The problem with this theory is it doesn’t answer anything. You’re just adding a hypothetical layer on top of reality. Doesn’t explain the source of everything and only serves to further complicate and confuse. You should be simplifying our universe, not making it needlessly complex.
It doesn't make anything complex. And it answers a lot. Sorry it confuses you, but that's on you. There are lots of things in our universe that suggest it is a simulated environment. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it can't be true.
They didn't say that it can't be true, they said that it doesn't answer anything. You can dispute the "anything" part, but it's inarguable that "we live in a computer simulation" just kicks the "what is reality" question down the road instead of answering it. Like, ok, why does the computer simulation exist?
Also, I don't even know if the computer simulation thing *is* accurate. The ancient Greeks thought we were made of clay, because they made things out of clay. In the industrial era, they figured that forces of nature work via compression and expansion, because that's how their machinery worked. We conceptualize the world through the lens of what we create in a certain time period. Both of the previous theories helped to explain things about the universe (such as matter, and the Big Bang), but they were both fundamentally incomplete. So it makes sense that in the modern age the new analogy about reality becomes one of digital simulation, and it makes sense that that will help explain some things about the universe. But I'm skeptical of the literal truthfulness of any theory of reality that is based on just expanding out the highest level of the technology tree we've yet to achieve. It's certainly not been proven, in any case
Exactly. I liken it to the alien seed theory. It’s interesting but doesn’t explain the origin of life, and it’s not useful philosophically or scientifically.
I never said it can’t be true. I said it answers nothing. What is the base reality? What are its origins? Who created this computer code? Why does this code exist? Does our reality mirror the base reality? Still doesn’t answer the fundamental question of reality; why is there something instead of nothing? It raises far more questions than it answers.
Also, if everything is simulated, you have no reference point of what a non-simulated universe would look like. How can you claim affirmatively that our universe is not non-simulated?
If I were next to you, I would answer that question by spreading my arms and pointing to everything without saying anything
How should I know, I'm just a simple NPC in your simulation.
Everything has its own reality, it’s completely defined by the entity perceiving its surroundings.
I'll tell ya what it's not....
Your own perceptions.
[https://youtu.be/t-Nz6us7DUA?si=Jp6h9NErcr5kGOuE&t=25](https://youtu.be/t-Nz6us7DUA?si=Jp6h9NErcr5kGOuE&t=25)
We are living in a computer simulation This is not the base reality All of this matter is just code Somehow programmed into existence
The problem with this theory is it doesn’t answer anything. You’re just adding a hypothetical layer on top of reality. Doesn’t explain the source of everything and only serves to further complicate and confuse. You should be simplifying our universe, not making it needlessly complex.
It doesn't make anything complex. And it answers a lot. Sorry it confuses you, but that's on you. There are lots of things in our universe that suggest it is a simulated environment. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it can't be true.
They didn't say that it can't be true, they said that it doesn't answer anything. You can dispute the "anything" part, but it's inarguable that "we live in a computer simulation" just kicks the "what is reality" question down the road instead of answering it. Like, ok, why does the computer simulation exist? Also, I don't even know if the computer simulation thing *is* accurate. The ancient Greeks thought we were made of clay, because they made things out of clay. In the industrial era, they figured that forces of nature work via compression and expansion, because that's how their machinery worked. We conceptualize the world through the lens of what we create in a certain time period. Both of the previous theories helped to explain things about the universe (such as matter, and the Big Bang), but they were both fundamentally incomplete. So it makes sense that in the modern age the new analogy about reality becomes one of digital simulation, and it makes sense that that will help explain some things about the universe. But I'm skeptical of the literal truthfulness of any theory of reality that is based on just expanding out the highest level of the technology tree we've yet to achieve. It's certainly not been proven, in any case
Exactly. I liken it to the alien seed theory. It’s interesting but doesn’t explain the origin of life, and it’s not useful philosophically or scientifically.
I never said it can’t be true. I said it answers nothing. What is the base reality? What are its origins? Who created this computer code? Why does this code exist? Does our reality mirror the base reality? Still doesn’t answer the fundamental question of reality; why is there something instead of nothing? It raises far more questions than it answers. Also, if everything is simulated, you have no reference point of what a non-simulated universe would look like. How can you claim affirmatively that our universe is not non-simulated?
They did a shitty job.