It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Simulation Hypothesis proposes that reality is in fact a simulation of which those affected by the simulants are generally unaware. The hypothesis does not have global scope since, if true, it entails that there is a reality that is not a simulation as there must be a place housing the machinery on which the simulation is being run. The hypothesis itself relies on the development of simulated reality, currently regarded as a fictional technology. This technology has been a central plot device of many science-fiction films, most notably Star Trek, The Truman Show, Dark City, The Thirteenth Floor and The Matrix, as well as stories such as I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility[1] and A Very Special Shutdown Notice[2]. The Simulation Hypothesis has become the subject of serious academic debate within the field of transhumanism, via the work of Nick Bostrom and others
Simulated reality is the proposition that reality could be simulated—perhaps by computer simulation—to a degree indistinguishable from "true" reality. It could contain conscious minds which may or may not know that they are living inside a simulation. In its strongest form, the "simulation hypothesis" claims it is possible and even probable that we are actually living in such a simulation.
Nick Bostrom (born Niklas Boström in 1973) is a Swedish philosopher at the University of Oxford known for his work on existential risk and the Anthropic principle. He holds a PhD from the London School of Economics (2000). He is currently the director of The Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University.
On the surface, Bostrom's simulation hypothesis is an example of a skeptical hypothesis, a proposal concerning the nature of reality put forward to question beliefs, and as such, there is a long history to the underlying thesis that reality is an illusion. This thesis can be dated back to Plato, arguably underpins the Mind-Body Dualism of Descartes, and is closely related to phenomenalism, a stance briefly adopted by Bertrand Russell. However, Bostrom has argued that this is not the case, and that there are empirical reasons why the 'Simulation Hypothesis' might be valid. He suggests that if it is possible to simulate entire inhabited planets or even entire universes on a computer, and that such simulated people can be fully conscious, then the sheer number of such simulations likely to be produced by any sufficiently advanced civilization (taken together with his Strong Self-Sampling Assumption) makes it extremely likely that we are in fact currently living in such a simulation.
Bostrom contends that at least one of the following statements is overwhelmingly likely to be true:
Almost no civilization will reach a level of technological maturity capable of producing simulated realities.
Almost no civilization reaching aforementioned technological status will produce a simulated reality, for any of a number of reasons, such as diversion of computational processing power for other tasks, ethical considerations of holding entities captive in simulated realities, etc.
Almost all entities with our general set of experiences are living in a simulation.
Now a New Zealand scientist is saying that physicists should seriously explore the idea. Brian Whitworth at Massey University says that it is perfectly reasonable to conjecture that "the world is an information simulation running on a three-dimensional space-time screen". Deciding whether or not this is true is a matter for science to resolve.
Assuming Whitworth is serious, what should we make of this idea? He readily admits that this is a weird idea but points out that it is no more strange than many widely held views in physics such as the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, the big bang and Boltzmann brains.
So how would we be able to tell if our universe was a simulation? Whitworth says that if reality was to do something that information processing cannot, then it cannot be virtual. But he falls short of suggesting what this might be.
(As an aside, there are plenty of mathematical algorithms that are incomputable. They are the products of a physical human mind, so if they count as something that information processing could not come up with, Whitworth's idea is already dead in the water.)
Whitworth goes on to suggest various ways in which phenomenon associated with quantum mechanics and relativity can be explained in terms of VR.
Originally posted by WanderingParadox
Love can merely be considered strong desires for the other. Simply put. To my knowledge, most animals do not know things such as "love", so, I suppose it's something we as humans conducted as the idea behind the concept that we desire something very much.
Originally posted by WanderingParadox
Love can merely be considered strong desires for the other. Simply put. To my knowledge, most animals do not know things such as "love", so, I suppose it's something we as humans conducted as the idea behind the concept that we desire something very much.
Anyway, what woiuld be the point of the Matrix then? That's still unanswered. If we don't have to abide by what they want us to do, what would they ever need us for?
Originally posted by Lichter daraus
I do believe this could be a possible theory, but would if we are the ones creating the simulation? Would if we are the true reality creating everything? I hope that makes sense to people as this is a good topic and one that i think about a lot.