Thought experiment: imagine the universe is a simulation!

[FindailsCrispyPancakes]

This sort of thing normally starts when people fail to understand sensationalised magazine articles about the Holographic Principle, which is commonly interpreted to mean "Dude, the universe could be a hologram or a computer simulation!"

Have you read the entire thread? Or are you just assuming that the people you are addressing here are ignorant? That seems to be your M.O., given how you made a nearly identical point in my UFO thread.

I get it. You're smart. You're sarcastic. So am I. Nice to meet you.

But you're missing so much diving in with these assumptions . . .

Despite what Elon Musk may say in sensationalised magazine articles, it just doesn't work. It's a nice idea for a sci-fi movie or a sensationalised magazine article, but in reality it doesn't fly. Here's why:

Despite Musk's great achievements in his career(s), I have taken issue with Musk on several occasions. Honestly, I wasn't even aware that he'd weighed in on this particular issue. His opinion means nothing to me here.

1) The storage/calculation capacity to run the universe as a program/simulation/hologram would need be multiverse sized, even if you could store your data in the smallest possible space.

Only if you are simulating the entire universe. I dealt with this in my first post here [which is why I think you not only haven't read the entire thread, but you haven't read *any* of it. I appreciate your eagerness, but if you're going to talk down to people, maybe you shouldn't make assumptions about their arguments first]. One of the main points of the simulation theory is that storage capacity is finite, and therefore simulated quantities like space aren't continuous, but discrete (as the proposed measurements of cosmic rays would confirm/disconfirm). Also, the idea in quantum theory that proxy waves aren't collapsed until a measurement/observation occurs could be explained by this limit in storage/capacity: reality doesn't take on definitive values for properties until someone looks at it. So the vast majority of the universe needn't be calculated because it needn't have definitive values.

2) The Holographic Principle is a method for calculating the amount of information within a black hole embedded in Anti De Sitter space. The information content is determined by the surface area of such a black hole and not by the volume.

Therefore, it could be said that the interior of a black hole embedded in Anti De Sitter space is a 3 dimensional projection of the 2 dimensional information encoded on the surface (event horizon) of the black hole.

Completely irrelevant to the discussion here. The Holographic Principle isn't the same as the idea that the universe is a simulation running on a computer.

Blah blah blah blah. I'm not trying to pass myself off as smart or sarcastic, but judging by your behaviour you fail to satisfy either description.

I'll restrict myself to pointing out that the premise of the thread is about the entire universe being simulated and not part of it. Thank you for your opinion that the Holographic Principle is of no use when discussing if the ENTIRE universe could be a simulation. I'll agree to disagree with you.

You seem to be under the impression that my posts are aimed exclusively at you and that your contribution to any thread is of greater significance than all others.

Knock it off.

I responded to your first torrent of drivel on the other thread, there's no way I'm bothering with this garbage any more. I get it. You don't like people discussing a point of view on a scientific subject if it's not the same as your point of view. You'd rather just attack them because you are under the mistaken impression they're talking down to you.

I'm not talking down to you. I'm simply entering a discussion with points of view that are not identical to yours. You are clearly so addicted to attacking anyone who disagrees with you, you just can't stop yourself.

I get it. You hate me and my posts. 2 in a row you've done this and counting. Now do us both a favour. This a waste of your energy and mine. So before you turn into an internet stalker, might I politely suggest you stop with the weirdo bit?

I've literally just arrived on these forums and right now you're definitely filed under 'freak'. You might be very bright but you need to calm down.

[Skyweir]

Good points Findail .. I am not a sciencey person and had never heard of the Holigraphic Principle so thanks for sharing.

All views advance a discussion, particularly on point ones like considerations of the application of such a simulation requiring a program of the size you mention to run it .. ie several multi verses.

There is another thread in the Loreseraat where a similar topic is covered. Do join that discussion too. It takes a slightly different perspective to the simulation theory thread.

Cheers

[Zarathustra]

I'll restrict myself to pointing out that the premise of the thread is about the entire universe being simulated and not part of it.

Being my thread, I get to define what the premise is. (It's really strange that I have to keep telling people this.) You're free to miss the point, jump right in with a lot of assumptions and zero reading, but I'm also free to point out your mistakes. Using a condescending tone (as you did) will only guarantee that my rebuttal will be all the more forceful.

There's absolutely no need for name calling ("weirdo," "freak," ect.).

You don't like people discussing a point of view on a scientific subject if it's not the same as your point of view. You'd rather just attack them because you are under the mistaken impression they're talking down to you.

You've got me all wrong. I don't care if you disagree. But since when did disagreement on scientific issues include fictional mocking dialog that starts with, "Dude . . . " ?? You're not merely disagreeing, you're belittling. And worse: you're belittling something which you didn't even take the trouble to understand.

You are clearly so addicted to attacking anyone who disagrees with you, you just can't stop yourself.

Do you have much experience talking to Americans? Maybe that's the problem. You don't seem accustomed to confident people who take up for themselves against pedantic condescension.

I'm willing to entertain the possibility that maybe I'm misreading a cultural tone myself. Is pedantic condescension just a British thing?



Honestly--I've just reread my post to make sure--I feel like all I did here was disagree with your post and tell you why I felt it was off base. Maybe it's you who doesn't deal well with a dissenting opinion?

[FindailsCrispyPancakes]

Zarathustra.

Glass houses. Stones. Both of us.

This isn't discussion, it's madness. bickering. From the moment I was made the regrettable decision to post on this thread you've assumed my only motive was to launch some kind of personal attack on you.

You were so angered and pre-occupied by what you have taken to be my tone and intent that you forgot yourself. You decided I was out of line for mentioning a number of factors you are fully aware are pertinent to a discussion on space travel.

I have no idea why you would feel that mentioning velocity (among many other things) in such a discussion was an act of aggression or self-aggrandizement. I have no idea why you've continued this crusade over multiple threads. Apparently it's my tone.

Fine. Thanks for the lecture on my behavioural problems according to you.

In the spirit of pedantic condescension, here is my final response to you.

It is definitely not a cultural thing.

It's deja vu. This is not my first time being the new guy in a forum having to deal with the guy who likes to fight everyone. You miight fool some of these people, you might even fool yourself.

But you don't fool me for a minute. I see through you.

Don't start behaving sensibly all of a sudden and trying to appeal to my better nature. Beyond basic fairness, I just don't have one.

This conversation is over. I won't be posting on any of your threads again, quoting you or responding to you if you quote me.

I'd appreciate it if you could return me the same courtesy.

Thank you.

[Zarathustra]

Oh, it's definitely a discussion. It's just one where you want the last word.

How many times have you posted a lengthy response and then told me not to respond? 4? 6? Why it is "courtesy" for me to shut up, but not you?

Dude, this is repairable. I WILL appeal to your better nature, because we all have our own personal Despisers that we need to harness/bridle. I can be an ass. I admit it. I think the most interesting people are the ones who not only utilize their good side, but also can tap into their dark side. We're animals capable of reason. Admitting it doesn't diminish our reason, it makes it all the more remarkable.