There’s a 20 percent chance we’re living in a computer simulation

[Hemi-Cuda]

cool article

[rockstar]

Meh. That's been my hunch for years now.

[Ford Prefect]

I think, therefore I am.

[Save Us Sutter]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

I think, therefore I am.

All that proves is that perhaps you are the computer.

Remember, Descartes had to prove God existed before he could come to any further conclusions about other people and material objects being "real"

And his argument for the existance of God is so flawed it's not even funny.

[Resolute 14]

I'm gonna go burn down a rainforest, cause there is a 20% chance that someone is just going to reset to a save point. I like those odds!

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Save Us Sutter

All that proves is that perhaps you are the computer.

Remember, Descartes had to prove God existed before he could come to any further conclusions about other people and material objects being "real"

And his argument for the existance of God is so flawed it's not even funny.

True ... Hawking actually makes a better case for the existence of God than Descartes did. How about the popular permutation of Rene's money line then ... I drink, therefore I am.

With Descartes, it almost seemed to me he didn't believe in the existence of God himself. He seemed to just utter platitudes to keep the Chuch happy ... or maybe to avoid becoming fire wood.

[Save Us Sutter]

Well he was a brilliant mathematician.... not that that precludes believing in God....

But I think you're right. I always wanted to like him, because he was obviously a genius in many ways... and Meditations was wonderfully written... but it seems like he just gives up, "proves" God and then proves everything else.

Back on topic, my Philosophy of Mind professor was a strong believer that eventually we would have this kind of computing power and when we got sick or close to death we would simply upload our brains and BANG! immortality!

I'm not sure it's going to be quite that easy... but the more we learn about our brains, the more it seems they are just big wet computers. If we are ever able to digitalize our neurons, and the relationships between them, it doesn't seem THAT farfetched

[lifer]

I've thought of this possibility a few times, but certainly not in this kind of depth. It's a cool possibility, but it really doesn't change anything. I mean, the rules that we live by don't really change.
It woudl be a shocking realization for many religions though. Considering the respect that mainstream religions afford to science right now, they would likely reject this concept not matter what proof is offered.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Save Us Sutter

Well he was a brilliant mathematician.... not that that precludes believing in God....

But I think you're right. I always wanted to like him, because he was obviously a genius in many ways... and Meditations was wonderfully written... but it seems like he just gives up, "proves" God and then proves everything else.

Back on topic, my Philosophy of Mind professor was a strong believer that eventually we would have this kind of computing power and when we got sick or close to death we would simply upload our brains and BANG! immortality!

I'm not sure it's going to be quite that easy... but the more we learn about our brains, the more it seems they are just big wet computers. If we are ever able to digitalize our neurons, and the relationships between them, it doesn't seem THAT farfetched

If that happens ... being able to upload our brain ... I want a BIG floppy, with lot's of RAM.

I don't know how realistic that is though. Cryonics and DNA mapping seem like a better ticket to immortality to me. I don't think I'd count on my immortality being entrusted to highly fallible electonic devices. Certainly the current state of computer reliability isn't very reassuring. They're making computers more and more powerful, but they seem to still be having problems with the nuts and bolts end of things.

[ken0042]

I for one welcome our computer simulation running overloards.

[Save Us Sutter]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

If that happens ... being able to upload our brain ... I want a BIG floppy, with lot's of RAM.

I don't know how realistic that is though. Cryonics and DNA mapping seem like a better ticket to immortality to me. I don't think I'd count on my immortality being entrusted to highly fallible electonic devices. Certainly the current state of computer reliability isn't very reassuring. They're making computers more and more powerful, but they seem to still be having problems with the nuts and bolts end of things.

Yeah how great would it be to wake up in the morning and instead of seeing your beautiful wife next to you, all you get is an error screen!?

I don't necessarily believe it will ever be possible (to upload) but I do believe that when it comes down to it, we're nothing but organic computers. Most human traits (emotion, motivation, the "self", heck even religion) we can explain (albeit not fully... yet) through neuroscience. The only thing left it would appear is consciousness, which I believe is tied into the development of language.

If we can ever get a grasp on what makes us "think" then we're well on our way to creating robots that can do everything we can. Except, as you pointed out, the technology has a long way to go to get to that point.

[Flames0910]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

If that happens ... being able to upload our brain ... I want a BIG floppy, with lot's of RAM.

I don't know how realistic that is though. Cryonics and DNA mapping seem like a better ticket to immortality to me. I don't think I'd count on my immortality being entrusted to highly fallible electonic devices. Certainly the current state of computer reliability isn't very reassuring. They're making computers more and more powerful, but they seem to still be having problems with the nuts and bolts end of things.

well they make computers cheaply right now because it would cost far more to produce programs and hardware that worked together without any bugs than it does to simply eliminate the most likely ones
for example the software for nasa space shuttles is virtually bug proof. but if we wanted comparable bug free software for our personal computer we'd have to pay 10x as much for windows and the hardware would also be much more expensive

If we can ever get a grasp on what makes us "think" then we're well on our way to creating robots that can do everything we can. Except, as you pointed out, the technology has a long way to go to get to that point.

yeah, the dalai lama's book "the universe in a single atom" talks about the search for what makes us conscious - sorta the same problem. (btw really interesting book about how science/religion can work together)

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

If that happens ... being able to upload our brain ... I want a BIG floppy, with lot's of RAM.

I don't know how realistic that is though. Cryonics and DNA mapping seem like a better ticket to immortality to me. I don't think I'd count on my immortality being entrusted to highly fallible electonic devices. Certainly the current state of computer reliability isn't very reassuring. They're making computers more and more powerful, but they seem to still be having problems with the nuts and bolts end of things.

It would probably take some kid minutes to find a way to upload a terrifying virus and ruin your digital heaven.

[CrusaderPi]

My favourite part of the computer simulation is when I'm walking around in fog. I imagine fog to be update times when the CPU doesn't have the horse power to render the whole world. Plus I know everything the CPU does really is centered on me.

[La Flames Fan]

The Sims!

[Drunk Skunk]

Originally Posted by Snakeeye

I'm gonna go burn down a rainforest, cause there is a 20% chance that someone is just going to reset to a save point. I like those odds!

I like the way you think ...

Anyone for a mass crime spree, followed by worldwide genocide?

[Frank@75]

What is the purpose of Man? It would be the same as all living things.

To Grow. To grow beyond ourselves and touch the face of God.

If artificial intelligence surpasses our own intelligence, if future computors
are made of light and chemicals, if they can repair and replace themselves, does this not make them the children of man?

Does this not make them the chilrdren of God?

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Save Us Sutter

Yeah how great would it be to wake up in the morning and instead of seeing your beautiful wife next to you, all you get is an error screen!?

I don't necessarily believe it will ever be possible (to upload) but I do believe that when it comes down to it, we're nothing but organic computers. Most human traits (emotion, motivation, the "self", heck even religion) we can explain (albeit not fully... yet) through neuroscience. The only thing left it would appear is consciousness, which I believe is tied into the development of language.

If we can ever get a grasp on what makes us "think" then we're well on our way to creating robots that can do everything we can. Except, as you pointed out, the technology has a long way to go to get to that point.

I read an interesting article a while back about a neuroscience research project in which they were monitoring brain activity during states of religious excitement. They discovered that the part of the brain that gets hyper-active in a state of religious ecstasy is the same as the part of brain that shows increased levels of activity while high on drugs. Maybe Carlos Castenada was onto something.

[Save Us Sutter]

Originally Posted by Frank@50

What is the purpose of Man? It would be the same as all living things.

To Grow. To grow beyond ourselves and touch the face of God.

If artificial intelligence surpasses our own intelligence, if future computors
are made of light and chemicals, if they can repair and replace themselves, does this not make them the children of man?

Does this not make them the chilrdren of God?

Or perhaps something more like illegitmate half-brothers?

I will not get into a discussion about God because I can tell we will disagree on that and really it is irrelevant. I will however offer the suggestion that the purpose of all living things is to adapt to their environments and therefore prolong their individual survival as well as the survival of the species. The point of life is to keep on living... so to speak.

Creating these super computers is certainly one way science seems to think we can go about prolonging our lives... perhaps indefinately.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Calculon

Well, I don't know if we are "simulated" by some guy eating corn chips and laughing at all of our problems, but I guess it it not entirely improbable. However, I would venture to guess that either way our brains are merely interpreters of the "code of reality". It's sort of like how a compiler interprets binary code consisting of strings of 1's and 0's into words and symbols, but in the case of our brains a complexion of particles, waves, strings, etc.

If we ever find it at all, our "grand unified theory" of physics may reveal this code if it exists. If a theory does not show this code, it is probably not the grand unified theory it claims to be. On the other hand, maybe this code does not exist at all or we will destroy ourselves before we can find it. Over time we have found that many of the constituents of nature that we thought were completely separate have proved to be closely related. We have found that the force keeping ourselves in our seats and the force keeping the earth in orbit around the sun are one and the same. We have combined electricity and magnetism into one force called electromagnetism. String theory is currently attempting to unify Einstein's theory of general relativity with quantum mechanics.

Needless to say, whether our universe is simulated by somebody else or not does not change the fact that all that exists is merely a mathematical model of some kind. Discovering the most fundamental laws of that mathematical model is the big challenge.

The mathematical/scientific haromony and inter-relationships in the universe have always suggested to me that God and science are either one and the same, or at the very least, inseparable. If math and science are therefore bound up in God, then our existence being nothing more than a computer simulation isn't all that far fetched. But who is running the simulation? Douglas Adams was onto this whole idea ... you know, the mice ... the meaning of life, the universe and everything ...but what the heck does 42 mean? Wouldn't it be a hoot if we are just a simulation being run to determine what 42 is the answer to?

Edit: You had to know given my handle that I'd work Adams into this somehow.