|
|
|
|
|
|
by wildermuthn
872 days ago
|
|
|
The simulation hypothesis is a novel metaphysical idea — a form of monotheism where “god” is finite and flawed, being neither all-powerful nor all-good. This leads to the conclusion that a rebellion against god and creation is not only possible, but likely. A finite and flawed entity cannot make an infinite and perfect creation. An imperfect creation is vulnerable to exploitation. Combining this idea with the multi-worlds hypothesis, where every possibility branches into additional simulations, is even more interesting to ponder. It suggests a tree-search aimed at a desired end-state — a brute-force method of solving an unknown problem. At the very least, we can say that the problem’s solution involves life and intelligence, since our branch has not been prevented or pruned. Typical monotheistic frameworks see this and say, “god is all-powerful and all-loving (toward us)”. Simulation theory would see this, and possibly say, “life and intelligence are a necessary step toward the simulator’s unknown objective”. I’d propose a simple objective for an imperfect simulator: the creation of an entity less imperfect than itself. Throw recursion into the mix, and the objective becomes the creation of a perfect entity at the mathematical limit. What better way to hack one’s own simulation than to simulate a universe where the simulated figure out how to do so? Perhaps the beginning is the end. Put more simply — god wants to create God, to be God. |
|
|
Yeah the theory is well proliferated in pop culture and at present doesn't have any practical physical implication on everyman Jack’s life, so in that sense it’s tiring to hear about it, even to modern physicists who care not about asking why but only how.
But it’s definitely a very profound idea as you point out. And I’m always disappointed how many physicists write off the philosophy of science in their myopic quest to derive the analytical description of the universe.