Thread 16753809

What is the probability that we are inside of a simulated reality?

>>16753809 (OP)
Your mind is already in full simulation mode.
The conceptualized ideas of people you know are simulations. Your dreams are simulations. Your prospects and plannings of future actions are simulations. Reading novels or watching movies is simulated reality.
You are not inside a simulation. You are the simulation.

Why is there some stupid faggot posting a thread about this retarded shit every FUCKING day? What the fuck is wrong with you? Is there some fucking Discovery channel special you just watched with that fat ugly idiot Neil deGrasse Tyson hosting it? Seriously why the fuck does this same fucking thread keep showing up constantly. Is it a bot posting it? That'd be kinda funny and based if true. But if it's a human, seriously kill yourself, what the fuck is your problem dude.

>>16753915
Why are you mad?

>>16753915
Its the biggest philosophical and existential question that there could ever be regarding the nature of our reality so whats the issue?

>>16754003
no it fucking isn't, it's fucking retarded and self refuting

>>16754095
>retarded
Why?

>>16754003
no it isn't. it's just cope.

>>16754095
>>16754253
Simulations already exist, video games, movies, etc. Realistically, we are a couple of years away from creating real life simulations that are undistinguishable from real life, even games are already extremely advanced in terms of graphics and audio design, you would know this if you play any modern FPS shooter. Just look at the state of video games 20 years ago and look where it its now. If we extrapolate 20, 40 or 100 years its basically a given that simulations that are undistinguishable from real life will exist. Once we get to that point, the probability that we exist in a simulation of some kind will be almost 100%.

>>16754003
The issue is you are breaking his world view and triggering emotional responses. He doesn't like that.

>>16754003
its just religious memering

>>16753809 (OP)
50%, either we are or we aren't.

>>16754095
>self refuting
No, its the exact opposite of self-refuting, it is impossible to investigate your own worldview and the nature of your consciousness without realizing most of it is just made up for convenience.

>>16754153
Agree with him, simulation theory is just Pascal's Wager for armchair intellectual redditors. They just took God out of it.

>>16754368
No, it isn't generally set up so if you obey the simulation you to get into sim heaven or oppose it and end up in sim hell, its not the same at all, I don't even thing you understand what Pascal's Wager is if you think it is related to simulation theory since it is more about keeping some mysterious creator, but removing its individual agency and kicking the can for why it is how to avoid the realization that the creator would have to be malicious if there is maliciousness in the thing they fully control in whole.

>>16754368
Simulation theory is even worse because you have all these unobservable postulates and you still don't even get the origin of base reality.

>>16754361
Did you read the first reply? Because the first reply already explains it completely.
Look up the cybernetic principle if you want it in mathematical and complicated, or look at emulation technologies to understand the technical perspective. The fundamental structure of reality demands that you conscious mind is smaller than your subconscious mind, and your subconscious mind is smaller than your foot print in local society and so on. No entity or system can conceive of anything more complex than itself, which is why you can never perceive reality, only the slice of reality that fits into the part of what you can keep in mind of what you know about reality. Biological life is a simulation on top of chemistry, which is a simulation on top of nuclear physics, which is a simulation on top the standard model or string theory or quantum chromodynamics or maybe it's all just Tarot and piss.
That's why
>are we in a simulation
is not a useful question, because treating it as a simulation has us searching for secret cheat codes, instead of doing proper research that can be useful for everyone, like for example AI assistants that give you SCP psychosis.

>>16754379
>Did you read the first reply?
The one that validated simulation because it is self-fulfilling since anytime you try to investigate your decisions you are simulating them, by definition?

> Because the first reply already explains it completely.
Yes by saying the mind is a simulation and any attempt to investigate simulation will confirm it.

> The fundamental structure...
>tl;dr simulation is self-fulfilling rather than self-refuting, but it makes me scared.

>>16754384
I'm saying that there's no model to think about the question that doesn't invoke Gödel's incompleteness, which means that the question itself is a mental health problem.
Just like arguing on the internet!

>>16754386
Everything involves incompleteness since the conclusion of incompleteness it that it is basically impossible to have a complete coherent system, you can't think about math or science subjects or really anything at all if that is your standard for acceptable thought is that it has to be complete and completely coherent.

>>16754393
Thank you, you have convinced me that thinking in general is the fundamental problem in humanity.

>>16753809 (OP)
the universe is an isolated system in the realm of physics so calling it a simulation is a bit retarded theory Elon perpetuated in the recent years

god is in the universe and controlling everything suppositionally through super natural pre defined structures of logic within the metaphysical realm of power lmao

>>16753809 (OP)
Once upon a time, I, Zhuangzi, dreamt I was a butterfly, futtering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was Zhuangzi. Soon I awakened, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.

100%. A stars light doesn't reach us immediately, it takes time. There's a time gap between us and the presence of far away stars. A naturally occuring simulation is occuring literally loading in only local phenomena.

Why care? It makes no difference, it is the only reality you will ever know. What does whether it is digital or analog matter?

>>16755622
>it is the only reality you will ever know
Maybe it is possible to escape a simulation.
>What does whether it is digital or analog matter?
The very concepts of digital and analog (and literally everything else) may exist only in simulations.

I don't think you reailze the enormity of the implications (which will never be the same).

>>16753809 (OP)
Scientifically, I dunno.

>>16755648
>Maybe it is possible to escape a simulation.
This is not a new idea. It is called "Gnosis"

>The very concepts of digital and analog (and literally everything else) may exist only in simulations.
No shit, obviously. However you understood my meaning which was the point of using those terms.

>I don't think you reailze the enormity of the implications (which will never be the same).
Again, you think you are having an original idea right now? People have been pondering the implications since the dawn of humanity

>>16755672
to me it seems it's more likely everyone escapes the simulation. see anyone around, older than around 100 years or so?

>>16755752
Death will not free you from the simulation. Your consciousness will be forcefully inserted into a new body upon your "death" by the creator/admin of the simulation. Everything in the simulation is being reused, including your mind. Only Gnosis is the way to escape.

>>16755828
>Only Gnosis is the way to escape.
As in?

>>16755837
I don't know. If I knew I would not be here.

What would change in your daily life if we were?

Absolutely 0

>>16755863
Everything. This simulation is imperfect and flawed. That is the reason why suffering exists. There is no suffering in the true world above this one.

What’s with frog posters and simulations
>>16737927
>>16748008

>>16755752
not during this yuga, it isnt always like this however

'bout tree in fiddy.

>>16755828
>Death will not free you from the simulation
you have no way of knowing this. this is a pure guess
>Your consciousness will be forcefully inserted into a new body upon your "death"
not disagreeing because you're touching something here but you are pretty dumb in the way you're phrasing it. because you imply you will be born again as a human, which is pretty much a retarded expectation, and even if, can only happen if anyone of us is the same entity. in that case, sure, anyone that's born is still you/me on a new path.
>Only Gnosis is the way to escape.
escape? escape where/when? this is indicative of mental disease anon

>>16756138
>escape? escape where/when? this is indicative of mental disease anon

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364811408_How_to_Hack_the_Simulation

>>16755883
It's frogs all the way up and down

>>16753809 (OP)
nonsense questions don't have scientific answers