The Universe is not a computer simulation

originally posted by: roadgravel

In order to fully understand reality as a simulation you would have to make more measurements and have more bits of representation that all of reality itself.

I don't believe that is always true. If a person understands one of many, it doesn't necessarily require more than the many if it is a huge number. We understand what a glass marble is and there can be billions of then.

Since reality is happening at the speed of reality, the hardware needed to simulate reality needs to be as fast and computationally dense as reality itself. A bit of catch 22 type situation.

The speed and capacity of a simulation could be less than the containing universe or simulation.

See my previous posts earlier in the thread on the necessity for accuracy and completeness in order to achieve a simulation matching the complexity of reality. The problem is with a complex system of waves there would ultimately be rogue waves capable of crossing the boundaries of our understandings having meaningful consequences to our experiences. Without these represented in our simulation, we would not achieve the desired result. Or possibly any result at all that would not feel hollow and unreal.

The problem with computers is they do exactly what we tell them to do. Reality is folded in on itself where the boundaries of what is possible is constantly being expanded. Reality is always doing more than we can possibly imagine. Who would have thought that Universe was not only expanding but accelerating! Who would have imagined that quantum entanglement has been measured to be faster than the speed of light. Unlike a computer simulation where we have a perfect understanding of exactly what happens when and why, reality always turns out to be much stranger than anything we could have ever imagined. Any simulation worth its salt must include the existence of experimental errors!

The biologist Lewis Wolpert believes that the queerness of modern physics is just an extreme example. Science, as opposed to technology, does violence to common sense. Every time you drink a glass of water, he points out, the odds are that you will imbibe at least one molecule that passed through the bladder of Oliver Cromwell. (Laughter) It's just elementary probability theory.

Richard Dawkins on our Queer Universe

a reply to: dfnj2015

Who would have imagined that quantum entanglement has been measured to be faster than the speed of light.

Milo would say that is because our measurements are being made at the wrong time/position in the event.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
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.

Whoa Seriously you Considering a Time as a Factor in this ???

and you Need to Stop Right there , as from that !!

Everything is Wrong ... of all what your Saying ,
let me Simplify this for you

lets say that we are Living in a Hologram Universe Computer Simulation ...
and lets Say that Galaxies are are ATOMS in our Universe
and Our Universe is a Molecule and that Molecule is a Particle of Uranium 235
and that particle is in the Process of a Explosion a Nuclear explosion detonation
and Our Galactic year is 250 Million years .
in this universe ,
and the explosion is
12,000 kilometers per second

The immediate energy release per atom is about 180 million electron volts (Me). Of the energy produced, 93 percent is the kinetic energy of the charged fission fragments flying away from each other, mutually repelled by the positive charge of their protons. This initial kinetic energy imparts an initial speed of about 12,000 kilometers per second.

www.quora.com...

so far all we know

We are in a Atom ( universe ) in a Nuclear detonation
o how would you have that way of thinking down to the Nano Second
From Their NANOSecond the creators of the Hologram Universe aka Computer Simulation
were it could be actually too US a Yottasecond

anyhow ,

your thinking as Neil Degrasser Tyson once thought ..
as now he is think a hologram universe may be possible

your thinking as what Humans Only know in the Mathematical Realm
of Ones and Zeros. from a Civilization Type ZERO!
From Them a Civilization Type 4,5,6

Actually Humans and all of the Animal Kingdom Fauna and FLORA

Are all CODE!! its Factual , if we were NOT we wouldn't be
able to Break Down the DNA Genome GATTACA

Recently Science have found a 2nd Layer CODE in our DNA..

I would Like too think :
Our World our universe is Like the Movies :

Tron , The Matrix , The 13th Floor

It would explain so much more ..
of Mythology and Religion. LOL

We are the Programs Tron CLU = ( The Living on Earth )
They are the Programmers / Users Kevin Flynn ( place your Gods and Deity's here )


there is Quite a Few REAL Scientist , that think....
We ((( MAY ))) a theoretical Concept MAY
live in a Hologram Universe.

and Now Neil G Tyson is with those very same Scientist

Quantum Entanglement.. still needs more Study
as Distance mean Nothing .

In All our Ancient Past Holds the Secret
it always HAD .

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
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.

and I agree!

Seem the Op is thinking only at Our level of Know How.

as Neil G Tyosn had the Same thought

if We cant do it they cant DO it!

well its not the Case anyore..

originally posted by: muzzleflash
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...

Well ..

Some theorized this ..

and Some claimed it caused a Mandela Effect
a re write , with a few left over codes of memory

LOL ... yeah.. I think Therefore I AM ..

wait a Minute

I knew she Had Braces ( DOLLY ) when She Smiled at ( JAWS )! Metal Mouth ( Moonraker (1979) )
the whole Concept for the Reason they Instability fell in love with Each other . lol

well thats what i remember..

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
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.

Balderdash.

A common misconception founded in religion...and now spouted by controlled science.

Why we wait for the truth to out is beyond me, line is drawn in the ether.....reveal or we will do it for ya.

It is just that simple oh ye fearful controllers.

originally posted by: roadgravel
Mankind doesn't really understand the universe completely. So it a stretch to draw this conclusion.

SCIENCE doesn't.

It is not allowed to...controlled by oh so many foolish groups who claim it is in our best interest.

Mankind as a whole in a similar state overall.

Those with understanding are quickly pealing back the layers...and ever faster FASTER.

Will we fast enough...precise enough...willing enough and SLOW enough to weld it all together?

Unlikely, and we are all that is left between forever spiralling lessness.

BUT WE NEVER GIVE UP NEVER!!

a reply to: dfnj2015



Well Ones and Zero Eh... On and Offs



There one Mathematician that thinks the Universe is a Cellular Automation


His Name : Konrad Zuse Considered to some the first Computer Programmer

Konrad Zuse
en.wikipedia.org...

n 1967, Zuse also suggested that the universe itself is running on a cellular automaton or similar computational structure (digital physics); in 1969, he published the book Rechnender Raum (translated into English as Calculating Space). This idea has attracted a lot of attention, since there is no physical evidence against Zuse's thesis. Edward Fredkin (1980s), Jürgen Schmidhuber (1990s), and others have expanded on it.

And

Whats ? Cellular Automation On and off Ones and Zeros

Cellular Automation

A cellular automaton consists of a regular grid of cells, each in one of a finite number of states, such as on and off (in contrast to a coupled map lattice). The grid can be in any finite number of dimensions. For each cell, a set of cells called its neighborhood is defined relative to the specified cell. An initial state (time t = 0) is selected by assigning a state for each cell. A new generation is created (advancing t by 1), according to some fixed rule (generally, a mathematical function) that determines the new state of each cell in terms of the current state of the cell and the states of the cells in its neighborhood. Typically, the rule for updating the state of cells is the same for each cell and does not change over time, and is applied to the whole grid simultaneously, though exceptions are known, such as the stochastic cellular automaton and asynchronous cellular automaton.

Not only is a "computer simulation" man made, but the "term" itself is also.

So to attribute something we humans created within the last 50 years to the universe itself is pretty laughable.

Does a lab rat know what's happening to them?

There's levels and levels and levels and levels and levels and levels and levels...

We humans are still at the beginning of the beginner level.

Now why would we use our limited knowledge of computer simulation as a reference for something that would obviously have to be beyond our comprehension to work?

But don't mind me though...

a reply to: dfnj2015

Ok, here's my final thought on the simulation theory. The definition which one subscribes to, in regard to relating the word "simulation" to the Universe and beyond, makes the correlation dependent, imho.

sim·u·la·tion

ˌsimyəˈlāSH(ə)n/

noun

imitation of a situation or process.

"simulation of blood flowing through arteries and veins"

the action of pretending; deception.

"clever simulation that's good enough to trick you"

the production of a computer model of something, especially for the purpose of study.

I agree that the first definition of the word could be a basic description of the Universe and whatnot, as there may be infinite, time looping iterations.

The other two, nope.

I have spoken!


*thunder clap*

I wonder how long it took to type all the code, every rain drop, every blade of grass, every leaf, every grain of sand, every fish that ever lived, every cat that ever lived, every human that ever lived, every....

*** DELETED BY AUTHOR ***

a reply to: dfnj2015

We should think of binary less of 1's and 0's and more of pulses of energy. A Pulse or not a pulse, is what our computers recognise. Of course we need a power source for this.

I do think our world is a simulation. Perhaps computer is not the right term but helps people understand the concept. We as humans so far have figured out how to run complex systems using the energy pulses that we can manipulate- electricity - and using states of base 2 (binary). Quantum computing tries to up the computational power by increasing the two states of energy pulses we currently use.

We are clearly only at the beginnings of understanding the universe. We should not disregard the notion that what we experience is a simulation just because what we have created so far cannot fathom a way to replicate that, yet.

a reply to: daftpink

Our brains do not employ a binary system, in the same manner, boolean logic dictates regarding a digital computer although it's similar, a neuron fires or it does not.

There seems to be some connection to the quantum level where logic and consciousness are concerned one can only imagine any computational control construct or machine capable of deterministic simulation of a universe would also operate or exist within the quantum foam that permeates our own macro verse.

originally posted by: pikestaff
I wonder how long it took to type all the code, every rain drop, every blade of grass, every leaf, every grain of sand, every fish that ever lived, every cat that ever lived, every human that ever lived, every....

Does a computer user reenter every bit of information, over and over?

Does s/he enter the headers on a email? Does a spammer retype thousands of emails to send?

The code to create a rain drop can create one or thousands. The same with plants, animals, etc.

originally posted by: pikestaff
I wonder how long it took to type all the code, every rain drop, every blade of grass, every leaf, every grain of sand, every fish that ever lived, every cat that ever lived, every human that ever lived, every....

I would not imagine things were coded as individual entities. Rather, one possibility is that these are universe simulations, and the only thing coded for were the basic laws of physics and the fundamental building blocks of the universe. Then the sim was set into motion, and the rest is what happened.

a reply to: dfnj2015

While most of this flies over my head, I do know a bit about scripting, and to script something as big as the universe would require an impossibly sized CPU.

For those not familiar with scripting, it's BORING and requires a crap load of time and effort. For instance if you were write a script for a single human waking up then this is what it might look like, sorry for the errors but i'm a bit rusty at scripting.

If X=true then COC 1,100,0 execute wakeup.exe
If X-false then COC 1,100,0 execute stayasleep.exe
If Y=true then COC 1,100,0 execute snoozebutton.exe
If Y=false then COC 1,100,0 execute wakeup.exe
If Z=true then COC 1,150,10 then execute treelopper.exe-chainsaw.Wav
If Z

a reply to: dfnj2015

The problem with computers is they do exactly what we tell them to do

To paraphrase the fourth doctor 'A computer is a very sophisticated idiot, it can solve a million algorithms in a second but it still needs someone to tell it what to do.'

At the current level of tech in mankind, we have super computers which are composed of multiple CPUs doing parallel processing.