←back to thread

UBCO study disproves the simulation hypothesis

(news.ok.ubc.ca)
21 points mxkopy | 1 comments | 02 Nov 25 19:24 UTC | HN request time: 0.217s | source
Show context
aeve890 ◴[03 Nov 25 00:11 UTC] No.45794593[source]▶
I'm surprised that the simulation hypothesis is even falsifiable. I mean, the guys above are supposed to be in a totally different level of existence from ours, how can we even start to think we can debug the simulation? Wouldn't that be already covered by beings way smarter than us?
replies(5): >>45796086 #>>45797330 #>>45797955 #>>45798488 #>>45798950 #
1. f4uCL9dNSnQm ◴[03 Nov 25 09:33 UTC] No.45797330[source]▶
It is hard to even disprove that we aren't a Boltzmann brain that hallucinated entire reality. Assuming the simulation is perfect(or at lest consistent) the only way to falsify it is to get some impossible estimates for required CPU/memory/storage. I think the whole "if simulations are possible, multiple ones will be created" falls apart when 1 second of running simulation requires several years of compute.