Do we live in a simulation, Scientific American article posted today

[RedOrb]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-live-in-a-simulation-chances-are-about-50-50/

I mentioned this just last night and a great article in Sci American was posted this morning. So what do you think, are we living in the matrix? I say no, however I have no problem viewing DNA as a computer program which could make us a simulation if viewed from the outside or to who or whatever wrote the code. So are you code written by a superior code writer? and what is the typical name for this coder?

 

[hutchphd]

Turtle.
I would point out that your argument can be applied to prove its "coders all the way down".
I hope the reference is not too obtuse

 

[RedOrb]

Turtle.
I would point out that your argument can be applied to prove its "coders all the way down".
I hope the reference is not too obtuse

It's an article, not my argument

 

[hutchphd]

They ask for the name of the programmer in the article?

 

[RedOrb]

They ask for the name of the programmer in the article?

This theory differs from Darwinian theory in a programmer is implied, not a sterile pond

 

[hutchphd]

You said it was in the article. Did they ask for the name of the programmer in the article?

 

[RedOrb]

You said it was in the article. Did they ask for the name of the programmer in the article?

I ask what is the typical name for this coder.

I means me in the English language

What I said again

I mentioned this just last night and a great article in Sci American was posted this morning. So what do you think, are we living in the matrix? I say no, however I have no problem viewing DNA as a computer program which could make us a simulation if viewed from the outside or to who or whatever wrote the code. So are you code written by a superior code writer? and what is the typical name for this coder?

 

[anorlunda]

This theory differs from Darwinian theory in a programmer is implied, not a sterile pond

No need to bring evolution in. It is not mentioned in the article.

The arguments about quantum experiments are not persuasive. The simulation could have started when you first opened this thread. All history, all memories, all records of past experiments could be initial conditions. So those past experiments could have whatever outcome the programmer wanted.

Correction: The simulation begins the instant I click Post reply. The contents of the thread and this post are initial conditions.

 

[RedOrb]

No need to bring evolution in. It is not mentioned in the article.

The arguments about quantum experiments are not persuasive. The simulation could have started when you first opened this thread. All history, all memories, all records of past experiments could be initial conditions. So those past experiments could have whatever outcome the programmer wanted.

Correction: The simulation begins the instant I click Post reply. The contents of the thread and this post are initial conditions.

Would not your existence and mine as well as the communication medium all be required? Was Darwins pond simulated? My point is that I fully accept that DNA simulates articulation

 

[mathman]

The idea of a simulation is as valid as the idea we are all god's creatures. It sounds unprovable either way.

 

[RedOrb]

The idea of a simulation is as valid as the idea we are all god's creatures. It sounds unprovable either way.

I agree, but here is the important fact for me which is that simulation theory requires what we would refer to as a master simulator with knowledge and parts that may be in our future or not. As you mentioned many believe that God created the universe, I see no evidence of that as of yet. However the physicist speculating on simulation theory are inferring that the universe was created as creationist believe, so two formerly competing ideologies are merging here

 

[hutchphd]

However the physicist speculating on simulation theory are inferring that the universe was created as creationist believe, so two formerly competing ideologies are merging here

My response was perhaps a trifle hostile...I thought you about to give a theological spiel. My apologies.
I do not really see the issue of simulation theory being salient to the fundamental existence question.
If we are "in a simulation", it might be the hand of god, it might not.
If we are not "in a simulation", it might be the hand of god, it might not.
I don't see what there is to discuss.....

 

[RedOrb]

My response was perhaps a trifle hostile...I thought you about to give a theological spiel. My apologies.
I do not really see the issue of simulation theory being salient to the fundamental existence question.
If we are "in a simulation", it might be the hand of god, it might not.
If we are not "in a simulation", it might be the hand of god, it might not.
I don't see what there is to discuss.....

Actually a simulation would logically require a creator as the simulation would not have pond molecules to write DNA before the simulation existed. If Tyson wants to claim that a massively powerful computer creator and programmer programmed us, then Tyson has inferenced God no matter what he calls it

 

[anorlunda]

Would not your existence and mine as well as the communication medium all be required? Was Darwins pond simulated?

Yes and yes. So what?

 

[hutchphd]

Actually a simulation would logically require a creator as the simulation would not have pond molecules to write DNA before the simulation existed. If Tyson wants to claim that a massively powerful computer creator and programmer programmed us, then Tyson has inferenced God no matter what he calls it

.
We are clearly in some form of simulation.
How do you define an actual simulation.? Its the one that requires God. Circular all the way down.
.
.

 

[Rive]

So what do you think, are we living in the matrix?

I think it's irrelevant: at least, as long as you can find the rounding errors and break the code (beware of the security measures - sometimes security ends with data erased).

 

[RedOrb]

.
We are clearly in some form of simulation.
How do you define an actual simulation.? Its the one that requires God. Circular all the way down.
.
.

I do not define simulation as it's not my driveling article. However as you say reality itself is somewhat relative, as my reality includes Apple and Google and I am not trying to make 50 cents selling paper that was obsolete 10 years ago