How likely is it that we are living in a simulation?

>>59629786
greater than 0

Considering we have a cheeto for a US president, 100%

>>59629786
Go ask /x/
They have a general about that all the time.

>>59629786
Bout tree-fiddy

From the thumbnail I thought that was a person and then I expanded. It was a chimp but I had to look closer and realize it was a person after all.

/blogpost

>>59629786
not a simulation like a videogame, more like a hologram. has always seemed obvious that this wasn't objective reality

>quantum entanglement isn't two particles somehow interacting with each other instantly even though they're a universe apart, it's just a bit flip generated on a processor

>>59629786
There is literally no way to prove you aren't just a brain locked in a jar and being fed artificial stimuli right now.

you are and the simulation is just me and you.

you are yourself


i am everyone else and I AM GOING TO FUCK YOUR SHIT UP KIDDO

>>59630155
>Considering we have a cheeto for a US president, 100%
le drumpf is bad maymay how's ventilation in your mom's basement

What'd be the point? Would YOU bother simulating this?

>>59632344
fuck off shill

>>59632464
Why not?

>>59632344
>>>/r/the_donald

File: 1468230825627.jpg (42KB, 288x360px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 288x360px

>>59629786

It's more likely that you're living in my simulation.
-observer theory.

>>59629786
If it turns out we are able to create a simulated universe that evolves thinking creatures, and those creatures can create a simulated universe, then I'd say "high". There's only one "reality", but we'd have at least two examples of "simulated reality". Just by the numbers, it seems unlikely we'd be at the start of the chain, if we create a new link in it.

>>59629786
not very likely im afraid

File: thegirl_03.jpg (35KB, 800x372px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 800x372px

How do I wake up?
I tried jumping off a building but that just bring me back in time of a couple o minutes

>>59634572
JOHJ

>>59634680
This. I'll know we're in a simulation when we create one.

>>59632344
I voted for him and I now think he's shit. I mean, he's better than Shillary but...

File: 1490395580857.jpg (9KB, 235x270px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 235x270px

>>59634680
What if they created this simulation without the ability to let us create a simulation?

>>59631539
t. brainlet whose knowledge of quantum entanglement comes from popsci articles

>>59635512

this.

I am so glad I don't live in Brazil...

>>59636452
Reminder that there are parts of Brazil that are 99% white, and that the age of consent there is 13 years
Also reminder that there are ugly niggers in your country too

File: 1484535822155.jpg (260KB, 1181x1080px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 1181x1080px

>>59629786

time is ticking much faster than it used to be when we were younger

>>59636476
>Reminder that there are parts of Brazil that are 99% white, and that the age of consent there is 13 years
...so?

>Also reminder that there are ugly niggers in your country too
...so?

File: 1483029762540.jpg (101KB, 539x960px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 539x960px

>>59630155

if we aren't living in a simulation then it's completely by chance and there's an infinite number of exact copies of our universe that are simulations

>>59636491
Just sayin'
Also reminder that using ellipsis makes you look like an idiot

>>59629786
Technically we are. Not going to explain because the people of the internet don't believe in purpose or anything that can't be seen.

>>59629786
I have suspicion I'm living in a simulation designed by the CIA to torment me, I don't think anyone I'm chatting with is real or if it's real, it's based off the real world I'm disconnected from. The CIA thinks they can torment my mind with shills, but they're wrong. I will not have my mind manipulated by the CIA and the NSA.

>>59636476
Yeah, I've seem what you monkey fuckers think passes as """""""white"""""""". Fuck off.

>>59636476
Nobody in south america is white or even looks white. Hell, the spics here look more white than anyone in south america ever will.

>>59629786
3/4

>>59629786
Not very.

>>59638217
How do you know this isn't a simulation right now?

very likely. Think about it.

There are infinite universe, BUT each universe will create an infinite amount of simulated universes, which will create infinite simulated universes within them, etc.

Only the initial seed generation is real, every other generation is a simulation, and there are an infinite amount of generations and only one initial seed.

We;re in the matrix

>>59638370
Prove it.

>>59638909
I just did

1*infinity < infinity*infinity

>>59639059
>multiplying by infinity
1*infinity=infinity*infinity
ftfy

>>59638370
This isn't a full picture.

Consider, the deeper you are into a simulation inside a simulation inside a simulation... the higher the chance one of the many simulators will halt, whether due to a bug, destruction of the computer, or because the scientists got all the information they were looking for, etc. It's pretty unlikely that we're some huge number of layers deep into being simulated, it'd be pretty unstable.

I agree that if we create a simulation within a simulation, there's a good chance we're simulated too, but we might be the seventh layer, or the first.

>>59639380
ya dumb dumbs, humanity has already colonized and harnessed the entire accessible cosmos, but due to still having the emotions and drive of a paleolithic animal they created a simulation of earth so we could pretend we were still living to advance humanity and vent off our pent up energy

>>59629786
You can't know this.
Your perception of world are electrical impulses after all.
It is impossible to know if other humans are just conscious as you are or if they're just biological robots"programmed" to act as humans.

You can even be "hooked" to some kind of device which stimulates your neurons to create this world around you.

I guess only thing to suspect that world is not real by searching for flaws in it.
Suspicious coincidences, repetitive patterns, strange human behaviour.
BUT, even that can trick you if "they" have full control of your brain.

Just... Don't masturbate and stop watching porn in case someone is watching you.

>>59639375
>all infinities have the same cardinality
t. web artisan

>>59634818
Great movie, forgot it even existed. Gonna rewatch it.

>>59639553
There is no point even writing here anything...
I can just think the answer and "they" will know it...
If it's simulation, there is no reason to communicate with other "people".
I'm just living the life and watching this simulation go.
How it interacts with itself and me.
It's fascinating.
No need to write it here, though. Because "they" know anyway.

>>59637066
Go sleep terry

File: hmmm.png (7KB, 112x112px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 112x112px

>>59630155
>/g/ is full of literal faggots who masturbate to "traps"
>/g/ is full of le ebin drumpf haters
Really makes me think

>>59639654
kys

File: toki wo kakeru shoujo.jpg (519KB, 2000x705px) Image search: [Google]

519KB, 2000x705px

>>59639597
I love it. I hope you enjoy it again
https://youtu.be/yxZ_oBGbNpk

>>59634591
This meme breaks down instantly when you apply Bayes theorem

>>59639654
Anyone who posts drumpf is usually a troll.

>>59632464
underrated

>>59629786
Drink some bleach and unplug yourself from the matrix.
Let us know what happens.

>>59639675
Says the scrawny leftist faggot. Keep crying, you're pathetic.

>>59639963
If you die in the matrix you die for real.

>>59639974
how would you know?

>>59639987
That's what happens in the movie

>>59639583
I think your understanding of the conceptual value of infinity is inadequate for the argument your attempting to make.

>>59640044
1*infinity != infinity^2 because all infinities are not equal

an infinity can have more items than another infinity

for example, the set of real numbers is infinite as is the set of positive integers, but the cardinality of the set of real numbers is larger than the set of positive integers even though both are infinities. so in short, an infinity squared would not be equal to that infinity, the infinity's cardinality would likewise be squared, and therefore be larger infinity than the starting infinity. literal second semester CS stuff

>>59640002
was it a documentary?

>>59635512
Wow an uninformed voter voted for Trump. What a surprise.

>>59640340
Thank you for correcting the record.

>>59635512
>better than shillary

What evidence is there to suggest this?
Literally everything he's tried has fallen flat so far lel. So it's basically barack obamas third term.

>>59640368
>Literally everything he's tried has fallen flat so far lel.

>repeals tpp intensifying

>>59640364
Fuck off Big League Truth. No one likes you or your incompetent boss that can't get any critical legislation past congress

>>59629786
can you be more vague than "simulation"?

Let's say it is true, and of course by one's definition that either is true or remains to proven.Even then, you will never be able to prove it, or to "break the matrix".

One's creation can't be smarter than it's creator,it's just plain simple.

>>59640433
>repeals TPP
He didn't repeal anything. He just didn't ratify it.

>>59640486
well then he's already infinitely ahead of Hillary

>>59640519
Again he didn't repeal anything, congress didn't let it pass in the first place.

It's a nice fake news story but it wouldn't pass regardless.

These speculations are purely designed as a distraction to prevent you from looking at plain reality. It literally doesn't matter if we're a simulation within a simulation within a simulation... repeat ad nauseum. It makes absolutely no difference to how the world is and how you can interact with it. Get over this retarded, baseless solipsism. It's holding you back.

I'll be more convinced once we have a unifying theory

>>59630155
We must be in a simulation because shit isn't going your way in life. Just accept the fucking reality.

>>59629786
99.99%

>>59638370
But we don't know there are infinite universes. And you can't say "very likely" than claim you have proof. Which one is it?

>>59629786
50%, either we live in a simulation or we don't.

>>59638370
no each universe will create a finite number of simulated universes, possibly 0

We are not living in a simulation. What a lot of people forget when thinking about this is that even with the most advanced super quantam whatever computer the entire simulation would just be data on a chip that contains info about what is happening in the simulated universe

It's just info though, it's not the real thing. Consciousness is based on our bodies and brains physically existing. Data is just arbitrary space on a computer chip that is meant to represent and keep track of a virtual universe.

Because that universe would not be physically existing though the beings in it would not actually be conscious. Because we can see that we are conscious it disproves the simulation theory. You could have a perfect simulation simulating every last atom and sub-atomic particle of a person and have them ask if they are conscious, but there wouldn't actually be any conscious mind asking that question, only 1's and 0's on a chip that is meant to represent someone doing that for the purposes of simulation; that data would not become conscious.

>>59641928
"consciousness" is an illusion, it's not a real thing. You have to first understand this before trying to make a statement delving into something as complex as this.

>>59641928
a universe on a hard drive is ''physically existing'' more than a universe just floating in the middle of literally nothing
also this >>59642042

>>59634902
KEKJ

>>59642042
>"consciousness" is an illusion, it's not a real thing.

Fairly sure that's wrong famalam. I mean it's not some magical thing like that other guy is implying, but our brains do have particular attributes and traits that can't be found on bacteria or rocks.

Anyway if the world is a simulation then we are part of the simulation, that makes everything in the simulation real to us, there's really no difference between "reality" and being a simulated person inside a simulated world. Is there anything really that a brain in the vat can do after he finds out he's a brain in the vat?

What can a puppet who sees its own strings do?

>>59641928
>You could have a perfect simulation simulating every last atom and sub-atomic particle of a person and have them ask if they are conscious
And that person would say "yes" and there is absolutely no way you can distinguish between the real person and the perfect simulation.
A perfect simulation is for all intents and purposes conscious.

You're basically arguing that "real" consciousness is some kind of magic that transcends the physical world as we understand it, which may or may not be true.

If P is not NP, then the simulation is NP. What is running this simulation must have infinite resources as details of the universe increase.

Maybe that is why it's mostly empty space.

>>59642042

Whatever you want to call consciousness it's based on our brains. The consciousness that is produced by a living being's brain is something that cannot be replicated in a computer because there is no brain physically existing and that is the necessary component. Without it they are just really advanced sims that can perfectly imitate humans but aren't actually consciousness.

Lines of computer code and data isn't actual consciousness.

>>59642076
>a universe on a hard drive is ''physically existing'' more than a universe just floating in the middle of literally nothing

I don't think you understand the meaning of the term "physically existing"

>>59642187
>but our brains do have particular attributes and traits that can't be found on bacteria or rocks
lol. Consciousness being an illusion doesn't dispute that by the way. Let's put it this way, you act based on a finite, understood set of experiences and events that shaped you to be who you are today. Which is to say you have no real say over your decisions, thoughts, actions, or even feelings (things commonly associated with consciouness), all of these things are determined by chemical reactions that happened in the past. For example, you know how you decided to wake up this morning? You didn't, your past experiences, dopamine in your brain, and the temperature of the room decided that. If those situations were identical 1 million times, you would get up at the exact nanosecond every single one of those million times.

>>59642197
the details of the universe don't increase wtf, did you even do high school
>>59642223
>I don't think you understand the meaning of the term "physically existing"
you're missing the point

>>59642223
>The consciousness that is produced by a living being's brain is something that cannot be replicated in a computer because there is no brain physically existing and that is the necessary component
100% false, there is no reason why consciousness could not be recreated in a computer

>>59642223
>The consciousness that is produced by a living being's brain is something that cannot be replicated in a computer because there is no brain physically existing and that is the necessary component
Why not?
What part of the brain could not be accurately simulated with sufficiently advanced technology?

>>59642190
>And that person would say "yes" and there is absolutely no way you can distinguish between the real person and the perfect simulation.
>A perfect simulation is for all intents and purposes conscious.

only from the perspective of someone else watching it, which is completely irrelevant

>You're basically arguing that "real" consciousness is some kind of magic that transcends the physical world as we understand it, which may or may not be true.

No, I'm arguing that consciousness is produced by the complex interactions of our neurons, neurotransmitters, glia, hormones, etc.

A perfect simulation is not the same thing and the same interactions are not physically occurring in real life. Because they are not physically occurring and interacting with eachother in real life there is no consciousness; only a bunch of lines of computer code meant to signify what is going on.

>>59642280
>100% false, there is no reason why consciousness could not be recreated in a computer
>>59642285
>What part of the brain could not be accurately simulated with sufficiently advanced technology?

see >>59642338

Something meant to signify and represent something else cannot possibly become that thing.

>>59642338
consciousness is literally just your perception
are you saying that this perfectly simulated human's perception of their own consciousness is somehow discernable as not real? are they just lying because they're a simulation
your retarded AHHHHHH

>>59642338
>No, I'm arguing that consciousness is produced by the complex interactions of our neurons, neurotransmitters, glia, hormones, etc.
>>59642360
>Something meant to signify and represent something else cannot possibly become that thing.

So a bunch of electrochemical processes come together and form consciousness. Seems like fucking magic to me.
Why would a different process with the same effective outcome not magically form consciousness as well?

>>59642243

What the fuck does consciousness mean to you nigger? It means being aware of who and what you are, being able to question your purpose and existence, think about the future and past etc. Like the difference between a variable and an entire running program.

Are the questions you ask and answers you receive determined by your nature, nurture, environment and incidents from the past? Most likely. However you're still able to ask the question and still able to think of an answer, which is more than what an entity with no consciousness (rocks,microbes,etc.) can do.

Stop tipping your fedora for one moment and look up the definition of the words you're arguing about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIrUoTYd9hA

>>59642360
it doesn't represent it. It literally IS it.

>>59642360
Not an argument, everything that together form "consciousness" can be (and therefore will be, assuming we don't destroy ourselves) recreated in a machine

This entire thread is wasteful masturbation

>>59636476
wtf I love Brazil now

>>59642411
your life is wasteful masturbation

>>59629786
You're outch'your monkey ass mind if you think we're not in a simulation

>>59642280
>>59642285

Lol hardware autists are the worst. B-but computahs are perfect! they can easily recreate a human brain!! Y-yeah, everything can be recreated with ones and zeros!
>even though we still don't know how the brain truly operates.

Dear god, computer hardware autists are the pathetic.

>>59642475
>since we don't know how the brain operates, we will never know and it will never be possible to simulate it, ever
kek

>>59642475
We still do not know how the brain truly operates but assuming that it does so exclusively within the limits of the physical world then it can be accurately recreated in one way or another with sufficiently advanced technology.
Whether that technology is a computer simulation or a biological brain that has been put together atom by atom is irrelevant.

If the brain does not operate exclusively within the limits of our physical world then it's magic.

>>59642373

In a simulation there would be no actual perception in the first place that could perceive consciousness, only data on a computer in our universe that is meant to represent that perception. Inert data does not magically create a perceptive and conscious being somewhere in a magical computer-land, it's just data that sits there doing nothing.

>>59642376

>So a bunch of electrochemical processes come together and form consciousness. Seems like fucking magic to me.
>Why would a different process with the same effective outcome not magically form consciousness as well?

They are different process but they also have different outcomes.

In one the outcome is a brain physically existing in space with real elements and minerals and atoms etc etc making it up, this leads to consciousness.

In another outcome there is only inert data on a computer chip. This does not produce consciousness but only results in data being arranged in a way to make it seem to a human user of the program that consciousness is occurring.

What is produced by one cannot be produced by the other because they are entirely different things.

>>59642390

>it doesn't represent it. It literally IS it.

No it doesn't you retard learn some basic logic. Two things that are entirely different phenomena with entirely different physical components cannot possibly in any way be the same thing. The physical component of the data is the actual atoms or electrons making it up, not what it is supposed to represent to humans.

>>59642398
>Not an argument, everything that together form "consciousness" can be (and therefore will be, assuming we don't destroy ourselves) recreated in a machine

see the above responses, you are confusing the representation of something with the thing itself

>>59629786
jump off a 40ft bridge and see if you respawn

>>59642592
>see the above responses, you are confusing the representation of something with the thing itself
Nope, everything that forms "consciousness" can be recreated in a machine.

>>59642592
>In one the outcome is a brain physically existing in space with real elements and minerals and atoms etc etc making it up, this leads to consciousness.
>In another outcome there is only inert data on a computer chip. This does not produce consciousness but only results in data being arranged in a way to make it seem to a human user of the program that consciousness is occurring.
A computer is physically existing in space with real elements and minerals and atoms etc etc making it up.

>>59642622
>Nope, everything that forms "consciousness" can be recreated in a machine.

Nope, god is real because the bible says so

>>59642634

>A computer is physically existing in space with real elements and minerals and atoms etc etc making it up.

but those are not the same real elements and minerals existing in space that make up the brain

It's those things in the brain physically existing in space at that moment that result in consciousness. The atoms of the computer would just be arranged in a way to signal to the human that the stuff in the brain was being represented but the brain being represented would not physically exist.

>>59629786
0, fuck off Musk

>>59642475
lol magic autists are the wors. B-but we still don't know how the mind works! I-it's mystical and magic and stuff!
You don't need to know how it works, you just need to copy it exactly.
>>59642592
>In a simulation there would be no actual perception in the first place that could perceive consciousness,
Yes there would.

>>59632464
money laundering scheme or maybe to simulate how to ruin everything so that the real people can avoid this fake reality we live in better

>>59642832
>It's those things in the brain physically existing in space at that moment that result in consciousness
So just like in Minecraft when you arrange obsidian blocks into a 4x5 rectangle and add fire you magically get a nether portal.
But in real life when you arrange atoms in a brain-like structure you magically get consciousness.

Magic is truly a wonderful thing.

>>59629786
The answer is 47

>>59642897
>just reinstates the argument without even addressing where I rebutted it in the post

>>59642945
Nothing magic about it, it's natural

>>59642970
you managed to fuck up one of the most XD NERDY reddit amirite xD jokes
i'm genuinely impressed

>>59643022
>Nothing magic about it, it's natural
So at which point does a disgusting blob of carbohydrates become conscious?
You keep adding atoms and at one point it goes WHOA I'M ALIVE?

>>59629786
We aren't living in a simulation.

Simulation theory's being pushed by the kikes now so that we can pretend that there is no moral question about killing people.

After all those (non-Jewish) white males aren't just going to kill themselves. Simulation theory allows them to be killed off without any messy moral questions.

>>59635512
>I mean, he's better than Shillary
People are still pretending like this is true? Really?

>>59643184

Consciousness is produced from real brains existing in real life, not from 1's and 0's on a computer chip.

It's not about a certain level of atoms or elements. It's about the thing itself versus something else that just represents it.

Is the Chinese character for water the same thing as water? No, but that's what you are basically arguing here.

>>59643382
A brain is some form of a mechanism, right?

A clock is also a mechanism. So let's say you have a traditional clock, with gears and springs and knobs and hands.
It does a thing, it measures the passage of time.

A clock doesn't need to be made of out gears and springs, I can make a clock with a siphon and some sand.
It does a thing, it measures the passage of time.

I can also make a digital clock, you know, computers and shit.
But check this out, I don't need to write a computer program that simulates the movement of gears or the flow of sand in order to measure time.
A computer has it's own unique way of measure time.
It does a thing, it measures the passage of time.


Now let's go back to the brain thing.
Brain does a thing, it's conscious.

I can create a computer, I won't make a program that simulates the process of a real brain.
It won't be a fake simulated brain with "inert data".
I'll create a mechanism that has it's own way of doing the same thing.
My computer doesn't even need to be chip full of transistors, it could be a room full of vacuum tubes, it could even be lots and lots of gears.
It will do a thing, it will be conscious.


Now tell me, what is so special about the brain.
A brain uses parts that are just as inert by themselves as a gear that's not connected to anything.
Just as inert by themselves as a grain of sand on the beach.

Why does a carbon atom get special magic conscious properties when it's in a protein strand in a brain but not when it's a polymer strand in a gear?

>>59643641
>siphon
I meant funnel.

>>59643022
there's no point arguing with retards

>>59635512
This, former Trump voter here