Simulated Universe, if it's True What's Next?

Well, my hats off to the programmers, I haven't noticed any killer bugs, that often show up in computer software. Things just don't go missing or crash without a reason in our world and science often has an answer for the "weird stuff".

However, socks mysteriously going missing might just be a bug our programmers haven't fixed yet, I wish they'd get on that.

a reply to: Septimus

I'm still at work and will be able to respond better in a few but you raised a good point I haven't looked at.

How do we really know we are self-aware?

BTW, awesome ideas everyone!

a reply to: Cuervo

Couldn't the same be said about us? I mean, we are all living through filters of chemistry and programming. We have free will, sure, but we are products of limited programming (even a strict evolutionist can agree with that) and must create within those boundaries. With our limitations, inhibitions, and compulsions, it would be hard to pinpoint what makes humanity unique when compared to the advanced AI we will inevitably have someday. Both AI and humanity would share the same hallmarks of created autonomy.

If we were following sets of instructions, there would be little room for deviation, growth, error, mutation, disease etc. Suicide, and the fact that a monk can light himself on fire despite being programmed to not light himself on fire, shows that no programming is involved. Only if you could program a sim to not follow its programming can any sort free will be attained. But that is a contradiction.

a reply to: neoholographic

This isn't the case. They would have simulated consciousness so their consciousness wouldn't be any more programmed than our consciousness unless our consciousness is programmed by those who simulated us.

Since they will have simulated consciousness, they will be free to do what they want to do if it's not outside of the physical laws we program into the simulation and again, the same thing can be said for us.

If they were free to do what they wanted, they wouldn’t be programmed. One cannot program a sim to not follow its programming. If we were to program a sim to do what it wanted, it wouldn’t do anything, because it doesn’t know what it wants.

"Consciousness". It's such a vacuous idea anyways.

I think perhaps we have an absentee creator or programmer. As grand as we think we are, perhaps were just one game on a console 3000 years from now, back in the day the creator was active..... Splitting oceans and sending plagues. Perhaps he grew bored and walked away.

Or who knows, maybe a day in his time is a hundred or a thousand years for us.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

And anyone attempting to call out this simulated universe is called crazy.

But then again, what if someone claimed to have been the creator of this "simulation"?
Would we not want proof of this simulation? How can you prove something that is unprovable?

The very nature of the Universe means that if this creator did exist, he/she would be subject to the same laws of psychics that we are and couldn't prove that he/she was the creator. And they couldn't prove we live in a simulation because again, by being in this Universe they abide by the same rules as us and couldn't just generate a goat or a car out of thin air.

OP, I like you.

As more and more people become aware so to speak, we will see more threads like this. The powers that be don't want us to think this way because it's the truth and some people just can't handle the truth.
I found out the truth by setting up an experiment. I would do certain actions and would attempt to predict the outcomes with math. It got so crazy that eventually a little birdy came along and told me to stop before I broke "it"
It got to the point where I would say something to somebody and then finish their sentence. I would throw something and predict with 99.9% accuracy where it would fall, regardless of variables. Playing with the programming will corrupt it however, as many people have found out in today's world. And eventually the programmers will attempt to destroy the corruption with new programs ergo the whole "natural" and "occupied" human thing.

Think about it for a sec. Let's say that there won't be a revolution and there are no conspiracies (despite the numerous examples like Contra, Enron, and the Us government syphilis experiments in the 40s).

Where do you see the economy and the world going? Do you think that we're ever going to see an economic boom like the 1950's? Do you think that the mountains of bureaucracy that exist today are going to solve themselves?
WHY DO YOU INSIST ON OPTIMISM WHEN ALL SIGNS POINT TO REALITY?

It will not get better. Worldwide currencies will deflate to the point where the majority of the world won't make enough money to buy a car or go on a vacation for 5 years of working. And then it'll stay there until we all die.

I for one became fed up with all of the little games being played with people's lives and came into contact with a group of individuals dedicated to getting rid of our virus. I more or less know what will happen in the next few years and created a 196 step plan in order to bring humanity into a golden age of prosperity.

Someone said, if you were given the choice of choosing different lives to live, why would you choose one where you're sent to child sex slavery or starved and beaten or born into a world where a mother can be beaten in the streets next to her child while a group of people film it with phones?
Sacrifice.
Because someone has to and I'd rather it be me than someone else.

I did a lot of bad things. Evil things. When given the choice to keep going on the astral planes or to start over to redeem myself, I chose to help others.

Because I love you all. I love everyone. I love the way people are unique. But I hate what has become of you all. It makes me angry that we aren't past the point of hate where a woman of non white skin color and a man of white skin color can't be together without trouble in some parts of the world. So instead of going on to nirvana and enlightenment, I chose to come back and help you. And that was the final test to determine if I would actually move on or if I was to suffer for eternity. I passed because despite being the most selfish, evil, most terrible person to have been born in 1,000 years
Plenty of doctors called me crazy until I started saying things about them that they had never told anyone and it scared them. It scared enough people that I became a target and almost lost everything.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I get the feeling that the "as above, so below" axiom permeates our consciousness. Our thoughts, our behaviors...they are driven (mostly) by neurochemical response. The manifestation of our actions would likely tend to follow the manifestation of behavior for other universal items. The same drivers are present: interactions related to physics and chemistry.

The universe seems to have a rule that if it exists, it is fractal in nature. Human behavior absolutely is not an exception.

a reply to: Cuervo

Yup if this theory is true. Then its basically saying god exists.

In some ways I think this whole theory was thought up so physicists could say there is a "god" without having to say there is a god.

As for the implications? Well nothing really? Life goes on.

Yes we enter the movie dream school, to grow our Love and stop beings selfish asshats. Some like our leaders take the long way home, preferring to be kings of this simulation than students in the real.

If we're just a simulation, then all we have to do now is find out who Neo is.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I'm trying to be think ahead on this so please bear with me. This follows your statement about not being able to hack reality.

First I'm left wondering what constitutes a 'hack' now, my definition is changing as related to this. Is it like time travel, breaking or just bending the laws of physics.
I'm kind of stuck here at the moment for I believe we will be able to time travel eventually but that in itself presents some similar paradox issues as this does. As for breaking or bending the laws there are also some lab experiments that are doing this right now, but at very limited scale. Maybe these aren't so much hack's but a work around in the system.
Would being able to heal with thought be a hack or walking on water(negating gravity). I see your point it does start to have that magical feel to it. But if manipulation of the code somehow is the cause, wouldn't the things we do appearing as magic be the effect.

Of course this all relys on the fact we can somehow find the code and access it eventually and I see where this is going now, for being limited to the 3rd dimension it would forever be out of reach.

Your example of a hack seems also like a work around to me. It reminds me of the theory that our government sees the internet as one organism. Through extrapolating trends from it they can introduce situations or information to make the majority move everything one way or another. Thus controlling the actions of all.

I still need to dwell on this a bit more. What I'm seeing as a hack would be the same as me being able to fly or survive in space without protection. Now in VR created by us this will be possible but due to the dimensional constraints our reality limits us to, it will probably not be achievable if we are in an advanced alien simulation of some kind.

Notice I'm still using the word probably above. I need to relook at some of the dimensional information before I wind myself into a mobius strip. From what I remember we are stuck here on the 3rd dimension, riding on the 4th.

a reply to: AnteBellum

I don't think you can alter the framework of reality without risking reality itself. "Stack overflow".

I do think you can find novel ways to negate inconvenient aspects of reality. And I think that any paradox is automatically dealt with. Think about the whole speed of light question NorEaster asked recently: if i have a pen moving at the speed of light, and then turn on a laser firing from both ends, will the laser in the front exceed the speed of light? The answer is "No". The additionl energy is dissipated in increasing wavelength, not speed.

There is self correcting there.

To truly "hack" reality, your best bet is to understand it better. Kind of like "mesmerizing" someone is really nothing more than being charasmatic enough, and understanding human behavior enough, that you can manipulate the next step to your advantage.

thanks.a reply to: AnteBellum

originally posted by: AnteBellum
The problem I have is calling one of my SIM characters 'real' or 'alive' yet if we are in a simulated reality where does one cross the line in discerning what is life and what isn't or what is real and what isn't.

That's why consciousness comes into play at the end of my thread, for right now I see animals as conscious entities but not my SIM characters in the computer. Am I being hypocritical by not allowing them the respect I myself may share even though they are in simpler form? It's also prejudicial.

If the SIM character is from, say, a computer-generated simulation, then it is formed with a binary system which is generated by a machine pertaining to this ternary reality. In other words, the video game character pertains to a subset of the Universe's simulation, a subset of a machine. The character is "real", in the sense that it can interact with its subset-simulated environment, you can see it, you can hear it, etc. but it doesn't mean that it is any more "conscious" than the machine which generated its existence.

Considering the OP took for granted simulation theory was fact....

My thoughts are as follows...

If we were to learn this as truth, would there not be uproar, a life simulated or otherwise, hoodwinked into worrying about fabricated wants and needs (money, taxation, politics, religion, education, I could go on..)

What would be the premise to continue religions? As we would already know the answers, in fact it applies anyway, what point is faith? Should we not put more stock in faith of the individual or others, rather than religion? I could see the religion of the simulation being born, with a carry over of all the major players now, integrating their now known reality into the fabric of their religion.

There would be deniers, looking to debunk the evidence presented before them and there would be a substantial portion of the population who would just continue to accept their everyday reality up to that point, still going about their business.

There would also be people wishing to "ascend" the programme into the simulator's "real world " environment, which if successful in turn, would too, be just another simulation.

The argument of whether we do live within a simulation or not is a moot point, it is a viable possibility, if we as people don't begin to grasp and accept this, then I fear should this be reality of our true origin, chaos would surely follow.

a reply to: AnteBellum

If it is a simulated universe then the whole question of "what's next" is surely irrelevant?

If that were the case, then would not our free will just be an illusion? What ever is programmed would happen, we would carry out our instructions and "we" don't really exist anyway, so who cares?

Did you ever read "The Algebraist" by Iain M Banks? There is a space faring civ in it that has the simulated universe as it's religion, along with some other very ATS friendly stuff in there, such as aliens kidnapping ancient humans for sneaky political purposes. It's weird as #### in parts but it's an interesting read

a reply to: swanne

But that's the point I'm getting at, what if WE are actually no different then the sims, other then being in a better simulation?

I couldn't separate the fact that if I was proven to be a SIM my treatment of other lesser SIMS would almost be like murder to me. (and yes, I feel bad when I step on bugs by mistake)


a reply to: skalla

Your right that's true, it goes back to that pre-destiny issue.


a reply to: solargeddon

Where was simulation theory proven? I've only seen the indirect evidence as of yet.

a reply to: AnteBellum

Texta reply to: solargeddon Where was simulation theory proven? I've only seen the indirect evidence as of yet.

What?! You're kidding right?

I thought the premise of the OP was to take for granted that the simulation theory was true, in that you were asking us to assume it as for the purposes of the thread.

I don't mean it actually is true!

I know your OP isn't based in absolutes and nor was my response, it was based on what you asked, which was to assume a simulated word was an absolute reality.

originally posted by: AnteBellum
I couldn't separate the fact that if I was proven to be a SIM my treatment of other lesser SIMS would almost be like murder to me.

But these lesser sims are nothing more than (albeit elaborate) clockwork, unable to evolve. Life forms evolve. This is why you are better than a sim - a sim is a complex clock/set of timers. But you, and bugs, and plants... you evolve.

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Septimus

I'm still at work and will be able to respond better in a few but you raised a good point I haven't looked at.

How do we really know we are self-aware?

BTW, awesome ideas everyone!

Self awareness is perhaps one of the most critical issues in modern psychology. To me, self awareness is a fallacy in itself; it can be argued that because we were created and are perhaps imitating another existence, all that we are is only an intention of our creator. Just like the example of a game within a game, it would not technically be possible to demonstrate self awareness because we were meant to do so, or programmed to do so. This gets into the discussion of free will and why it's so very important to remember. The fact that we are able to make conscious decisions on whatever criteria we decide and demonstrate the level of introspection that we have, I believe makes us self aware.

What if we were programmed to question though? Wouldn't that then invalidate any possibility of self awareness? I don't think so, if only because self awareness is a variable term and capability. It can be taught, it can be learned, and it can also be forgotten. Children advance from not being self aware to being fully aware. There are actually five developmental stages of self awareness, ranging from confusion (after birth) to total self awareness. I speculate this developmental process actually leads to what many call the loss of childhood innocence and advanced depression in adults, but that's a different topic. It is possible to lose self awareness in a variety of ways. Mirrors are particularly good for this. If you stare into a mirror for too long, you may frighten yourself because you think you're looking at someone else. This is a demonstration of losing your self awareness, temporarily. I'm sure you've gotten that feeling before, of where you scare yourself because you feel like you're not really where you are at the time. It's a difficult feeling to describe, but it exists. Because of it's variable nature, I feel self awareness is not something that we are programmed or designed to do, but were programmed to be capable of. If we were made to be self aware, we would know who we were at birth and would never forget.