Really, take the blue pill on this one.
Jan. 4th, 2008 02:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
So, Some
Guy is claiming that physicists should seriously investigate the
possibility that, a la The Matrix or The 13th Floor, our universe is just a
virtual reality simulation. And he makes the claim that we can test this
and determine whether or not we're just bits in some computer! He says that
all we need to do it see if reality can do anything that information
processing can't; if reality can, then we're not just strings of 1s and 0s.
Now, i haven't read what the guys says, but already I see more than a few
holes. I mean, first off, you want us to find something, one thing,
that reality does that information theory can't do? First, that requires
that we test everything the universe. Which, among other things, means we
need to understand (at least within reasonable limits) everything in the
universe. THEN, we need to compare that to everything in information
theory, which requires we have to understand everything in information
theory (easier than "everything in the universe," but that's like saying the
Milky Way is smaller than The Universe). And never mind that
not-finding such a conflict isn't proof-positive that the world IS a
simulation. Even if EVERYTHING the universe does can be simulated,
that doesn't mean it is. So what we're left with is an
astronomically-academic potentiality to prove that the world is not (and can
not be) simulated.
At best WAY too much work for no real payout.
Guy is claiming that physicists should seriously investigate the
possibility that, a la The Matrix or The 13th Floor, our universe is just a
virtual reality simulation. And he makes the claim that we can test this
and determine whether or not we're just bits in some computer! He says that
all we need to do it see if reality can do anything that information
processing can't; if reality can, then we're not just strings of 1s and 0s.
Now, i haven't read what the guys says, but already I see more than a few
holes. I mean, first off, you want us to find something, one thing,
that reality does that information theory can't do? First, that requires
that we test everything the universe. Which, among other things, means we
need to understand (at least within reasonable limits) everything in the
universe. THEN, we need to compare that to everything in information
theory, which requires we have to understand everything in information
theory (easier than "everything in the universe," but that's like saying the
Milky Way is smaller than The Universe). And never mind that
not-finding such a conflict isn't proof-positive that the world IS a
simulation. Even if EVERYTHING the universe does can be simulated,
that doesn't mean it is. So what we're left with is an
astronomically-academic potentiality to prove that the world is not (and can
not be) simulated.
At best WAY too much work for no real payout.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-04 08:11 pm (UTC)BTW, it wouldn't necessarily require us to check everything in the universe. If he's right in principle, it just means that we *could* prove we *weren't* in a simulation, not that we *were.*
no subject
Date: 2008-01-05 08:28 pm (UTC)Duh.
All hail His Noodly Appendage.