Give me one reason to believe the universe is not a simulation.

Does that mean that once quantum computing is reality, we'll be able to create entire new worlds?

>>8586518
What's the simulation for then?

I mean, obviously it's not for sapient life. You wouldn't make a simulation for life, and then make it so 99.9999999999(followed by a lot more nines)% of the universe is utterly hostile to complex life. Plus a procedural generation that has to do countless trillions of cycles to create life at all is rather redundant, when you can well, just simulate life from the get-go.

And if life is just an odd side effect of the simulation - what's the rest of it for? 5% matter doing fairly predictable stuff, collapsing, collapsing, exploding, most of the rest just being empty potential energy. After another countless trillions of cycles, the whole thing just runs down and, eventually, every remaining particle spreads apart so fast that it no longer interacts with any other particle.

Why build this thing?

If the universe was a simulation, one would think there'd be a whole lot less wasted space and energy, and it wouldn't be set on a path for self destruction.

>>8586518
Punch yourself in the face.

Does that feel simulated?

To break the simulation continue punching yourself until you can matrix and feel nothing because it's a simulation. http://www.simulation-argument.com/

>>8586543

"They" are testing some kind of random galaxy-building algorithm that produces mostly crap, like us

There's no evidence that definitely proves that it's a simulation.

>>8586518
Give a reason why there's not a God

The formative particles of the universe, whether they open and closed strings, particles with up and down spin, particles that are charged or uncharged, etc... are such an elegant design, easily reducible and generalisable at the same time, that it cannot have happen by chance. Similarly, the extra complexities in the quantum level are explained by viewing them as God's true signature, His mark, showing us that even if we will always approach Him closer and closer, we will never know Him truly.

No feature of reality is not adequately explained by God's infinite wisdom and craftsmanship.

>>8586556
If they wanted to produce us, they could just have easily produced us with no apparent origin. If this was a simulation for the sake of having crap like us around, there wouldn't be a galaxy, let alone a universe, so full of crap that isn't us, and is in fact deadly to anything like us. Further, there's no reason to build a simulation that eventually just falls apart.

I mean, unless we're a tinyverse powering a car battery or something.

>>8586571
>If they wanted to produce us

They actually didn't

>>8586543
This would easily be explained by the universe being one of countless simulations, all run simultaneously, with each having different initial inputs for plank units, the speed of light etc... as part of a large experiment to search for which inputs generate the most desirable outputs.

Just as there is no reason to assume that our planet is unique/special within our universe, there is no reason to assume that our universe is special within the simulation.

>>8586578
Then, again, you're stuck with a whole lotta matter doing nothing terribly unpredictable at that level of magi-tech, that all, eventually, will effectively be doing nothing.

The universe is pointless. A simulated universe would have a more blatant function, or at least a potential for function. Even if that function was beyond all possibility of comprehension, it'd at least be self-sustaining.

>>8586581
>generate the most desirable outputs
Even with our primitive minds and technology, we can predict what the end output of this universe is going to be - ie. nothing. Surely any super-dimensional aliens capable of running this simulation would be able to figure that out without running the whole thing. Even if they were somehow retarded in that one respect, certainly they've figured it out by now, so why haven't they shut it off and started over?

>>8586518
/sci/ is not for metaphysics dear

>>8586609
metaphysics, to some degree, influences the direction of theoretical physics, which then influences the direction experimental physics, astronomy, engineering, etc, so I would say it is very much /sci/ related

>>8586588

Yes, but this is a yet another test, run at incredible speed by some type 3 civilization (Kardashev scale). The aim is to create shitloads of civilizations and hope one of them reaches type 3, then research how they harness the galaxy the best way.

Of course, some of the simulated T3 civs would create simulations of their own.

>>8586543
>What's the simulation for then?
shits n giggles

Why is it assumed a simulation has to be created by an intelligence? Or if it was, who created the simulation in which that intelligence exists? Or is it simulations all the way down.

Arguments relating to simulation and multiverse theories actually make more sense if it's just happenstance, and not an intelligence that is responsible.