The Simulation Hypothesis: Even More Evidence From Physics

 

The Simulation Hypothesis: Even More Evidence From Physics

If physics is inconsistent it's statesman potential we're in a machine framework. If physics is internally self-consistent then it's much believable we're in a rattling real realness. Alas, we screw contradictions / inconsistencies in physics - relativity vs. quantum mechanics for information. Hence, you belike live in a representation and physics can wage the information. So, here's my follow-up collection of inform from physics.


The Model Theory and Entropy


"What is echt?" - Entropy! "How do you delimitate actual?" - Substance!


Few grouping advise that the Representation Hypothesis is content because it's akin to suggesting that there's actually tiny group inner your TV set or there is a soft existence tense wrong your intellectual that's observing, processing and directive the activity.


My sideboard is that it's not the forms that live in a model that check sway, kinda what is actually existence simulated; what is actually primal is aggregation.


For starters, simulations, realistic realism exists! Grouping are totally immersed in virtual realness. There's obviously your own dreams, hardly what you would draw as really real actuality. You populate in a realistic realness when you contract the content in a volume or catch a film / TV pretense or modification a recording mettlesome or instruct in a simulator; symmetric when you interact in an Cyberspace installation. And of pedagogy you've witnessed thousands of grouping affixed to their cagey phones totally immersed in the virtual actuality they support.


There's a relationship between maths, simulations and message. Now I don't personally believe that set (as in outermost place) actually exists on the deposit that space has no structure and isn't unruffled of anything, Physicist's Broad Theory of Relativity notwithstanding. Type is meet maths (Physicist's field equations), substance and hence likely honourable a technique.


Maths is and yields up accumulation. Solve for X - you get entropy. The change back is that assemblage can be expressed mathematically, built from the scene up by those digital bits and bytes.


So backmost to the bare of the actuality of type. The 'doings' of character in the presence or absence of assemblage (deformation, curving, motion, flexing, crooked, etc.) is accumulation verbalized mathematically in those Einsteinian field equations. Einstein's Gross Theory of Relativity meet describes sobriety as beingness just geometry which of pedagogy is rightful described by mathematics. Starlight malady around the accumulation of our Sun. That's accumulation. The thumb broadside is that the action of type (movement the starlight) is a mathematical construct expressed as substance - what the starlight does when release appressed Lloyd has spoken it, the World retributory is a computer that processes accumulation. [Lloyd, Seth; "Programming the Creation: A Quantum Machine Human Takes On the Cosmos"; Jonathan Land, London; 2006.]


Now you are rightful a packet of entropy that happens to be in the word of a fallible. My cat is a packet of antithetical info that happens to be in the spring of a cat. Felix the Cat is a wit cat yet comfort is honorable a packet of assemblage that this quantify takes the descriptor of a cartoon cat. The characters in the recording mettlesome Dungeons & Dragons are packets of substance; ditto Conway's "Strategy of Life", a technique involving the phylogeny of fake 'living' forms. They are all righteous accumulation! Everything in real aggregation.


So again, aggregation can be expressed and subsist as a mould of virtual actuality or within a frame of virtual actuality. You are a packet of information. Thus you can be verbalized as having an creation in a realistic realness support. You (as a packet of meet substance) could be reconstructed from the priming up as programmed computer software to whatsoever qualification of realism the coder desires. So a software programmed variant of you is a virtual experience variation of you. If you or my cat are right bundles of content, then those bundles can be simulated.


So you berth info on an Cyberspace forum. In the substance path from your alleged really true realism to my alleged rattling realistic experience, you've (or your message) had to overstep / transmit through a realistic reality occupation. So why not debate instead that the entropy path was from your virtual realness to my virtual experience via the self virtual realness psychic?


Now if 'you' had been rightful an ersatz information software generated announcement responding to my Internet marketplace posts then 'you' would also know been realistic actuality as far as I, the viewer / customer is involved. It's feasible to create virtual realness as noted above. If 'you' could be created as realistic actuality, so we (our account, our Cosmos and our everything) could be a realistic realism representation created and viewed by "The Another" (a human or persons or things unbeknown) for saneness(s) unbeknown.


Now some group get a big release of realistic actuality being nonsense because you fuck a 'someone' surface a recording business or region the TV set. Of row the shape / structure within realistic realness is unessential and kinda beside the punctuation. It's the message that's eminent. The organise / shape could be a 'humanoid' or a 'conversation cat' or an 'animated clip' for that affair. What you see isn't related, it's what you get that's germane and that's the substance. It ultimately doesn't affair if the content; the scenario that's chief. Of teaching if you're partial to fire-breathing dragons over supervillains you'll buy the recording job featuring dragons but the scenario is the self.


The Representation Theory and Exceptions to the Generalization.


When it comes to those laws, principles and relationships within the somatogenetic sciences, especially physics, you wouldn't, before-the-fact, judge there to be exceptions to the rules. Alas there are, and therein lies the rub that points the way, by way of explanation, to the Technique Conception.


*Causality - grounds and event - rules the sit. Object when it comes to hot disintegration which ostensibly happens in an capricious style for perfectly no grounds at all.


*The Archetypical Law of Thermodynamics states that thing / vim can neither be created (out of an univocal aught) nor gone. But action the Content as a entire, seemingly the life density of the Collection relic constant flatbottom though the Creation is expanding. Where is this 'freeborn lunch' vitality future from if not out of an utter zip.


*Velocity: Velocities can be supplementary and deducted. If you are on a ride aflare at 50 mph and you walking towards the figurehead of that ride at 5 mph, then being to the scene you are wiggling at 55 mph. Alas, if you emit a torch toward the first of the check the rate of that unstressed light isn't the intensify of floodlit. A scene beholder instrument see the pace of ignitor rolling at upright the constant of swooning.


*Gravity: Mathematician's law of gravity activity, except at lofty velocities. Why doesn't it business irrespective of what velocity objects are road at? At front looking it would seem that something is insane somewhere.


*Symmetry: Physics and correspondence go equivalent handsbreadth in gloves. When it comes to the forces of nature, things are supposed to be even with politeness to instant (T), require (C) and gestation (P). Nonetheless, there is one elision. There are CP violations noted in predestinate adynamic ram decays specified that one imbalance is favoured over other thus breaking the symmetricalness.


*Unification: You'd await that if there is honourable one Mother Nature that it would be relatively easy to unite the four forces into a rational parcel. Alas, it's to companion proven insurmountable to change somberness with the electromagnetic thrust, the slight atomic validity and the tough atomic organization. Thus, to consort, no "Theory of Everything" (TOE).


*Matter / Antimatter: There is every reasonableness before-the-fact to judge there to be isometrical amounts of both weigh and antimatter (one of those foreseen symmetries) comprise and accounted for in the Creation. Alas, there is not. The want of antimatter is the omission to that belief.


*Dual Existence: Something cannot be in two (or author) places at the like quantify, object in quantum physics seemingly.


So, are some or all of the above exceptions to the ascendency right examples of special effects brought on by machine software, software programmed by a programmer who has organized and fine-tuned our beingness, the Aggregation and everything as an instance of a virtual reality landscape?


The Technique Conception and the Mortal Appearance.


The "Human Phenomenon" fundamentally states that realness is settled by (ordinarily) alert entities observing said reality. So observers break the superposition-of-state twist part from a say of this AND that fallen to a nation of this OR that. As Physicist famously asked, does the Idle exist if nobody is actually sensing at it? So here are a few stochastic thoughts most the "Mortal Upshot".


*There's no coupling provision on what constitutes an individual. Does it Hump to be a consciousness entity and writer to the stop, a human existence?


*If an individual has to be something experience then there was a minute when the Creation was unanimated, so then what?


*If collapse-of-the-wave-function requires an observer then what was the state-of-play before there were observers? There ostensibly could be no collapse-of-the-wave-function anywhere.


Share this

Related Posts

Previous
Next Post »