Are we living in a Computer Simulation?

I would take Lakoff's position. As Feynman said, physics describes but does not explain.

This isn't that difficult.

My kids play Minecraft. This is a pretty clever computer simulated world with some very odd laws of Physics. Once you understand the laws of Physics in this simulated world... it makes perfect sense. Of course many people (well... players) in the world have figured out how to use the laws of physics in the game world to their advantage... much as you and I have figured out to used the laws of physics in our world to ours.

In Minecraft, gravity works completely differently. If something is falling, it will continue to fall until it hits something... however if something is not falling, then it will continue to stay stationary even if there is nothing holding it up. So you can put a one block on top of another (a stable structure). If you move the bottom block, the top block will stay stationary (where in our world you would expect it to drop). So you can make structures that are "hovering" in the air.

In Minecraft there is no conservation of mass. There are "blocks" (all objects in this universe are blocks) that generate "matter". The most interesting of these is water. A water source block will continue to generate water forever with no input.

If an Artificial Intelligence ever exists in the Minecraft Universe, it will learn to live with and function in these laws of Physics that are different than ours. The in-game laws of gravity and matter would seem quite obvious and natural to the in-game intelligence. The question is whether this in game intelligence would have any way to conceive of our laws on gravity on its own.

We develop an intuition based on our experience of the laws of Physics in the universe we inhabit. They seem perfectly logical... but they only seem that way because it is all we know.

For anyone who is interested in the ideas of other possible Universes.... Flatland by Edwin Abbott considered the idea of different universes ruled by different laws of mathematics in 1884.

C'mon Hod

Pointless post.

Unlike all his others?

On a good day, Dale could be surprisingly coherent and accurate about aspects of English usage. Unfortunately good days are few and far between now.

Yes, but if he's not on the grammar threads he's not doing any harm. I'll challenge him on those posts, but I let everything else slide because I don't want to put him off posting entirely.

In any event he makes more sense than the bloody OP.

Absolutely.

because?

dalehileman wrote:
C'mon Hod

C'mon Cen

You wouldn't understand.

because?

You're not that bright. You've been given loads of evidence you don't understand and are unable to give any that supports your moronic view.

Your English is execrable, you don't even know how the apostrophe works.

Without knowing more about you I don't know why that is, maybe it's genetic, maybe you were dropped on your head as a kid, but one thing's certain, stuff most normal people can grasp just shoots over your head.

As I told you, ad hominems don't count...at all.

Those aren't ad hominems , they're truthful responses to your moronic drivel. You have been given evidence you don't understand, you've not provided any of your own nor displayed any understanding of the evidence you've been given.

In view of the above I've been remarkably restrained considering I've never suffered fools gladly.

Fool, or troll? Or both?

As I told you, ad hominems don't count...at all.

You can't do without them, eh?!

Wrong! Of course 'ad hominems count' when a poster fails to support wild claims and has been banned elsewhere for polluting respectable forums. It is a truism that the status of what we call 'facts' is ultimately a function of their contextual utility, but since your ad hoc ravings have no such utility you don't deserve the courtesy of a normal response.

As I told you, ad hominems don't count...at all.



Yawn