zlacker

[return to "Physicists prove the Universe isn't a simulation after all"]
1. armcha+D9[view] [source] 2025-12-06 14:04:31
>>webnrr+(OP)
What's the difference between a simulation and a non-simulation? Nothing, except where the simulation can be broken.

Can we accurately simulate a smaller universe in this universe? If I understand correctly, according to this paper the answer is "no". Except how do we determine the simulation is inaccurate, without either knowing what is accurate (and thus having a correct simulation), or being unable to distinguish the inaccuracy from randomness (the simulation already won't perfectly predict a small part of the real universe due to such randomness, so you can't point to a discrepancy)? What does it mean for a simulation to be “inaccurate”?

Also, you don't need to simulate the entire universe to effectively simulate it for one person, e.g. put them in a VR world. From that person's perspective, both scenarios are the same.

◧◩
2. johnni+Ml[view] [source] 2025-12-06 15:46:13
>>armcha+D9
You're getting to the key problems of the simulation trilemma itself. What the hell is a simulation?
[go to top]