Simulation theory?

File: ringinsideofringinsideofring.jpg (8KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 480x360px

"(Really, all this means is that we “reset the game” and try again. Each time, taking with us knowledge and experience of how the other players play in order for us all to be able to play The Game of Mortal Life the way that it was setup to be played, the ONLY way that it can go on to provide our advanced, eternal brain with the experiences that it needs, for the reason it connects with other advanced humans during the process.)"

Why do you care enough about this meme to mutate it?

>>19393083
You think I'm mutating it?

File: pepeascii.gif (607KB, 800x792px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 800x792px

>>19393067
I'll chime in because it is plausible
we live in a finite universe, everything is measurable. we have Planck length. taking this knowledge a step further you would imagine given enough time we would be able to create a digital 'model' of each of these objects down to the smallest scale.
>Does the tree fall if nobody is their to see it?
no. If the computer or whatever logic that is processing us was in a place were resources of any sense were limited it would benefit them to only compute what is needed as it is needed. so if their is no concious being to watch the tree fall it will only appear fallen when it is observed. This has been proven at the smallest level via the Double-slit experiment and taken to the next level with the Delayed choice quantum eraser that means that until you observe that tree in it's fallen state. it could be anywhere in between alive, dead and not even their.

All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
- William Shakespeare

>>19393083
do you want him to post the true image and get the board taken down again??

>>19393398
>we live in a finite universe, everything is measurable.
1) qualia, motherfucker
2) if the original universe, i.e. the universe that is not a simulation of any other universe, also possesses the same qualities you believe suggest this universe to be a simulation, then they don't actually suggest jack shit

>if their is no concious being to watch the tree fall it will only appear fallen when it is observed. This has been proven at the smallest level via the Double-slit experiment and taken to the next level with the Delayed choice quantum eraser that means that until you observe that tree in it's fallen state
the word "observer" in quantum physics does not mean conscious observer

Simulation theory is not entirely wrong, but it completely fails at identifying the source of the simulation.
We do not experience the universe directly. What we experience is the interpretation that our brains have made of the information that our imperfect senses have managed to pick up from our environment. Simply put, it's not that the real world is a simulation, it's that our brains are simulating the real world.
And even if the world is a simulation, it's infinitely more likely that it's being simulated by a person rather than by a computer because in any given universe there are bound to be way more brains simulating realities (either the realities they inhabit or the ones from their dreams) than computers doing the same.

File: removebunkidity.jpg (170KB, 777x777px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 777x777px

>>19395754
>And even if the world is a simulation, it's infinitely more likely that it's being simulated by a person rather than by a computer because in any given universe there are bound to be way more brains simulating realities (either the realities they inhabit or the ones from their dreams) than computers doing the same.

this