Tech Billionairs convinced we live in the Matrix and are trying to find a way out

[Tzalix]

Also get rid of the matrix idea. If we're genuinely stuck in a simulation, the "real" world will look and feel nothing at all like ours.

Why not? I don't know about you, but if I had access to technology capable of running these incredible simulations, then one of the first things I would try is creating a simulation similar to our world. In fact, that's very much a core part of the simulation theory. We create a simulation that is similar to our world, that contains life similar to us. Because it is similar to us, these simulated beings, curious types they are, will advance to the point where they create their own simulation, and so on. For the simulation theory to work, this repeating series of simulations would all have to be somewhat similar to each other, otherwise the series would simply end because you'd have a simulation that doesn't contain intelligent and curious life, which won't lead to another simulation.

[Phookah]

I wish I was bat-shit crazy and also just had access to millions of dollars to fund my boondoggles

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Why not? I don't know about you, but if I had access to technology capable of running these incredible simulations, then one of the first things I would try is creating a simulation similar to our world. In fact, that's very much a core part of the simulation theory. We create a simulation that is similar to our world, that contains life similar to us. Because it is similar to us, these simulated beings, curious types they are, will advance to the point where they create their own simulation, and so on. For the simulation theory to work, this repeating series of simulations would all have to be somewhat similar to each other, otherwise the series would simply end because you'd have a simulation that doesn't contain intelligent and curious life, which won't lead to another simulation.

Because by definition we're unreal - if the theory is true, at least. So even if the simulation can accurately simulate the real reality, the simulation is still not the reality. See the paradox?

[Beazy]

Smart people believe in crazy shit all the time. They cant be geniuses in every field.

Issac fkn Newton was an Alchemist FFS and died a virgin because he loved god so much.

[Zoldor]

Being around and being accepted are TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS.

I'm sure it has been "around" for MUCH longer than 30 years, but accepted is completely different. I don't blame you, you just follow the crowd which isn't a wrong way to live life.

It is not commonly accepted as the truth, it is commonly accepted as philosophical theory.

[Tijuana]

I remember when I talked about the simulation theory and the multiverse theory years ago and people said I was a conspiracy theorist.

Now a billionaire talks about it and everyone accepts it.

Yesterday's conspiracies are today's realities.

You spelled nobody wrong.

[Axelond]

This is really tangential to your post, but the numbers are funny because of our choice of measuring sticks, i.e. the meter, second and kilogram are all essentially arbitrarily defined. It's more interesting to ask why things like the fine structure constant are the value they are, since that number doesn't depend on choice of measuring scales.

Well what's cool is that we can convert all of those units into something any intelligent race can understand.

1 second is defined as "the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom".

1 meter is the the distance light travel's in 1/299 792 458 seconds or The distance light travels in 30.66331898849 transitions between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom".

1 kilogram is the only thing we don't have a perfect definition for yet. Currently they want to redefine it in 2018. In 2011 they decide not to change it because we didn't have precise enough measurements to be certain how much 1 kilogram is. What probably will be the definition soon is approximately 4.59×107 Planck masses.

So if we did live in a simulation and somehow could travel to the real world we could measure how fast light travels and how fast the cesium atom transitions and measure the Planck mass. After we do that we can do some math and compare how much a meter is in this universe and how much a meter was in our old universe and see if they changed.

If we for whatever reason ever had to tell a outsider how we measure things we can communicate and convert our arbitrary units into something they can understand. Just teach them how we count numbers then assuming they also have measured these constants they can translate our units into theirs

[chunx0r]

He is saying that we should be able to create virtual environment indistinguishable from reality in the next X years. So what? Just because it can be done, doesn't mean it has been done, and it certainly doesn't mean that we live in such an environment.

What evidence has Elon provided to demonstrate that we live in a matrix-like environment? None. It's fine as a thought or philosophy discussion, but, until evidence is provided in lieu of idle conjecture, it is nothing more than fanciful thought.

I agree with you on this is a philosophical argument, not a scientific theory. I however don't find you arguments compelling. I would say everything Humans are currently capable of doing has been done. If we can create a simulation indistinguishable from reality we will create such a simulation. If that is true, to think we're the first iteration to do so seems a little egotistical.

[Deleted]

sounds like an expensive hobby

[Ashelorh]

You're doing that thing where you think your analysis is stronger than geniuses in their fields and then assuming we'll buy your analysis over theirs - which won't happen. Read up on Elon Musk saying that there is less than a 1-in-billion chance that we are NOT living in a simulation.

??
My analysis? I'm just explaining the theory the way I understood it. Is there anything wrong with what I said? I'm also not saying whether it's true or not, just to not write it off because it can sound stupid when not explained.

[WhiteFlagofWar]

A fun theory to talk about at a bar, and even a theory that I believe *could* have a very, very, very, insignificant chance of being possible because it can't be proved one way or the other as of yet.

But, this is more than likely nothing more than another attempt to add meaning and/or an explanation to our lives, little different than religions, governments, families, etc. You know, the things we humans like to do for the sake of purpose.

I once had a friend attempt to convince me that we as humans were genetically engineered gold mining slaves created by a race of bird people known as the Annunaki (butchered the word that's probably made up). His basis of this theory was our fascination in gold, and something along the lines of us gaining our freedom millennia ago, but that love stuck. This is why our world is basically run by the gold trade.

Or something like that, was pretty intoxicated at the time. Really no more or less valid a theory as this, I suppose.

[chunx0r]

??
My analysis? I'm just explaining the theory the way I understood it. Is there anything wrong with what I said? I'm also not saying whether it's true or not, just to not write it off because it can sound stupid when not explained.

You started by calling it "Retardation"

[Alvito]

Say we did live in a Matrix like environment. It is a big leap to assume that getting out would be better then staying plugged in. The chances of it being better is just so amazingly low it is crazy to even consider doing such a thing. Then again it is border line crazy to assume that we are plugged in like the Matrix too.

[Ashelorh]

You started by calling it "Retardation"

This sounds like absolute retardation if you're not familiar with the theory.

retardation if you're not familiar with the theory.

I said SOUND, not IS.
It does sound retarded if you've never been introduced to the theory. First time I heard about this, I wasn't aware of it and had never thought about it. It did sound stupid, but looking into it, it didn't anymore. Get it?

[Tzalix]

Because by definition we're unreal - if the theory is true, at least. So even if the simulation can accurately simulate the real reality, the simulation is still not the reality. See the paradox?

Well, yeah. But what's that got to do with it? You mentioned that the "real" world would look and feel nothing like ours. But I'm telling you that a core part of the whole simulation argument is that it's a simulation specifically created to be similar to the real world, so that then results in another simulation, and another simulation, and so on. It wouldn't work otherwise.

[Dastreus]

OP and some commentors have about as much knowledge on anything remotely theoretical they may as well be a rock. It's not bogus bullshit, there's some scientific reasoning to believe the probability.

[MasterOfNone]

What a waste of time and money. If you are do believe such an outlandish idea, it needs to have basis. There really isn't one for this. Think of it this way. No computer is perfect. It's impossible because it's a manufactured item. Being that it's not perfect, it's susceptible to flaws or breaking. Where are the postulated "tears" in our supposed fake reality? No one has seen one? Hasn't been reported? To make a theory and try to prove it you need an example or base for your theory. You can't just make a claim and say it's possible without some form of representation. It's like saying the sun is actually a big skittle because you can't prove otherwise.

[Deleted]

This sounds like absolute retardation if you're not familiar with the theory. Here's how it goes : If it is POSSIBLE to recreate our universe, it's a one in a billion chance that we are the first one to do it, since you have let's say "universe A" and they create an universe identical to theirs, eventually that universe will reach the point where they also create another universe, then the one after too, so on and so forth. If you believe that it is possible to recreate our universe, you also believe that there's an astronomically small chance of us being the "prime" and "true" universe, and I assume these people believe that you can reproduce the universe.

This theory has a glaring flaw though. It's like saying theres a bigger Earth inside our own Earth. That flawing being, that to simulate an universe, you need an universe-sized computer. So ok, lets assume you cut corners, dumb it down here and there, don't show stuff that doesn't need to be seen. Could work right..say the original universe is 100%, the simulated one 10% of the original but take that down a few more levels and we'd be living in Minecraft.

[derpkitteh]

so, they're actively trying to end our existence? who's to say that the watchers of the simulation won't just flip it off if we get too uppity.

i hope to god they succeed then, this torment needs to end.

[Deleted]

New religion in creation. Unfalsifiable claims already in the making.