Is / are our universe(s) a simulation?

[griff]

I enjoyed The Matrix, though the last film was gash.

At the end though, it’s quite simple. Life is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol.

[Piglet_Phoenix]

"I feel obliged to say that we have free willy."

I feel obliged not to dive into that rabbit hole less than a week into the close season.

It's much preferable to concentrate upon "In a legal court case if there is insufficient evidence to produce a conviction then a 'not guilty' verdict must be given."

Have we really heard the prosecution's case in this instance? We need Elon Musk to appear asking if we remember Nelson Mandela dying in prison in the mid-80s or Sinbad playing a genie in the movie "Shazam".

Anyway, the prosecution would probably present the "twin slit / double slit" experiment. As you probably already know, this demonstrates light and matter can act as both waves and particles, in other words wave-particle duality. This phenomenon is impossible to explain in any classical way as with the very act of watching the observer affects the observed reality.

When the observer watches the matter acts as particles and not as waves and the more they watch the more this behaviour increases. Why would this occur? If you were designing a computer simulation of a universe you would be constrained by the limits of resources in the universe in which you were simulating. It would be impossible to simulate the behaviour of every single particle, so it stands to logic / reason you would only simulate the particle interactions which were observed and save a ton of energy by working the rest out using probability. Quantum mechanics is consistent with the flaws you would expect to see in a programme which minimizes processing costs by simulating physical events only when their outcome is relevant and winging it for the rest of the time.

Any counter to this argument for the defence of reality?

[Piglet_Phoenix]

https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/sou...id%20president.

Exhibit "A"

[Piglet_Phoenix]

https://ourcommunitynow.com/film/sin...t-doesnt-exist

Exhibit "B"

[Piglet_Phoenix]

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/35988673

Exhibit "C"

[6EQUJ5]

Yes, I have seen this double slit / observation point made and I do regard it as unexplainable. I do not think that it is a large contribution to the case for us being in a simulation but if I wished to believe that we were in a simulation I would wave it in the face of someone who doubted that we are in a simulation. As defence lawyer for 'we are not in a simulation' I would have a tremor of anxiety about this evidence.

If there were more cases of physics being different according to whether or not it is being observed I would regard that as being extremely interesting. In this case what counts as observation? Is it observation if a human being sees it? What if just a video camera records it and nobody views it directly?

Since we have not heard the case for the prosecution we are obliged to hold the default view of 'not guilty' until the prosecution has put a formidable strong case. Perhaps if we need an immediate verdict the Scottish 'not proven' should apply and the case can be brought back into court at any time.

Although I take the default option that we are not in a simulation I am well open to a situation in which very strong evidence can change my mind.

As for the opinion that if we are in a formidably accurate simulation would it matter, being as good as reality? Well, consider
that the person who created and is monitoring the simulation is a 15 billion year old child running it in the dining room. For us all it could end in a fit of pique, being destroyed by a hurled bowl of custard.

[6EQUJ5]

I do not regard the Mandela / Shazaam cases as scientific evidence at all. They are about fallible human memory and possibly people being told the wrong information initially, then time passing before they realise the truth.

I give these cases the same consideration as I give to people who report sightings of UFOs and who make exotic claims. 95% of UFO sightings are subsequently explained as normal phenomena. The remaining 5% are of course unidentified, but there are numerous reasons why they are unidentified and numerous possibilities of what they may be and where they may be from. I do not believe that any of them have been created 'elsewhere'.

[cocopops61]

This has gone waaay over my head,can't we talk about Red Dwarf or summat

#ramithawkins

[6EQUJ5]

Coco, red dwarfs / dwarves are indeed interesting. In astronomical terminology a red dwarf is a type of star.
I.e. our Sun is a star with objects defined as planets, dwarf planets and a myriad of smaller objects orbiting it.

One of the characteristics of a red dwarf star is that it is a lot smaller than our Sun and gives out a lot less heat. Thus it would be reasonable to assume that it is unlikely that any planets orbiting it would have any life on them and certainly not intelligent and technological life.

However, there are a lot more red dwarf stars than there are stars of the size of our Sun. Furthermore, any planets that are in a relatively close orbit to a red dwarf star will have a surface temperature that is one of the factors capable of supporting life of some sort.

I am as old as time itself and I was educated to believe that Pluto was a planet, which indeed it was. But it was run by the Holdings board and got relegated into being a dwarf planet. The 8 planets in orbit around our Sun, in order of their orbiting proximity to it, are Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.

[6EQUJ5]

Piglet, I think that you are going through the motions of presenting an opinion that is the opposite of what you believe. I sometimes do that as an interesting exercise. I do this in the company of people who have the same opinion as me. I present the opposing case.

It is my belief that the Mandela / Shazaam cases are not science. The double slit case is science but I do not regard it as correct to state that it is an indication that we are in a simulation. It could be, but my conclusion is that the reasons for the double slit result are as yet unknown.