You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Elon Musk was wrong, we are not living in a simulation according to latest results
Or are we? I have read the publication and yes, it has a lot of interesting implications but does not definitively disprove simulation theory. The reason I say that is because...
"The researchers calculated that just storing information about a couple of hundred electrons would require a computer memory that would physically require more atoms than exist in the universe."
This does not actually mean anything because the strongest computer we have can already simulate more atoms than we have on Earth. Just look at minecraft or 'No man's Sky' (Shit as it was). This implies that atomic theory is irrelevant when it comes to digital simulation.
What´s the basis of your claim? Where is this magical computer located? How is minecraft relevant to simulation in any way whatsoever? You are just making a claim, without any basis.
It was more a thought experiment than a claim. Watch the latest video by Vsauce3 and the companion video. It implies the thought that we could consider atoms as being equivalent to 1's and 0's in coding, then consider the rendering capacity of a simple desktop computer.
Also, notice I said atoms on Earth, not the universe. Games like Minecraft that can render vast amounts of code already simulate more 'atoms' than earth contains. I am suggesting that this does not definitively disprove simulation theory, especially since simulation capabilities are STILL on the rise...
I am not looking for a fight, simply trying to start a conversation since the Tag on the article is Philosophy...
I am sorry for my rude tone, I was in a shitty mood. I disagree that your minecraft example has anything to do with simulation. To simulate atoms, you need to simulate the physical properties of atoms,including electrons, protons, quarks,etc.