Tyson Says It's 'Very Likely' The Universe Is a Simulation

[Buzz Bloom]

https://science.slashdot.org/story/...-its-very-likely-the-universe-is-a-simulation

I am curious to see how this discussion goes.

 

[mfb]

Tyson Says It's 'Very Likely' The Universe Is a Simulation

No he does not. He says that, given some conditions, it is very likely, but he does not claim that those conditions are very likely.

It's like saying "if a big asteroid hits New York city tomorrow, the city will probably get destroyed". This is true - but it does not imply a large probability that New York city gets destroyed tomorrow, because the asteroid impact itself is very unlikely.

 

[collinsmark]

For those interested, here is a video stream of the debate in question.

 

[jackwhirl]

If the simulation was run using spacetime as the computational medium could we tell the difference?
Is it conceivable that we might one day say the universe is definitely not a simulation, but we can't rule out that it is an experiment?

 

[jw6661]

I would like to hold an annual Physics forum meeting in las vegas to see you guys in my simulation.

 

[Hornbein]

If the simulation was run using spacetime as the computational medium could we tell the difference?

I don't see how. But I didn't see how to test the EPR paradox either.

Is it conceivable that we might one day say the universe is definitely not a simulation, but we can't rule out that it is an experiment?

I don't see how it is possible to rule out that it is an experiment. Somehow you'd have to show that this leads to a contradiction, and that seems impossible to do.

 

[micromass]

I'm very disappointed that the OP hasn't been back to acknowledge that the OP and the original title were extremely misleading. If anything, the OP should have asked the mentors to change the title or to add a message that the OP is highly misleading. As it stands, the title is just flat out wrong and attempting to mislead the public for the goal of sensation. I find these practices disgusting and disappointing.

 

[newjerseyrunner]

No he does not. He says that, given some conditions, it is very likely, but he does not claim that those conditions are very likely.

It's like saying "if a big asteroid hits New York city tomorrow, the city will probably get destroyed". This is true - but it does not imply a large probability that New York city gets destroyed tomorrow, because the asteroid impact itself is very unlikely.

That's not really true, start at 1:38:00, his exact words were: "I think the likelihood may be very high, and my evidence for it is just: it's a thought experiment." He didn't come right out and say he thought it was likely, but he alluded to it. I think of it as a misstatement during an off-the-cuff remark rather than being interpreted incorrectly.