TJung
- 16
- 3
I was reading about the symulation hypotheses and they say that more and more scientists and physicists are finding this hypothesis plausible. Some facts really seem to fit better in a virtual reality than in a materialistic reality, such as:
1- Big Bang: Nothing more than the beginning of the simulation, just press the start button;
2- Maximum speed of causality (or light): nothing more than the limit of simulation processing;
3 - Pixelated Universe: Discrete space and time are in favor ofa virtual reality (fact not yet confirmed by science);
4. Laws of the universe can be described mathematically, just as in a computer simulation;
5- Non-locallity: Within a simulation there is no real space between two systems, because the origin of information processing is the same.
What do you think of this hypothesis? Does it have any scientific basis?
Is there any interpretation or theory that takes symulation hypotheses into account?
The only reference I found was from a philosopher: Bostrom, N., 2003, Are You Living in a Simulation ?, Philosophical Quarterly (2003), Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255.
Thanks in advance.
Tung
1- Big Bang: Nothing more than the beginning of the simulation, just press the start button;
2- Maximum speed of causality (or light): nothing more than the limit of simulation processing;
3 - Pixelated Universe: Discrete space and time are in favor ofa virtual reality (fact not yet confirmed by science);
4. Laws of the universe can be described mathematically, just as in a computer simulation;
5- Non-locallity: Within a simulation there is no real space between two systems, because the origin of information processing is the same.
What do you think of this hypothesis? Does it have any scientific basis?
Is there any interpretation or theory that takes symulation hypotheses into account?
The only reference I found was from a philosopher: Bostrom, N., 2003, Are You Living in a Simulation ?, Philosophical Quarterly (2003), Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255.
Thanks in advance.
Tung