Simulation Hypothesis

>>17876880
>if the universe is simulated, how do we find out who the NPCs are?
We don't. We're good little simulated goyim. We can't know who's really pulling the strings.

>>17876880
Another good question: if the universe is a simulation maybe things we haven't seen and didn't discover don't exist until we do?

Like in a video game with open world. If you start a game and are in the starting point on the map and you see grass waving, birds chirping etc you would think that this is also what is happening across the entire game-world in any location.

But while you're in the starting place on the map, the world outside of that place hasn't generated yet and will only generate if you visit it.

We took photos of the mountains on Pluto. But we're the mountains there before we took the first photo of it?

>>17876880
If you don't know whether you are an npc or not you probably are.

Npcs never know that they are npcs only the players know that

>>17876920
Jesus fucking christ I hate typing shit like that on a phone it messes up sentences

>>17876920
>But we're the mountains there before we took the first photo of it
I would say yes, because technically, photons reflecting off of Pluto have been traveling through the universe ever since the Sun flipped on, but nobody on Earth had a telescope capable of resolving Pluto out from the ambient darkness until recently. If cavemen had really good eyesight, they would have been able to see Pluto's mountains.

>>17876920
tl;dr
>If a bear shits in the woods...

>>17876983
> photons reflecting off of Pluto have been traveling through the universe ever since the Sun flipped on
Googled this to make sure I wasn't wrong, and sunlight takes approximately five and a half (5.3) hours to reach Pluto. Your point still stands though.

>>17876920
>We took photos of the mountains on Pluto. But we're the mountains there before we took the first photo of it?

From my underatanding of quantum physics you need an observer so only until a consciousness was able to observe the mountains on pluto it forced the universe to generate something and backfill the history. This saves memory much how polygons in a video game that arent in view arent rendered. This is also how the mandela effect comes into play. If the universe was forced to generate a new object it also has to backload the history which may change how things happendd in order to account for it. Its a sort of bug in this version of the universe and will be fixed in a future patch. Just let the grey "alien" admins enter and tweak somethings before teleporting out.

>>17876880
>how do we find out who the NPCs are?
Easy. They are the ones who can only repeat a certain number of lines and conversations before they start repeating themselves. They also often wait around hoping for someone else to solve their problems, because they are too static and pathetic to do it themselves. Whoever designed the simulation is a fucking sadist, though. No matter how many quests you do for NPCs, you never get any reward, just more fuck quests.

>the quest lines never end
>there is never a reward
>the more you complete, the more they want you to do

This game fucking sucks, I want to play a different one.

>>17877255
>From my underatanding of quantum physics you need an observer
Not trying to be rude, but that's not an understanding of quantum phsyics. Until you perfect a grand unified theory of everything, the rules of quantum physics don't apply to the macro level physics that we are bound to. If we knew how to consolidate the two, people wouldn't still being arguing about quantum physics. Shrodinger's cat is a metaphor for how certain subatomic particles behave, not something to be taken literally.

>>17877255
the 'observer' quantum physicists talk about is always an electrical sensor
it's not about particles behaving differently when your eyes are directed at them

>mandela effect
what is this?

>>17877343
>>mandela effect
>what is this?

Where people are too proud to admit how fallible their memory can be, so they claim reality has been altered instead.

>>17876880
it's not a simulation you missed the boat too simulation was totally last month's thing

>>17877307
kek

>>17877307
All of everything repeats itself. Matter is recycling itself in the cosmos, you reuse letters and words every single day. You aim for a dream and maybe you get forced to compromise.

Keep walking.

File: mandela-effect.jpg (66KB, 714x766px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 714x766px

>>17877343
>what is this?

>>17877343
Where do the bounding boxes of observer and experiment end? What line separates them?

Related: http://www.simulation-argument.com/

>>17876920
Yes, but do you really think a simulation of this magnitude would really need to take shortcuts like that?

>>17878504
That's because her name is Clarice.

>>17877307
I hate that the tutorial is 18 years long. And don't forget that you can't choose difficulty, some are born with shit tier genetics and play life on hard mode. And the glitch called "Down's Syndrome"? Don't even get me started.

>>17878623
Does anyone know if you can respawn yet?

>>17879202
There was this one guy.

>>17878623
>9gag/youtube tier humor

This shit is friggin' stupid. If the universe is a simulation, there's nothing that says you have to be able to write a theory of everything. Parameters could be changed at will by the entity in charge of running the simulation. If in fact it's a simulation there's nothing that speaks for us being able to do anything about it. This argument is shite.

>>17876880
Nice thread.
Yes it is a simulation :)
Yes thats good news.
Yes im 99% sure.
My-big-toe.com
Start with the calgary stuff on youtube or you will not get the whole idea from ground up and youll be confused.
Good luck.
Love is the key still.

File: statera.jpg (30KB, 234x248px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 234x248px

http://i.imgur.com/P4aiaMI.jpg

>>17876920
Why should a conscious being have to observe something for it to exist/happen?

>>17876880
>But here's the real question: if the universe is simulated, how do we find out who the NPCs are? And once we do, how should we proceed?

if we are part of a simulation we can only do as much as we are programmed to do. Therefore we can only know what we are allowed to know. So, we'll probably never find out unless we are supposed to do so.

File: what.jpg (71KB, 484x480px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 484x480px

>The Matrix comes along.

>Ignorant tards think it's profound when it's pretty much Philosophy 101 shit, inspired by Descartes' skepticism.

>The Internet gets popular, said ignorant tards meet each other on the Internet and have an autistic circle-jerk.

>Ignore actual science and philosophy, just find things that support their views, especially from shitty clickbait sources.

>Ignorant tards take pure conjecture that is supposed to be a thought-experiment literally because they're incapable of any nuanced thought whatsoever.

>Popsci computer nerd neckbeards who don't have any actual understanding of science invent the religion of the Technological Singularity where a computer-god fixes everything and makes anime real.

>This shit intersects with simulatards and quantum woo fuckery leading to piles upon piles of bullshit being posted on the internet.

>Summer school break 2016 begins.

>This thread happens.

There you have it, a brief history of the computer techno-cargo-cult.

>>17879800
>Parameters could be changed at will by the entity in charge of running the simulation
Yes, but we would notice. So they'd never do it.
Once we come up with a theory of everything, it will work forever. If it -suddenly- stops working, the rules of the simulation changed, and therefore we are actually in a simulation.
However, if it's impossible to come up with a theory of everything, it means the universe is chaotic and therefore not modeled according to simulated rules of any kind, and therefore we are not in a simulation.

>>17879848
i haven't made it too far into this but so far this sounds like a cult. maybe it's just the presentation.

>>17876880
the universe isnt actually infinite. humanity can only see a small portion of the thing from earth. things are moving away from everything else as technology gets better so having better telescopic lenses and probes means nothing. we currently cant even maintain a signal at the end of our solar system from a probe.radio and microwave noise from stars renders the signal unusable

you only have 1 thing that may indicate infinite but without a large enough sampling of stars you cant know . vacuums have form dictated by the container. they always pull in to the center. this can affect how things would be arranged in a vacuum at the moment of its creation without gravity affect there placement

but there isnt enough data about stars to dictate this is the case. the scientific community went ahead with the assessment before it had the data because it probably never will map the entire universe or even 1/3 of it. how is a pic of 1/10000 of it going to tell you anything

>>17876880
>In a simulation, the universe is finite or procedurally generated (and therefore not infinitely large; also it can not reach an infinite age due to memory constraints).

Why? What if the reality outside said simulations has different rules regarding physics and mathematics?

>>17879848
No fap is the key. When i stop jerking off for 3 months I become so powerful I am almost able to bend reality. Thinking about someone dying? Boom. Someone calls to tell me the person I was just thinking about is dead.

>>17876880
I sincerely hate the term infinite and infinity. It is a lazy work around for people to cut off a shit ton of data because its too big to jot down.

The fact that there is a concept known as Variation and Complexity disproves the very notion of infinity, and further proves the laziness of human beings.

(Variation meaning the after effects from making a decision that has multiple outcomes, Complexity being the after effects of alternate pathways not chosen in the previous stage.)

By analyzing a single decision, we end up with an extremely large amount of side effects or reverberations that rival some of our biggest defined numbers. Kind of like the Butterfly effect, with more of a Ripple effect. When applying that mindset to all matter in the known universe however, atomic to galactic; you've easily thought of something even bigger that our largest defined number within the period of a second. To put it simply, its Universal Matter Management. Once you get into Complexity, then you are thinking of something so large that it can't be reasonably defined; however is still not considered infinity because the data is still pertinent, albeit massive.

>>17881759
E.g. Variation
I don't step on the rat
The rat runs into the cat
the cat eats the rat
Cat gets fat
Lays on the mat
I trip on the cat
fall on my face flat
hit the cat with my hat

Complexity: If I had chosen to step on the rat, the rat would be dead, meaning the cat wouldn't eat and get fat, however that would result in it eating something else to sustain itself, lets say it crosses the road to catch a bird, a car drives by; the car could hit, or it could miss. It if hits then I would be emotionally hurt over the loss of the cat, if it misses, the cat may catch the bird; if it does it gets full and lays on the mat, however the birds nestlings will starve; if the cat does not catch the bird, then the nestlings survive however the worm the bird has in its mouth will die.
All of that stemmed from your initial decision to step on the rat.

Now apply that mindset on an atomic scale with the time scale of 1 Planck Time.

Then you'll be a non believer of Infinity like me.

>>17876880
>But here's the real question: if the universe is simulated, how do we find out who the NPCs are?
Alright. So this is going to really boil your noodles. But, we've already figured this out like thousands of years ago. That's what spirituality is. You might think spirituality is putting flowers in your hair, and smoking drugs, and worshiping the moon. That would be incorrect.

Spirituality is the concept that your body is a terminal, through which spirit, or consciousness is transmitted. People who don't believe this concept, or are incapable of projecting their consciousness through others are the NPC's.

It is *extremely* telling that the NPC's concept of sentience is self awareness. Really? Just SELF awareness? That's where you put the bar? People who have woken up to the notion that the universe is a physical information processing machine use the concept of other-awareness to detect who is or isn't a PC. Now, obviously PC's can always just RP as NPC's by just shutting themselves off and pretending to be mute. And in fact, all NPC's are just PC's doing exactly this, so it's considered rude to awake them back into their sentient other aware state before they're ready.

That said, it's worth remembering that there isn't really an outside. You can program your mind to experience the even of "waking up." You might even be able to put yourself into a situation where you're in a matrix tube all full of goo and everything. But, that's also still in the simulation, just maybe on a higher level or whatever. You can wake up from that one as well. At the highest level, you might just be a vegetable of a person, who's imagining all the layers of reality because they are unable to physically move. Or perhaps you're completely insane, utterly delusional, and locked up in a cell somewhere, envisioning this fiction you call Earth. Or maybe this is just a short dream, and you'll wake up with your faculties intact. Or maybe... etc.

>>17881781
None of these are The Truth. The Truth is a fiction invented by NPC's, in order to lock themselves into a reality which is incapable of seeing its own exit. There is no The Truth. There are many truths. Any plausible scenario that can't be proven false, is actually automatically true, and whenever a contradiction is detected--which happens frequently by the way--your consciousness selects a plausible scenario to follow. In order to navigate your reality, you must learn to notice contradictions, and select them intentionally. This can only be done when you learn to divorce your mind of preference, to honestly and objectively consider each possibility of any scenario from every angle, and to put yourself in a state of mind where they all seem equally likely. It is from this state of mind that you will be able to effectively travel between what NPC's think of as entire realities, but to which a PC thinks of as only roads.

When you awake from this reality, you will not be in The Reality. You will just have progressed to a new place. Your consciousness will have progressed, your SPIRIT will have progressed, and left your body behind. Maybe you wake up as an entirely different being, and everything here on Earth is like a dream. This how the soul travels. It is a faster than light technology. You literally just make up entire new realities, every time you reach the end of a life time. Every time you "die," you experience a process of recreating a new scenario. Spirit can do whatever it wants. It's highly popular on Earth right now, for spirit to enter in a state where they believe they are not spirits. It's really ironic, and totally fun.

So, there ya' go. What you do with this is only ever your decision, including the possibility of deciding "none of this information works me" and choosing your own path. But yeah. All NPC's are just PC's pretending to be NPC's. You were a PC pretending to be an NPC, and now you're in the process of deciding again. GL HF!

>>17881771
Infinity is a process, not a value. To demonstrate, when you get to 9, you can't go any further. So you make a new space, 10, and start again. When you get to 99, you run out of space. Stack overflow, so you go 100, and start over. Infinity is the concept that when you run out of possibilities within a finite configuration, you then iterate to the next finite configuration, and check all *those* possibilities.

The known universe is not infinite. It is finite. And then one day, someone will travel to a place outside the KNOWN universe, and find an UNKNOWN universe. That universe will also be finite. And there is an infinite number of unknown universes in existence. And you can never prove this, but--and this is the really fucky part--it is possible to have a physics system that is capable of disproving that there is an infinite number of unknown universes. That physics model is NOT what we have. We do NOT have the physics model that can ever definitely prove that there is not an infinite number of unknown universes. So what does that tell you?

>>17881744
Trollol. Actually not lol

>>17881980
laugh about if you want but it's true, the less i fap and the more i seem to have control over small things in my daily life

Godels incompleteness theorems

>>17881789
Why the hell would I decide to forget I was a PC?

>>17879903
If something isn't observed by a conscious being, we assume that it doesn't exist. Like unicorns, Earth's 4th moon and triangular TVs.

Being observed is what it means to exist, that which cannot be observed doesn't exist, and that which doesn't exist cannot be observed.

>>17876880
The universe as a simulation is projected from the platonic Good.

>>17876880
not the autistic meme

>>17881287
literally this

>>17881287
Kek. How can you be so sure that we aren't in a simulation? Do you have any proof or evidence to say that this reality is not entirely subjective? If no shut the fuck up your and your dumb images.

>>17881287
You acted smart in front of people who really don't care. Great! What's the next part of your exciting day?

>>17881802
Ah, you are talking about Infinity in the sense of being beyond our Universe.

Which I cannot deny, however; how can you, how can any of us as denizens in a Universe that may or may not be finite really be able to dictate what lies outside the realms of our container?

Infinity could exist, however we won't ever know that. We can theorize all we want, however there is a sad flaw that most sciences don't take a look at. The fact that we could be on the opposite end of an answer to the actual Reality.

Remember, Medicinal fields once believed in Liquid Humors, Geographers in Flat Planets, Psychology in trephination, lobotomies, and Riddlin. Humans have been known to be in the wrong before, while claiming to be in the right. This possibility exists even now, and we won't have a conclusive answer until we see beyond our container, which at the current time; would mean nothing more than extremely complex calculations by computers that will be created specifically for running numerical; hypothetical "universes"

If Life is a game of Life Genesis that is viewed from the playing field, then we have to emulate that game in a numerical, virtual way within the game, but outside the influence of the currently running game. Even then, that might not be the answer, as it could be as flawed as the persons who observed/created it.

>>17878529
This question doesn't have any coherence from a s scientific point of view. They are completely different.

>>17881287
came here to post this.

the farthest point away from you in the universe is right next to you

>>17877255
>>17877052
>>17876983
>>17876920
This not a "generating on demand" kind of simulation. IF, the universe was being simulated the amount of sheer energy it has does not require it to be generating on demand. It is simply already generated and we are simply experiencing it. To truly understand this simulation we have to take a step down from atoms, a step down from quarks and understand that even smaller things are at play here. Mathematically, the only thing this universe runs on is the law of attraction. Positive fills to the negative and vice versa. That construct needs to be evaluated if we are to determine the true origins of our universe. For all we know, the things that make up quarks could quite literally be all around us however they are so small that it is quite impossible for us to "feel" them since we don't have the proper receptors and or are simply not forming the correct mathematical bonds to construct a quark and so on and so forth. If this is a simulation, they built two things.
1. Objects
2. Energy
However they combined the two and started extremely small. Once the entire universe was filled up with tiny objects, energy was provided.
Once energy was given to the objects everything would be going crazy. All the objects forming bonds since they are either forming positive and negative attraction. Each object would have both a positive and a negative, thus enabling tiny spins to objects.

The origins eventually developed the right mathematical combinations to develop certain bonds to start what should be called, as the causality stream. This means a supervenience of energy and objects ((subquarks)quarks,atoms(stars), molecules(life))...ect.
But if this is a simulation, some grand "computer" (as you would call it), then there is one question that arises from this.
Why? Why simulate an entire universe if not to observe?

>>17881759
>>17881771
You pretty much get it but if you explore deeper there is something else at stake (4th of july, steak, yummy :)). What you are describing is the supervenience of causality, and those origins are mathematical by nature using terms such as, "energy" which is nothing more then the result of allowing positive to negative attractions. The true infinity is not something that can be seized as an object, it is simply captured as causality builds up. Quarks to atoms, atoms to molecules and so on and so forth. Nothing dies, it is simply used mathematically to construct a larger network. The real infinity is that causality builds and by doing so the very nature of the particles are forever changed as they are bonded into something much larger until something even large breaks the bonds back down to their elementary and independent bonds. During these processes the current networks of energy do incredible things such as life.

So this proposes two things. One, either causality builds or two, objects are reconstructed back to bonds they have had before. Sorry to say it, but if you are not part of something bigger then you are mathematically a failure (a system that can't continue up) therefore you are doomed to be reconstructed unless your particles can be arranged so that the right combinations of energy allows a supervenience to occur. In the process "you" will be destroyed for now. Are humans the next level of supervenience? Or are we doomed mathematically to be extinct? If you have any level of clairvoyance you can understand the answer. That, is yes. Only if the right networks of people are allowed to rule for extensive periods of time. After all, we are all nothing but networks of energy subject to change by other networks. Adaption, construction, reconstruction, supervenience of energy, all are just by following the very basic law of attraction.
The real question, is why is there a law of attraction? Why does positive attract negative?

>>17882795
>>17882755
Living things of this universe will and will always be questioning the origins of everything. How small can things be or how much bigger is it really? But in order to understand either of these there needs to be an evaluation on language. Language is a constant barrier to understanding the universe. One language could explain it better than another. The language of the universe is simply the law of attraction as the energy source and objects in order for it to be...well alive. The law of attraction without objects is something that we can't even imagine. it would be like traveling through your computer's processors but not exactly existing.

Language needs to be redone so our brains can start exploring new patterns and constructing new ones (get bigger). Assuming that is something that we want as a species since that will begin an entirely different type of interaction.

>>17876880

Stop wasting your fucking time here and read more.

This is being discussed since Parmenides or even before and certainly before in the East

We're in a reflected reality. Blacklight and Amber street lamps are somehow generating other lifeforms in our reality. Either they are machines, or the undead brought back to life. The latter have very thin waists and no buttocks!

I think we got nuked, and brought back by higher intellects not of Earth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0WNbm1jz6A

>>17883200
You can go yourself if you don't want to contribute. How do you think those people in ancient times came up with the ideas? They talked, wrote down their ideas and received criticism. Who knows, maybe the right people will read this board and inspire them or someone else to come with something better.

>>17882755
our universe, from outside of it, might look like noise
I could simulate an entire universe in the static on your TV screen, but you'd never watch it.

File: 18631808.jpg (76KB, 1300x928px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1300x928px

>>17876920

>>17883509
If you left a tv on long enough and tune it to static eventually you will find certain patterns popping in and out of existence however they can't interact with each other. It's a receiving station. In that universe there is no causality just patterns. Kind of an interesting viewpoint. However there is no "outside" of our universe. Any new discoveries are still considered the universe. In any case, now that we on the topic of "outside" the universe we could hypothesize many different viewpoints as to what is "outside" of our universe.

>>17883763
I believe it stands to reason that if the universe does have an 'outside', everything outside the universe works in the same way that the inside does. Like a fractal.

A lot of people like to treat the idea of a region 'outside the universe' like some kind of unpredictable no-man's-land, where the laws of physics could be fundamentally different for arbitrary reasons. Gravity might not exist, for example. But that seems counter-intuitive to the assumption that nature is mathematical. The region outside the universe would have been affecting our universe since its inception, and physics works a very particular way here.

As above, so below, right?

If we're living in a simulation, how do we find the cheat codes or god mode?

Could we hack the system and find shortcuts to other worlds?

I'm sure there's a way to find this out right? Is that why we haven't found life on other planets, like ayyy?

File: 66113410.jpg (108KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 400x400px

>>17882510
There's a whole field of philosophy dedicated to the issues behind this question. It's called epistemology.

There's hundreds - no, thousands of years of discourse from people who devoted their lives to these issues. You can read their input on these matters yourself, on the internet, for FREE.

You've ignored this completely because you just want to go "WHAT IF IF IF IF IF" on the internet like a buffoon. You and all the rest of the intellectually lazy charlatans here.

If you're actually actually interested, here's a good place to start: http://plato.stanford.edu/ This resource is renowned by professional academic philosophers for its depth and accuracy. Try typing in "epistemology" and READ.

File: 1357859318807.png (642KB, 875x909px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 875x909px

>>17884034
Wow, I can hardly believe it. Someone has actually posted a decent suggestion on /x/. Is this real life?

>>17885251
It's just a npc quoting hardcoded programmed lines
dw about it

File: MLA.gif (193KB, 590x350px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 590x350px

>>17885338
>hardcoded programing
why not dynamic programs able to "learn" from responses while also simulate a meaningful discussion and debate?

>>17885359
I don't understand, what is a question?

File: matrixjew.gif (85KB, 501x585px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 501x585px

>>17885338
this

don't listen to his lies

>>17884034
>reading
lol, why bother reading if it's just a simulation anyway, lol
I'd like to know whats outside of my cage

>>17876880
I was wondering if its a simulation why does it exist? One reason could be to create conscious creatures to harness that conscious energy.

>>17878623
cringe