-no-evidence-universe-hologram

>>721885085
True that homeslice.
Who gives a fuccccccck.

>>721887256
please provide a reason as to why we wouldn't be able to think about it.

>>721888065
He's a program within the simulation trying to spread misinformation.
Wake up ya dummies!

File: strokey.jpg (46KB, 885x516px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 885x516px

>>721884466
do you think any of /b/'s retards are capable of grasping that likely assertion?

No.

So why posit it here?

All you'll get is "trump! trump! trump!" or "white power!1", or "death to niggers1!" here.

>>721888496
They'd have to do better than that.

Does that mean it's possible to "hack" the simulation? Could I have 3 qt elv slave loli's and a thors hammer?

>>721884466
the hardest proof we have that we are not simulated is that there still isn't an end to the number Pi. A computer is physically not possible to store an infinite number so PI is one of the few ways we can determine if our universe is simulated

>>721888684
Hmm, are you assuming everyone on /b/ is a retard? Does that include yourself? Or me? I think you are generalizing and underestimating people in general. I believe people are able to grasp that concept, but often do they want to.

>>721889549
Yes, I'm aware of that.

But look at it this way: Because we aren't familiar with every possible way a computer can possibly work, aren't we discarding a possible system which can handle irrational numbers such as Pi?

>>721889508
Possibly..

No computer could ever simulate the massive shit im taking rn.

>>721889888
trips dont lie

>>721888684
You don't have to read fuckin' Baudrillard or whoever the fuck to understand it.
I mean, the Matrix was a popular movie, right?
It's not the most complicated idea to entertain.

If we did figure out it was a sim, I'm with >>721889508. Hack that shit and do God Mode, no clipping, night vision and yeah elf loli slaves

>>721889888
Booooi if only that 9 was a 8

>>721889770
Not really. As Infinite didgital space needs infinite physical space there isn't really a way to store a number that is infinitly large. Except if you take something into account like extra dimensional stuff and scfi shit like that

>>721888684
Faggot

you all motherfuckers need to watch the movie "the 13th floor"

>>721890031
Yeah that's what I meant. Maybe something which we aren't aware of in our current might help solving that issue. Just theorizing / rambling.

>>721890423
current time*

>>721884466
is that flow 3D?

File: 32880564.jpg (64KB, 407x405px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 407x405px

>>721885085
/thread

>>721890031
why do assume you would actually need to store PI wit an infinite accuracy? Why assume you need to store it all?

File: Pepe Hawking 2.png (243KB, 1095x862px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1095x862px

>>721889581
good sir. perhaps you're overestimating these animals.

they voted for GW Bush twice. And they elected Trump.

what evidence do you have, that these retards possess self-awareness or any intellect whatsoever?

and yes, "life" is a simulation. frankly it's not even debatable at this point, there's a 90-percentile likelihood that life is a simulation.

>>721890503
Sorry, no idea what you mean, just grabbed that picture from the web.

Further investigating shows Flow 3D is modeling software.

Still, no idea if it was created with it.

>>721884466
If it's a simulation program, that means there is a programmer.

Good job, you proved what the Christians have believed for millennia.

>>721890698
I'm gonna simulate my fist hitting your face, nerd.

>>721890882
Hmm, what if the simulation created itself?

>>721890882
Programmer <> god

File: 2rh0e0y.gif (2MB, 381x214px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 381x214px

>>721887447
lifes too short

>>721890994
Has Anyone Really Been Far Even as Decided to Use Even Go Want to do Look More Like?

>>721890994
Ok, stand in front of your computer and wait for it to just make a program on it's own, without any input.

>>721891039
The programmer would still be the Creator of this reality.

>>721891284
>Implying our computers are all the computers that will ever exist, effectively discarding possible advances in technology.

>>721890882
>>721891284
Hey man, aliens can be gods too if you squint hard enough. Christians are worshiping some alien dude I guess.
Like, if God is a computer programmer, then man, we gotta sit down with him and do some serious debugging of this code, man. Like, cancer and like herpes and shit? Why'd you program that shit into it, huh?

>>721890698
Well, I don't have any proof. BUT, logically, assuming everyone on this website is "mentally inferior" (couldn't come up with something better, sorry) is just as insane as believing the exact opposite.

Not everyone on this website is an american from the US, so basing their irrationality on decisions made in only the US doesn't make sense when you consider this website is international.

Furthermore, assuming people that frequent /b/ are "everyday" people, then, and now I'm speaking from my life experience (not necessarily truth), people have potential to grasp these "meta" concepts.

Just my thoughts of course.

>>721891434
Then someone or something would still have to make the computer.

Don't know if you realize that Computers are designed by non computers.

>>721891284
but he still wouldn't be god. certainly not the christian god.

>>721890698
>overestimating these animals.

Says the guy who believes in an omnipotent space creator.

>>721891641
He would fit the criteria to be a Creator.

Have you made a universe with beings able to question the reality of their own existence?

>>721891610
Ok, you have a point. Computers need to be created by something.
That doesn't mean that there must be some entity, in this case, a "programmer". Just like our universe could possibly exist because of a big-bang, which in itself isn't a being, then computers can be created by something that isn't an entity.

>>721891641
What separates him from the christian god?

>>721892067
>computers can be created by something that isn't an entity.

How the fuck would a superpowerful computer assemble itself, and program a simulated universe without any assistance?

Last I checked Intel doesn't just wait for CPUs to build themselves.

Almost no way to find out. Only way to know is if we notice when the system cuts corners to make rendering easier

This needs to be on /x/
They are smarter on there

>>721892493
What if it's a perfectly built simulation? Are we trapped in here forever?

>>721884466
Explain how I feel joy and pain in this simulation

>>721892493
they'd've got the physics engine spot on though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaUR6u8nHoM&t=540s

>>721892629
>advance to the future
>we achieved singularity (aka created AI)
>we create a simulation with AI characters
>characters can feel
>you are a character

>>721892493
Well that does seem like an absolute way to make sure we live in a simulation.

>>721892804

Who would want to simulate some losers in their mom's basement arguing over the internet?

>>721892946
someone whose motives are way beyond our comprehension

>>721893012
Sound's like the shittiest ant farm ever.

>>721893113
Indeed.

>>721890698
And who the fuck are you? Did reddit kick you out for being too much of a faggot even by their standards?

>>721893250
triggered much, faggot?

>>721884466
I can think of a lot crazier ideas. In fact, given the rate of technological progress and the fact that we're already creating simulations, it would stand to reason that someday we'll be able to create a universe that's virtually indistinguishable from our own.

By this line of reasoning, if we're living in a simulation, then it's probably a simulation within many layers of simulations.

>>721890503
lookup "computer simulation of osmosis", maybe you can find something

>>721893587
not crazy at all, see >>721885875

>>721890698
If you were trying to be cringey af, you succeeded

>>721885875
Essentially what my source said. He also argued we are most likely ancestor-simulations made by our far descendants so they could see exactly how the past was.
Another hypothesis is that we're testing grounds to weed out bad ai.

Why the hell would a programmer enable artificially intelligent components of its program to code? One of these components would eventually come up with the idea of compromising the functionality of the entire program, especially if it had the capacity to make moral-based decisions.
Computers and computer programs are ultimately tools, and shouldn't be treated any better. If we are tools, what purpose(s) do we serve?
The more I hear this idea of the universe being a simulation, the more I believe it's a product of creationist propaganda.

>>721893788
That does give some meaning to our possible simulated existence.

>>721884466
Why would you even care? It doesn't affect you, and even if you knew that you were, there's nothing you can do about it

Seems silly, actually no, seems retarded to even bother yourself even thinking about it.

>>721893808
>creationist propaganda
nigga u cant be serious

>>721894036
You can't possibly know that there's nothing we can do about it.

>>721893741
Ah, yeah, I should have noted that I wasn't saying anything particularly original.

>what's the point?
Aside from the fact that it's ingrained in our DNA to preserve the species, what's the point in procreating? What's the point in doing anything? Boredom... and because we can. Never underestimate progress for the sake of progress.

Perhaps some dipshits thought that preserving the species organically was going to be impossible, and so they'd continue the cycle of suffering in a simulation.

reoccurring numbers

>>721894101
Have you not heard of the idea of God being a computer? This idea meshes uncannily well with the idea of us being part of a simulation.

>>721889549
I'm pretty sure a posthuman civilization that can simulate the universe could easily have a variable precise to well over a decillion values.

>>721894246
see >>721889549
and >>721889770

>>721890698
>90
>percentile
Brainlet detected.
There's an infinitismal chance we're not simulated. Far less than 10 "percentile"

>>721894228
depressing

File: ANG.png (117KB, 206x309px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 206x309px

>>721884466
We very likely are. Materialism in physics has just about been ruled out. Vibrating strings, the multiverse, & holographic models are all the rage these days.

>>721891641
He's got admin privileges. He's our god.

>>721894570
Not anon, but putting a % on it at all is pretty arbitrary and silly.

>>721894717
11/10 you're gay

>>721894570
you just pulled that 10% out of your ass

How would this simulation handle infinity?

>>721894257
Maybe. But just because it aligns with it doesn't mean it was created by it.

>>721894674
/thread

>>721893808
Also, the most important element holding this argument up -- as I see it -- is the existence of quantum computing. It exists, but its breadth is limited to machines. Unless a social, intelligent-enough species pools its efforts to create a constantly expanding and improving computer, making quantum computation the smoking gun to prove a simulated universe is presumptuous.

>>721894773
I got it from who I disagreed with genius
>>721894717
we're only one of the universes as the number of simulated universes approaches infinity
Saying the chance we're base reality is infinitismal is no hyperbole.

File: 1472874892473.jpg (138KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 960x960px

>>721894913
Let's agree to disagree, then.

>>721894892
I can't imagine a scenario where the technology that would be required to create the simulation(s) would be eternal.

WAIT, WAIT WAIT.
If a computer could simulate the universe it exists in, doesn't it mean that it would have to contain itself? Wouldn't that mean that it would have to be infinitely complex to repeatably contain itself?

>>721884466
roll

>>721895402
well the computer could have been designed to not contain itself to avoid possible infinite recursion

depends on the advanced extent of the technology used by the ones using a simulator... on earth? how big are we talking here? If our technology stops advancing then that would be a sign we are in a simulator

>>721895538
but then again, the simulation wouldn't be exactly the same as our universe.

>>721895662
Not necessarily. Another species residing in our universe might have created the simulation we live in. If that's true, us technologically advancing or not, we might still be living on a simulation.

>>721895278
>Saying the chance we're base reality is infinitesimal is not hyperbole.
It is, because there are other factors to take into consideration, like ETE's that might have prevented human beings from creating the simulation in the first place. Also, we don't know enough about the limitations of future technology to assess anything with a %.

>>721895383
That's a common misconception. Base reality cannot simulate for eternity and it will not.
Processing power will only have to be infinite as time approaches infinity which won't happen.

>>721895919
*ELE's

>>721895809
If that's true, no reason to keep alive, l don't see why any alien would have use for that unless trying to gain information or something, but that wouldn't be infinite anyway. We could create simulations on ourselves though in the future, which would be a stupid idea

>>721895919
If it's possible to simulate other universes, then we're most likely a simulation. This journal explains it is possible among other things.

http://simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
This paper argues that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage; (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof); (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation.

>>721895923
...?

>>721896312
The tech won't have to be eternal nor infinite.

>>721896431
How many ways could you knock a glass of water off a table? even becoming close to infinite would require an amazing amount of simulation power for just that one act.

>>721896279
Sure, it's possible, I totally agree. All I was saying is that putting a % on it at this point is illogical.

computers can't simulate infinity, and we know that there are infinite sets of numbers.

wow hard

I'm sure the people that created our "simulation" would be wondering the exact same fucking thing about their existence, if they did not know the truth.

>>721896722
wow you must be some kind of genious

>>721896431
Yeah, I realize that. It wouldn't have to, but the anon was asking how it could.

If the universe is going to reach a state of deep freeze where all ordinary matter will cease to exist, then it would be impossible. However, there is the chance that humans found a way to get around that -- unless we live in an infinitely expanding and contracting universe, in which case it would be impossible.

>>721896610
You obviously don't know how physics or computer programming works.
Direction
Inertia
Friction
Weight, etc.
You just need a formula, not a table of every possibility.

File: 1464464327815.gif (2MB, 350x300px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x300px

>>721892461
well...

>Man creates real AI
>AI learns more and evolves exponantially
>AI creates simulated universe

File: 1486251307262.jpg (39KB, 350x800px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 350x800px

>>721894257
Tell God to delete System32 to improve the simulation's performance

>>721897704
I wish he would, cause my avatar sucks ass

>>721897564
Physics
>consciousness
>free will
>Quantum mechanics

>>721896722

That's so fucking dumb. The universe doesn't have to simulate abstract concept, and it isn't infinite.

Also the idea that whatever kind of reality our universe would be simulated in would have the same limitations as ours as ridiculous. If you can be sure of anything, it's that it isn't.

>>721898162
>what is spontaneous symmetry breaking

>>721898162

>consciousness
Please enlighten me as to what consciousness is before pretending it can't be simulated.
>free will
free will is an illusion, and a very dumb one at that. It's probably dumber than religion tbh.
>Quantum mechanics
It's not like it's magical, it's just really unpenetrable at our scale. Particularly terrible argument since, while it's really hard to work with, we can already simulate quantum mechanics in limited scope in our current universe.

File: 26902815ea5bde355de5ea65d6387ffe.png (38KB, 352x408px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 352x408px

>Babby's first existential question
Anyone who has studied even a tiny bit of philosophy or rational thought knows it's a stupid question. It's fundamentally the same as, "HOW DO WE KNOW THERE'S NOT MAGICAL UNICORNS PRANCING AROUND US THAT WE CAN'T OBSERVE?"
There's no reasoning, evidence, or proof that could lead to that conclusion, so it's dismissed.

>>721897646
What if I told you

We ARE the A.I.

File: mfw WE are the AI.gif (806KB, 220x190px) Image search: [Google]

806KB, 220x190px

>>721898836

>>721898780
>There's no reasoning, evidence, or proof that could lead to that conclusion
>I have no idea what I'm talking about.

>>721884466
Awareness fuck me dead

>>721898689
>"FREE WILL IS AN ILLUSION", spouted the idiot
Free will is only as much of an illusion as reality is an illusion. Will is a product of conscious thought, which is an objective reality. We have a concept of reality only through conscious thought. To deny this is like trying to send an email declaring that the internet doesn't exist.
If you think existence exists, you have to believe in free will. They are both products of reality.

A simulation doesn't require free-will as an illusion because it already is.

Your 'uniqueness' in regards to your favorite foods, women, hobbies, and decisions are all symptoms of social influence.

Your desires and passions are based on the trends that are coherent in the status quo, your subconscious mind works in tandem with your innate instincts to ensure that you are continually responding to subtle undertones of social influence.

A simulation is unable to provide the inhabitants with an illusory free-will because it never existed in the first place.

>>721899119
Okay, please provide evidence that we're living in a simulation.
Then provide evidence that there are unicorns bouncing around you right now that you can't observe.

>>721899271
>people conflating free will with incentive and motivation
Holy shit it's uneducated in here

>>721899328
I don't need to provide you shit. If you truly believe that there is no proof then that just means you haven't looked it up in the first place, which means you are just speaking out of your ass to look intelligent.

>>721899264

You're talking about something else entirely which doesn't relate to the original point. Perhaps I'm giving too much credit to the original comment (yours or otherwise), but I understood "free will" to mean "non-determinism of the universe".

I believe that if the universe is not deterministic, it hasn't done a very good job at showing us that.

Let me rephrase then so that your jimmies will perhaps be left unrustled : the notion of freewill is *irrelevant*, with our understanding of spacetime. If I simulated a universe, I couldn't possibly make it non deterministic, I couldn't create or remove freewill from the agents living in it, which is why I said it's an illusion.

File: 1382050307402.png (130KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 500x500px

>>721890698
>Posts on /b/
>Calls people dumb
newfag

>>721884466
We are, wake up sheeple

What's the likelihood of even being here?

Some odd seven billion people are alive. What are the chances of even being one?

Say you have a kid. That kid could be anybody, why me?

>>721899761
wut

Incentives/motivations and free will are not mutually exclusive, dumbfuck.

>>721889549
But what if pi is a lie?

>>721900249

Actually not that small, that question doesn't really make sense, but almost 10% of the human population is still alive today.

File: dGrxbvv.gif (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

So then there is an equal likelihood that there is a simulated God, who sent his simulated son to die for our simulated sins, ruling over a simulated heaven that our simulated minds go to once we "die"?

>>721900050
different anon

>>721889549
WRONG! Quantum computers in the future are able to store an infinite number.

>>721898836
Wake up sheeple

>>721884466
we are , the real question i think, is how do we know whats real?
>whats real?
>real?
try to grasp this concept

>>721899271
Free will is an illusion perpetuated by an internal critic who doesn't really exist outside your material body. Basically we are all organic robots.

>>721899264
We only have the illusion of free will since we are part of the system. Someone outside our system and with full knowledge of it could predict what could happen with 100% accuracy.

>>721899264
You can't compare our perception of Free Will with our perception of reality, because reality can't be well-defined.

Freedom is an absolute. You can have varying degrees of difficulty of Will, but varying degrees of freedom doesn't make much sense. We're under to many constraints to truly be free, and on top of that, time is transient and we live in the rear view.

The concept of Freedom doesn't properly account for the fact that every event, every thought and choice, is predicated on a maelstrom of other causal events that we have no control over. We make choices, but the assertion that we're free to make those choices is illogical.

>>721889549

Again, some comment as before, pi is an abstract notion. The universe doesn't have to know about pi at all, it doesn't even have to know about fractional numbers.

>>721898780
It's just as provable as the big bang theory nigger

>>721896234
What if we did create a simulation of ourselves in the future, which is what we are now living in

>>721901187
>The universe doesn't have to know about pi at all
>What are circles

>>721900834
How?

>>721884466
I think about this all the time.

>>721901323
The real question is did we create mathematics to explain our universe, or does our universe follow mathematical principles?

Gotta love the idiots using "infinite numbers" as proof we aren't in a simulation. Guess what, those numbers are only infinite if we are using decimals. If you use other bases, you can represent those numbers with a finite number of algorithms.

>>721897704
And to update to a better graphics card, we can almost see through the pixels on max magnification

>>721884466
we don't (can't) know but it is the most likely that we aren't.

>>721901323

A circle is an *abstract* geometric notion. You can do sphere-sphere collision with 3 lines of code while only using substraction.

>>721901479
well the latter is being constantly proven, the first depends on the definition of creating

>>721901470
It's definitely the funnest cosmic postulation that's come around in a long time.

File: 1449944328177.jpg (64KB, 628x628px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 628x628px

>>721888684
Death to niggers

>>721901479
Considering we have change our math constantly to fit the universe, I'd say it's the former

>>721901618

That's not true. Einstein in particular discovered many mathematical rules to our universe way before he had any way to test them. Special relativity and all that jazz still holds up today.

Why do we limit ourself to computers?
If we were to be in some kind of simulator, it could be some advanced form of biotech.

>>721901479
I think that would be a case of putting the cart before the horse... or something like that.

File: 1460471843374.gif (952KB, 500x685px) Image search: [Google]

952KB, 500x685px

>>721890694
Are you assuming it would continue to generate as it went? Explain.

File: !!!.jpg (29KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 500x400px

>>721884466

>>721884466
Does it matter?

>>721884466
We don't

>>721901544
>A circle is an *abstract* geometric notion
What about spheres? Gravity makes planets round. If you have an uniform material with enough mass and a center of mass right in the middle of it, theoretically, gravity can make it a perfect sphere. Then how did you calculate it's volume (4/3 Pi r^3)

>>721901738
>Special relativity and all that jazz still holds up today.
Perhaps not entirely true...

https://phys.org/news/2016-11-theory-einstein-physics.html

>>721894036
if it's a simulation the chance that there is an "after" is more likely. if that's the case I'd like to "test" something ... like rape murder and stuff. so yes it does matter.

>>721891097
Death is the only enemy worth fighting.

>>721901738
Special Relativity is just a model that is mostly right under certain circumstances, but try applying that at the quantum level

>>721901772
Or a 3d illusion on a 2d plane

If reality is actually a simulation.
Then the programmer is a fucking faggot.
>I hate java

>>721901978

Wow, I hope you're trolling but whatever here goes :

>If you have an uniform material with enough mass and a center of mass right in the middle of it, theoretically, gravity can make it a perfect sphere.
Fuck, my head. Why uniform? Why enough mass? If the center of mass is in the middle of it already you've already done half the work, but anyway, no, no, you wouldn't have a perfect sphere. You can't make a perfect sphere out of legos, nor can you out of molecules, atoms or quarks. Also none of those elements (not molecules or atoms anyway) have "uniform mass", that doesn't exist.

But even then, why on earth do you have to calculate the volume? Do you think the universe keeps a nicely sorted catalogue of every planet and store their mass? That's insane.

But even with all that, even if I really wanted to make a perfect sphere in my universe, I wouldn't need pi. I'd say my sphere is located at position P, with a radius R, and maybe it's mass M or whatever the fuck else, and I can manipulate it as an atomic object however I want, calculating distance and collision to other perfect sphere by only comparing their distance.

The equation for a sphere is x2 + y2 = r2.
Where do you see PI?

Did we all enjoy the BETA

>>721902664
x2 + y2 + z2 = r2

I gave the equation for a circle.

>>721884466
Pi has infinite decimal places, would require infinite computational power, therefore we can't be in a simulation. What kind of philosophy faggot thinks of this shit?

>>721902867

Read the thread you moron, your argument is so dumb it's physically hurting me.

>>721884466
There's no way to tell. As soon as you could find a way to say this is real, you could just say the simulation is simulating that quality.

Since there'd be no discernible difference between this and a simulation just like this, one must ask, what would be the difference at all? To which you would answer, "there wouldn't be one", at which point, the ideas of realities and simulations merge into a broader definition of "existence".

>>721889549
A finite universe can't hold an infinite number either. ...or an infinite anything. Nothing is truly infinite.

>>721902742
Life is a circle, it is both a simulation, and not a simulation

>>721903157
true, even an infinitely divisble ratio such as pi can't be infinite, because it exists in the mathematics of this finite universe, which limits pi from ever being realized as infinite.

>>721884466
TFW you realize OP's pic is from Elite, star map filtered by economy.

>>721903157
Until you realize that everything is nothing, and nothing everything

>>721903475
And that is why things other than digits for pi can also exist in this universe. Otherwise it'd just be full of pi digits and nothing else.

>>721903516
herpalyderpaly

Just divided by zero. Still alive

How do you guys know this universe is finite, isn't it forever expanding

What if the reason we haven't found alien life yet is because aliens realized how shitty real life is ... how we are limited to our physical bodies ... how all life is pain and degradation.

What if they harness the power of their star to power a super computer where they have uploaded all their consciousness into. Essentially allowing them to live forever (or for how ever long the star lives for) within the simulation , doing an infinite amount of things from a completely "normal" mundane life to literally exploring the cosmos as a immortal being ... within the simulation that feels like it's real anyway so what's the difference .

Because I doubt if someone was actually controlling me would make me sit on 4chan all day and jerk off to gay threads.

>Why enough mass?
so gravity's effects can be explicit. i've already given an example with fucking planets dude. smaller corpses don't have a spherical shape because they don't have enough mass.
> If the center of mass is in the middle of it already you've already done half the work
well no shit, i pointed it out so faggots like yourself would understand all the requirements for the sphere to be perfect

also fuck you, i said theoretically, which means in a universe created by the rules i stated it would work

>>721903657
I too got zero infinities
and but strangely, I got seven and a half more zeroes.

>>721890694
Because math.

Computers can't even accurately calculate 1/3. as it's .33333333333333333333333...

>>721903665
exactly, which is why nothing in it is infinite.
Things that exist within a finite universe, are limited to being finite.
Things that exist outside that finite universe, are still part of the universe, because that is the definition of universe. Things that exist, tend to exist. Things that tend to exist, are limited to finite lives that end with the end of the universe, which is the end of all things. ...or they do not exist in the first place.

What happens when you add zero to zero, you get zero, so if you take away zero from zero, what do you get

This is a fucking bulshit thread.
Let's suppose we are in a simulation. Who the hell is in within that simulation, because as long as I know there is nothing else that exists than my point of view, and asking if 'we' are in a simulation is firstly an absurd question, it has no sense at all, secondly the only appropriate question would be wether 'I' am in a simulation, and thats also absurd cause firstly it is needed to be resolved the fundamental question: are the others a conscious self or just a plain representation?

File: handblob.webm (2MB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x640px

>>721884466
HABEEB IT

>>721903981
What if the end is the beginning, and time is moving backwards towards it

>>721903747

Like a grain of sand from the ocean floor?

The sphere is the result of an effect (gravity, water errosion, surface tension), it isn't the effect itself.

Again, tell me where exactly in my little simulation I need to know pi. Quite a simple question. I can model every force known to this universe, gravity, electroweak interactions, strong interaction, and quite frankly any other force made up or sensible outside the standard model. I do not need to know the value of any irrational number, be it pi, square root of 2, euler's number or whatever else.

>>721904035

OP is operating on the assumption that we all are conscious as shown by the way he asked the question. Your reply is therefore retarded and not relevant to Op's thread and question. You are simply derailing the thread please fuck off get btfo

>>721903981
Then why can I think of infinity?
Why do black holes' singularities have infinite density?

who gives a shit either way. its not like living in a simulation is a big deal or anything.

>>721904019
zero you retard

>>721903747

You're asking "BUT HOW DOES THE UNIVERSE EVEN KNOW THE PLANET'S VOLUME" I'm telling you it doesn't.

It does have to know how magnets work though.

we dont and even if we somehow did, it would not answer the question where everything came from, its like the god argument, answering a mystery with another mystery.

>>721884466
because ur a faggot
no simulators simulate fags

>>721904475
True, when you take away something from itself, you get zero, but what happens when you take that away from itself

File: france benefiting from diversity.jpg (1MB, 1891x2800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1891x2800px

>>721904454
y-yeah guys, it's 2017! stop being such simuphobes!

>>721904532
fine. you still can't know for sure that every equation the universe works under doesn't rely on irrational numbers

>>721904670
Continued, You actually get an infinite number of zero's

>>721884466
checked
Because the food here tastes like shit

>>721904670
Let me see if I get this straight:
something has a property of 0
if you remove that property of 0, what does it have'?
well, by definition, zero, because you removed nothing, because there was nothing there to begin with

>>721904670
Do you even do high school mathematics or just not pay attention

>>721905050
But nothing is everything, see zero is something because it exists

>>721904397
1- OP assumption is false, it is making the question itself absurd. It is like assuming that I have an 35 inch dick, and asking if my 35 inch dick is a divine blessing. My dick is not 35 inch! The question is fucking absurddd!
You are an idiot too

>>721905181
not really. zero, by definition, is non existance

>>721905181
0 is just a representation for nothing m8, the start of the number line.

>>721902987
I don't have time to argue with you dude, I have to study for my med school exam on Monday

>>721905275
Can you define non-existence, you can't, because you exist, it's a circle, zero is a circle

>>721887396

Please check for more recent publications when ascertaining if your source is valid.

http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.041301

>>721905291
I'm currently in year 12 and want to be a physiotherapist, I don't reckon I'll get the score to enter straight into it though, what's the best pathway?

>>721903981
It could still be infinite at the microscopic level. Unless there's truly a base matter particle that's not composed of anything else, the universe still can be infinite.

>>721905185
OP here. Please provide evidence that the mentioned assumption is false. Not that I don't consider what you said to be truth, but one should be open-minded towards others' s arguments (hence why I want to know why you refused what I assumed).

>>721904828

No I can't, but I will make the point that I'm pretty confident with enough computational power I could make a universe simulation and I wouldn't need any.

So unless you got a counterargument to that, the pi argument is invalid, therefore we might or might not live in a simulation. I couldn't care less about that really, just the pi argument dozens of people have raised in this thread pisses me off.

>>721905291

Yet you have the time to shitpost and tell me you don't have the time to argue. Either go study or gtfo 4chan you cunt. Idc I've got time.

>>721905430
Fuck dude if I can get in anyone can

>>721905284
See, without zero, there be no other numbers

>>721905465
others'

>>721905537
Tru lmao

>>721884466
>HOW DO WE KNOW WE'RE NOT LIVING IN A SIMULATION?

doesn't matter, if it's a sim, a sim this real is real. but that raises the question, it it only real because this is what we have grown to believe real feels like? regardless, real is what real to you. so.....

>HOW DO WE KNOW WE'RE NOT LIVING IN A SIMULATION?>>721884466

We don't.

This isn't new, Decartes dealt with it 400 years ago.

>>721905275
Zero's definition is not non existence, it is, no element, with is very different, because you are assuming the possible existence of the elements and telling you have none of them

>>721905432
there's planck length

>>721905525
How much study do I have to do? I've currently been doing about 5 hours a day, but I'm only 3 weeks into my final year

File: fd45b7a171c92eda168bea5404338ced.jpg (335KB, 720x755px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 720x755px

>>721905537

And without zero, there be no large scale calculation, or maths as we know them today.

We owe the fact that zero exists that we sit here now discussing it.

>>721890694
Really makes no sense to calculate with any precision greater than the plank length if you think about it

>>721905520
>pretty confident
how can you be confident if you are aware that you don't know every equation required to replicate our universe? are you basing the non existance of equations relying on irrational numberon on a lucky guess

File: 1464187457837.jpg (76KB, 960x346px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 960x346px

>>721893808
Look up bit coins how to mine them and what they are worth and why. All life is based on a measured out equation.

>>721905465
The existence of others consciousness and self point of view can't be proofed, you are trying to resolve an implication without knowing if the hypothesis itself is true. The question is absurd

>>721892493
You mean.... like creating niggers or something?

>>721905999
well, planck length is only a limit on the physical world. but the universe contains our imagination. and our imagination contains planck length/2. therefore, to simulate our universe, you need more than planck length.

>>721906080
What if this is the first universe and we've yet to make every other multi-universe, that would be cool

>>721906080

I'm saying that I could make a pretty damn convincing universe. One that could harbor planets, stars, life, "free will", and all that you'd expect in a universe without needing any of them. If you there is anything in our universe you think wouldn't emerge from our current understanding of physics (and more importantly would prevent life from existing, since this is the point), please point it out.

File: zoom.jpg (140KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 450x600px

>>721885313
It is possible to simulate a universe because we already do it all the time. The real issue is the number of particles in the simulation. We started with 300 in 1970 and as processing power gets better we can increase the number of particles. The smallest particles in the universes we are simulating right now are on par with planets or entire solar systems, but when we can simulate a universe down to the individual atoms people will start to ask if the lifeforms that spontaneously develop in the simulation have rights on par with animals until some simulation lifeforms start building and worshiping stuff and building computers on which they run thier own simulations.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/426342/largest-ever-simulation-of-the-universe-revealed/

Physically we are living together

>>721884466
we don't, in fact it's apparently overwhelmingly probable that we do in fact live in a simulation or a 3d projection of reality

File: 1455692445464.jpg (64KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 800x800px

>>721894036
Im sure there is a way out or into another SIM. This happens more often than you would think. We call it. Demonic possession is the belief that individuals can be possessed by malevolent preternatural beings, commonly referred to as demons or devils. Obsessions and possessions of the devil are placed in the rank of apparitions of the evil spirit among men.

>>721906273
Are you implying that only theories based on dogmas make sense? Aren't scientific theories based on work that may or may not be truth?

>>721906549
>I think therefore there's a sweet potato in my eye

? ? ?

>>721906291
What the....how do you even....no. nonono

>>721906751
what?

lol this was the topic of an episode of rick and morty

Yall niggas just need to read the book I wrote, "The Matrix and Philosophy "

So, wait, there's the imagination producing an ever expanding theory of the universe?

File: 1445388160823.jpg (38KB, 680x370px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 680x370px

>>721895664
Enter black holes and dark mater the point of the black holes is to delete the information that would be infinite. Keeping the machine in check.

>>721906400
didn't understand the last sentence

>>721906291

my imagination also contains two times my imagination! Therefore I must be infinitely imaginative or something!

Wait I'm picturing the universe being fucked by a huge suprauniversal megapenis. This is either rape or our universe must be gay, how could it possibly let itself be raped through my own imagination which it harbors!

>>721907034
We have time, discuss it here

>>721907061
ooo that sounds interesting. black holes being the recycle bin of our little simulated universe

File: Retard.jpg (11KB, 300x156px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 300x156px

>>721906878

>Pic related

>>721907086
what's your point nigger?
my argument made sense

>>721906601
I'm implying that the question is assuming an non probable hypothesis

>>721907328
And that doesn't make sense?

File: 1486614427688.jpg (322KB, 1160x629px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1160x629px

>>721906319
We are Gods chosen universe, it is our duty to create all the rest of the universes.

>>721907328
Also, "non probable"? Where did you get those probabilities, might I ask?

>>721907061

But then again we do know that event horizons can and will contain information indefinitely.
Holding bin is probably a good way of putting it.
(Dark matter are the comments to the code)

>>721907488
Sorry I meant that it can't be proved (My English bad).
The question does make sense grammatically but it is absurd making that question if we can't even know what is the actual nature of consciousness

>>721906255
Did the mathematical functions that describe how our universe works come about before the universe itself?
Numerical logic is not natural, we've only used it to understand phenomena around us.

>>721908077
I am pure consciousness, you'll find out if you practice detachment, ego-death and mushin, then amp up the volume with drugs that make you emotionless

>>721908077
I am aware that my assumptions may not be true.
I just wanted to have a discussion which may or may not be true because I thought the concept was interesting.

Also, I'm going to sleep now, so thank you /b/ros for your replies.
>OP out.

>>721888684
Kek and /thread

>>721884466

Shh

>>721884466
Because the earth is flat

File: 1463872597735.jpg (143KB, 920x1364px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 920x1364px

>>721906745
>https://www.technologyreview.com/s/426342/largest-ever-simulation-of-the-universe-revealed/
>(EYEYAM)

>>721908267
I don't like detachment, I don't like Buddhist monks, I don't want practice a delusional, vegetable, boring way of life in order to reach a false "enlightened" goal.
I like anger and love and happiness and fear and doubts and sex and emotions and living

>>721908869
I like it too, that's why I reversed the process =3

>>721895318
It's just Boris!!

>>721908869
I didn't choose those things, it was forced upon me, because it was the only way to survive

File: 1459685983211.jpg (49KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 499x499px

>>721907456
No its our job to make this universe great again. Recent reports are coming in that the universe is expanding. If this is true makes sense as we continue to upgrade our systems the machine that runs our sim would also continue to become more complex. The only true way to know is that day when we reach the peak of the technology that created this simulation.

>>721884466
does it matter? its real to you.

>>721909232
I also had a time in which I used to think too much and end up in a kind of Alert/mindful/conscious/thepowerofmeow state of mind, but it is just that, a state of mind, nothing to be with enlightenment and that kind of bullshit

>>721884466
There's been no lag as far as I know, and we haven't had to restart yet either.

if it is then I feel bad if "they" see my pissbottle and shitbucket collections

>>721909526
OP went to bed, but true, if it feels real, then maybe it's worth something, if it feels dead, then maybe its worth nothing, but nothing is everything, the message maybe being meaning out of thin air, or not I don't know, I'm just guessing, maybe if we can create our own realities, we'd find everything we've been looking for

File: 1472953518020.jpg (74KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 640x640px

>>721908227
everything has a number everything is a balanced equation cancer life death birth trees bees cars gas solid metal liquid its all got a number. Computer just crunches them that's all they do. Some numbers are RANDOM like most here today we are here because we love the RANDOM.

Wisdom is knowledge,
knowledge is power,
power is life,
life is order,
order brings chaos,
chaos brings death,
death brings pain,
pain brings truth,

and truth has wisdom,

it's a circle

>>721909931
that makes no sense.

honestly, your reality is what you make of it. thats why mental patients create their own when they don't like whats happening in the one every else sees. all that matters is that you think it's real. even if it isn't, you obviously couldn't even tell the difference anyways.

>>721910665
I know it's real, doesn't get much better than that

>>721884466
because i am one hundred percent sure if our universe were a simulation my life would be written better.

File: DSC_7388.jpg (2MB, 2500x1660px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2500x1660px

>>721889549

In the material world, there are no exact circles, only nearly-exact circles. And one can compute the circumference or area of the known universe to remarkable precision with only a few digits of Pi.

So the irrationality of Pi doesn't suggest anything at all regarding the materialism of the world.

Math, however, will be consistent between manifolds.

File: toys2.jpg (270KB, 1200x1023px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 1200x1023px

>>721901978

Planets are nearly round. The Earth is kinda pear-shaped. Jupiter is rounder, but it doesn't need math.

Even the Sun, which is super round has (ever-changing) bumps and wobblies.