Level Extreme platform
Subscription
Corporate profile
Products & Services
Support
Legal
Français
Living in a computer simulation
Message
From
11/01/2013 10:32:11
 
 
To
11/01/2013 10:14:53
General information
Forum:
Science & Medicine
Category:
Quantum
Miscellaneous
Thread ID:
01562109
Message ID:
01562157
Views:
35
>>Let's say we've made a simulation universe.
>>In that simulation, let's do Young's Double Slit experiment.
>
>Don't know that experiment.


It pretty much defines QM.


>>Let's also put a simulated human being in there to watch the simulated experiment.
>>My question is, we assume the model itself is in agreement with real-world
>>measurements before the simulated human being is put in there, but is that
>>necessary?
>>
>>My suggestion is that it is the simulated human being and its measurements
>>that have to agree with our real-world measurements, not the underlying model.
>>
>>In other words, the Double Slit experiment only applies to measurements, and in
>>a simulation that includes a human being, that means only the information in the
>>simulated brain has to demonstrate the uncertainty principle.
>
>The simulated universe could only be an approximation of true reality.


Well, sure. Quantum mechanics is just an approximation of true reality. General Relativity is just an approximation of true reality.

The idea is that we aren't sure which is better, which is right.

The idea is creating this simulation, with a human being in it, and if QM and GR can come out of the human being's measurements, then the simulation will be a more accurate approximation of just GR or just QM.

And that's what science wants. More accurate models and theories.


> To use VM terminology, the nature of the existence of the simulation in the host universe would cause the guest universe to be a constant variable (always changing) due to the guest's universe necessarily being executed on the host universe's mechanisms.
>
>It would never be correct. You could not program for the variables because they would require real-time sampling of the host universe, the results of which, as Dragan points out, alter the host universe slightly, resulting in additional variables.
>
>A simulated universe that is accurate is not possible.
>
>UPDATE: Neither is a simulated photon, or a simulated nucleus of an atom. It would be a close approximately, something from which you could determine the true formulas which drive the host universe. But, they would never be completely accurate inside the simulation because it is a multi-array set of compounding variables.
Previous
Next
Reply
Map
View

Click here to load this message in the networking platform