It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Universe is not a computer simulation

page: 1
44
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+6 more 
posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 07:45 PM
link   
What is a computer? A computer is a calculator capable of subtracting two numbers and based on that result change what numbers to subtract next. Computers are based on the Von Neumann architecture. Computer memory is discrete, well defined, and has two very well known states of one or zero. Computers have instructions or computer codes defining what to do to memory like add-two-numbers. Computers have a get-fetch-execute cycle which requires a well defined clock-pulse. With each clock-pulse, the computer will change and eventually settle to a very well known predictable state within a few nanoseconds. With each clock pulse the computer will execute a computer instruction changing the state of memory. Between clock pulses, states of the computer's memory and the location of the program counter is a perfectly known. The computer's program counter is the memory location of the next computer instruction to execute. What computer instructions do is "hardwired" and built into the computer's microprocessor and normally do not change over a computer's lifetime.

Predictions of what will happen from one clock pulse to the next to the next is perfectly known with a computer. As long as your computer program is not self-modifying its own computer code in memory, as long as you know the state of all computer memory and the current location of the program counter, you can go backward and forwards in time with the clock pulse and arrive at the exact same state in either direction. Computer science is a "perfect" science.

The idea of reality is a computer simulation is based on the idea the fabric of reality is like computer memory. And the Universe is a computer where the laws of physics are the computer instructions changing the computer's memory. This idea is further enforced by the way computers are used as a representation of reality in computer games and simulations. Computer bits can be used to represent some level of precision of measurement about reality. And computer programs can simulate the laws of physics. So the natural conclusion to follow is given enough computer bits to represent reality and enough computational speed reality could be simulated with enough detail that the remaining lack of precision can essentially be ignored.

The question then becomes how much precision is needed? How much computation speed is needed? The problem with discrete representations of reality done by a computer is that the fabric of reality is a much different animal than the way computer memory works. To understand the wave nature of reality and how it is different that a computer's discrete memory model consider the nature of quantum entanglement proven to have faster than light travel:



And to further understand the wave nature of reality and the interconnectedness of election movements over the entire Universe consider the Pauli Exclusion principle:



The wave nature of reality is much different than the "perfect" science behind computers. At every level of the fabric of reality we have rogue waves. Rogue waves converge at points causing meaningful and measurable results. Reality cannot be easily mapped to a discrete model because of rogue waves of energy. Representing reality with computer bits is neither accurate nor complete in terms of representing ALL of nature's behaviors. The wave nature of reality's fabric producing rogue waves causing meaningful change means there will always be meaningful parts of reality missing from our representation.

Since computer science is a "perfect" science is it any surprise people gravitate to it because having perfect knowledge is comfortable. People want to believe in a clockwork universe. But instead of the Universe being a clock they substitute a computer for the machine. Machines have discrete states. Machines are perfectly understand. Machines are easy to understand. The idea of the fabric of reality being an interconnected wave is messy and hard to understand. Unknowability is uncomfortable to most people. People do not like to accept their own limitations.

So in conclusion no matter how much we want to believe in a clockwork Universe or computer simulated Universe the evidence from reality is reality is always much stranger than anything we could ever imagine. Even though it is uncomfortable to accept, the fabric of reality is impossible to map to computer memory in a meaningful way, that is, accurately and completely because our representation will never include the missing affects of rogue waves. If it were a clockwork Universe, our laws of physics would explain the origins of experimental errors.




posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Well, in point of fact, the entire universe is a quantum computer simply by virtue of the fact that it can be quantized, and the state of every object can be decomposed into various collections of quantum states.

As to whether the universe is actually a computer simulation in the sense that some higher power created it to simulate something is unknown and likely beyond the purview of science, although not necessarily beyond scientific interest.

I think the whole "universe as simulation" argument is most compelling when the wave function is treated as what happens inside the black box of a remote server that is never physically coupled to our reality, as it cannot be observed without collapsing the wave function (ie forcing quantum probability distributions to manifest as a singular reality).

And it makes even more sense if the points on the wave function NOT manifested in our reality are manifested in other realities (ie many worlds).

So, in this proposed architecture, the quantum world exists on remote servers, and the classic physics we see all around us is what it looks like once it reaches the servers we exist on.
edit on 11-9-2017 by Dudemo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-9-2017 by Dudemo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 07:53 PM
link   
There is a French (if I remember correctly) Mathematician that stated the Universe could be run on just a few lines of code.
Probably in Java . That would be my guess after observing the Universe for years.



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dudemo5
Well, in point of fact, the entire universe is a quantum computer simply by virtue of the fact that it can be quantized, and the state of every object can be decomposed into various collections of quantum states.


I think you are missing the point of what it means to identify something as an object.



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Dudemo5
Well, in point of fact, the entire universe is a quantum computer simply by virtue of the fact that it can be quantized, and the state of every object can be decomposed into various collections of quantum states.


I think you are missing the point of what it means to identify something as an object.


I think you are failing to explain yourself.


+11 more 
posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:01 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I think the mistake is assuming the universe would use the same "computer" as we do. If we are indeed in a simulation, it would be far too advanced for us humans to even comprehend.


edit on 11-9-2017 by knowledgehunter0986 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Dudemo5

Love this.

I have used No Man's Sky with its procedural content generation as a way to explain this to my daughter. Our local content on our console would be our universe yet, when two universes observe the same object reality (two players seeing the same planet which didn't exist before they discovered it), it collapses (or generates) out of a probability state.



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   
In the beginning , there was DOS ......



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Wouldn't an EMP shut down any artificial reality ? And why would people still remain ?



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Mankind doesn't really understand the universe completely. So it a stretch to draw this conclusion.



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Plotus
Wouldn't an EMP shut down any artificial reality ? And why would people still remain ?


It would be inside the simulation, so no.



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Plotus
Wouldn't an EMP shut down any artificial reality ? And why would people still remain ?


If you used an EMP in a video game, does it break your computer?



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:30 PM
link   
You are because I am.



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Spooky action at a distance could be easily explained if it is a simulation.


+5 more 
posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   
The idea that our universe is a computer simulations is simply a manifestation of our times ... The computer age.

Humans have always attempted to explain the universe as a system similar to their current technological advancement.

Like the Pythagoreans modeling their universe after perfect geometric systems; even if it meant postulating ever more elaborate ways to explain the celestial movements such as planetary retrograde. Basic geometry was king and the universe had to fall in line.

Or the 14th century idea of the "clock work universe" modeled after the revolutionary technology of the time, the mechanical clock. Nicole Oresme wrote that the movement of the planets was akin to a well-balanced precision clockwork that once set in motion would continue to move by its self.

When humans take the next step in our understanding the idea of a computer simulated universe will die away and be replaced by a model that befits the new technology.




edit on 11-9-2017 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

The idea of the entire Universe being a simulation seems kind if insulting and naive.

Is "this" reality akin to the Matrix, in that we are essentially asleep and plugged in? Or that these are avatars?

Unlikely, although some kernels of metaphysical truth can probably be derived from those themes.

The extent of reality is quite possibly unknowable.

Just like the human eye that can only perceive 400 - 700 nm wavelengths, every observer only gets fractions of the puzzle.

Begs to question though, the knowledge that dot connectors contain.



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Just because we cant represent every single rogue wave in the universe, in one single computer model, doesn't mean we can rule out the computer simulation theory. Maybe you're right, and the universe isn't a computer, but we don't know nearly enough to rule out the possibility..

Personally, I think reality is a computing Time Crystal, encrypted with every possible reality potential, hidden within smaller dimensions. Our existence is the compactification of infinite knowledge/data (omniscience) into a finite crystalline state of frame-by-frame change.

Quantum entanglements doesn't seem paradoxical to me. I think it implies there is no such thing as true emptiness in space. Entanglement is just an instantaneous action-reaction relationship between two or more particles responding to a disturbance within a field. What field? Maybe the Quantum Vacuum. Whatever causes Quantum Entanglement to work, it must require a method of propagation that is much faster than that of transverse waves.


edit on 11-9-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: added comments



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Not just 9 hours before this thread, you wrote a thread about how thinking we are an expert, closes our mind to the possibilities of the universe. So here you are, using supposed expert knowledge, to rule-out possibilities of our existence.
It just strikes me as 2 completely opposing viewpoints, and leaves me confused as to how you could reconcile these two positions.
Would you care to explain?

Oh: and this is just for those interested in the general subject:


edit on 11-9-2017 by Nothin because: sp



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Plotus

Even if our Universe Computer was shut down for a thousand years then rebooted we wouldn't notice.

Everything would pick back up exactly where it left off, and no time would elapse in our simulation.

So there's no way to know how many times this simulation has been turned off and back on, all we know is that it's "on" right now. So to speak...



posted on Sep, 11 2017 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: CreationBro

It's indiscernible.

There's no way to actually differentiate a perfectly simulated reality from a reality.
They are essentially the same thing, as there is no way to contrast them.



new topics

top topics



 
44
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join