Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
It would have to be a quantum computer, so that it could compute all the paths at once.
No because a computer isn't alive, breathing, eating or murdering people. A computer would have a more "ordered" type of world whereby things "fit" in well.
Nick Bostrom has another paper where he poses Emulation rather than Simulation.
The main difference between the two is that a Simulation is what we currently term various computational models that are themselves not an actual reality (For instance there are simulations for training the armed forces which require shooting people, but no real people are actually shot), where as an Emulation is a fully working version running on a different platform.
So we aren't likely to be in a Simulation (Unless you have seen points pop-up in the corner of your HUD), this however doesn't rule out not being an Emulation. There are many potential avenues for reasoning in regards to emulation, obviously I'd pen mine here however I've already posted to enough threads here on the subject (albeit most of the time it will appear abstract word salad).
Sure. The body feels what the mind tells it to feel. Is there some person who can construct a completely intelligent universe to simulate or emulate their own and can merge the dimensions together like "Inception"?
The html doesn't address the the more plausible dynamic, that is evident as the naturally-occurring, finely resolute, Planck realm/quark emanations.
Not necessarily. Remember in The Matrix it was explained that there was a first Matrix that was a perfect world. Problem is, it was too good, so people didn't buy into the illusion and kept dying off. Part of what makes reality is how crappy it is.
Logging in and finding even more of your posts.Question is, what could be crappier than THIS Matrix-generated Reality of ours?![]()
NICK BOSTROM: Suppose that these simulated people are conscious (as they would be if the simulations were sufficiently fine-grained and if a certain quite widely accepted position in the philosophy of mind is correct). [...] A common assumption in the philosophy of mind is that of substrate-independence. The idea is that mental states can supervene on any of a broad class of physical substrates. Provided a system implements the right sort of computational structures and processes, it can be associated with conscious experiences. It is nor an essential property of consciousness that it is implemented on carbon-based biological neural networks inside a cranium: silicon-based processors inside a computer could in principle do the trick as well.
If consciousness could compute things that have been proven to be uncomputable, then this would imply that consciousness looked like it was associated to the hardware of the brain, but was really running off some hardware that could compute our physics, but cannot be computed by our physics. That's about the only thing I could think of as evidence.