Simulation Theory and Black Holes

[/.]

Philosopher Nick Bostrom's argument states that at least one of the following statements is very likely to be true:

1.) Human civilization or a comparable civilization is unlikely to reach a level of technological maturity capable of producing simulated realities or such simulations are physically impossible to construct.
2.) A comparable civilization reaching aforementioned technological status will likely not produce a significant number of simulated realities (one that might push the probable existence of digital entities beyond the probable number of "real" entities in a Universe) for any of a number of reasons, such as diversion of computational processing power for other tasks, ethical considerations of holding entities captive in simulated realities, etc.
3.) Any entities with our general set of experiences are almost certainly living in a simulation.
4.)We are living in a reality in which posthumans have not developed yet and we are actually living in reality.

While it may not be provable in any concrete sense, let's assume for a moment that we are, in fact, living in a simulated reality.

In such a scenario, there is a source for our existence. Let's call this source "The ALL", and let's think of it as an infinite and eternal mind (or "computer", if that helps), that does thought experiments (aka "simulations"), and that our universe is one of these experiments/simulations that applies certain laws of physics, and lets them play out to determine what would happen, and what it would look like to have these laws in the defined space.

"The ALL", or source of everything, is truly infinite and eternal, and thus cannot be understood or destroyed, so as our universe ages - even after trillions upon trillions of years when we're all LONG dead - it is just a blink of an eye to the Source of everything, because it is infinite and eternal. Regardless if "The ALL" is an infinite mind, a universe, or a computer.

In such a scenario, even if we were to think of the ALL as its own universe/reality - it would have no need for black holes or anything of the sort, because black holes (as we currently understand them) would eventually take up everything around them, thus making an end to all things as an eventuality. Even if the ALL is truly infinite, it would make no sense for black holes to exist, because at the center of black holes is (supposedly) a gravitational singularity - an infinitely dense point in space that takes until there is nothing left to take. If something is the true SOURCE of everything - and is infinite - it cannot eventually be destroyed or taken away via black holes. So why would they exist at all, in such a circumstance?

Thus, if at any point, a civilization has made simulated universes, and we are currently existing in one, then perhaps black holes are an anomaly of simulated universes, versus which ever one may be considered "real", and are a necessary aspect of our reality because it is necessary to take from our universe in order to power the simulation(s) themselves.

If black holes work as a power source, or battery, and eventually will swallow everything the universe has, then that means the energy and matter and everything else aren't just disappearing into a black hole's horizon or whatever, never to be seen again - but they are being recycled to fuel the simulation again - or to perhaps fuel a different simulation, but in another plane. This way, the simulations are self-sustaining and never have to die out, which allows life to continue (possibly) developing, or at the very least, allows things to continue to exist (even if simulated) in various kinds of universes.

NOTE: These are just thoughts and ideas and do not actually reflect my belief of anything. But if you actually read my rambling, then you have my thanks and are welcome to share your thoughts.

[jahpeg]

simulations are a human concept

[idkyetok]

I simulated reading this

[/.]

Originally posted by Cyni:

simulations are a human concept

Perhaps the average understanding of "simulations" is a human concept, but if we were to think of our entire universe being a simulation, then it is beyond any current human's understanding, because the universe itself is definitely not understood.

[Xautos]

And here you are debating an apparent impossible scenario and yet you explain such an unexplainable scenario in great detail as if we are in a simulated existence. So then you propose in your mind another such existence where the impossible is possible, and your mind is another such program within this computer, meaning a new simulated reality was already created by the computer itself using you to do it.

And Blackholes? we need hard concrete proof of their existence, the whole bit. Yet all we got to go on are theories and conjecture about such things from what we can make out from telescopes which may as well tell us nothing at all with the data collection capability we have at our disposal these days.

With all that said, someone is creating simulated realities in their mind about blackholes with no regards for anything said about our simulated situation, thus it can't be proven to be true because it is based on an assumption with what is fed into the computer for us to work out, a projective model if you will and we are the lab rats to figure it out.

So if blackholes are a simulation based on data we have from our all powerful machine, then the universe must be even beyond it's understanding, so how can it understand realities, simulated or otherwise?

[/.]

Originally posted by Xautos:

And here you are debating an apparent impossible scenario and yet you explain such an unexplainable scenario in great detail as if we are in a simulated existence. So then you propose in your mind another such existence where the impossible is possible, and your mind is another such program within this computer, meaning a new simulated reality was already created by the computer itself using you to do it.

And Blackholes? we need hard concrete proof of their existence, the whole bit. Yet all we got to go on are theories and conjecture about such things from what we can make out from telescopes which may as well tell us nothing at all with the data collection capability we have at our disposal these days.

With all that said, someone is creating simulated realities in their mind about blackholes with no regards for anything said about our simulated situation, thus it can't be proven to be true because it is based on an assumption with what is fed into the computer for us to work out, a projective model if you will and we are the lab rats to figure it out.

So if blackholes are a simulation based on data we have from our all powerful machine, then the universe must be even beyond it's understanding, so how can it understand realities, simulated or otherwise?

I'd say it's improbable, sure, though not impossible. And I'm not debating anything - just spouting nonsense I was thinking about after a very large 9% abv beer. It's just an idea, not an actual theory.

And there is concrete proof of a black hole's existence - one was photographed not even that long ago. We just aren't sure what they are exactly, but I was running with ideas that have been presented about them.

This post was just something I thought was interesting to think about, nothing more, nothing less.

That said, if something is infinite, it is entirely possible to simulate billions of conscious people, one of which is creating simulated realities in their mind about black holes. Why not?

I'm not asking anyone to figure out anything, so how about you relax and contribute your own theory if mine is soooo stupid to you?

[how bout i do anyway]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GLgZvTCbaA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmVOV7xvl58

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klpDHn8viX8

[AWAWA Liz]

How is babby universe formed?

[secuda]

And this is why Scientest dont use drugs.

[Xautos]

Originally posted by Cuttlefish:

Yeah, black holes exist. It's thought that there is a massive one at the center of the galaxy and others.

taken for granted based on what? scribbles. theories and conjecture as already stated. we need to get out to the center of the galaxy and actually prove this is the case.

[how bout i do anyway]

If you physically went to the center of the galaxy and saw for your own eyes what was there, what would that prove?

Hard solipsism is unfalsifiable. The subject cannot prove to any reasonable degree that anything outside of themself exists. The existence of a reality beyond ourselves is something taken for granted, an a priori assumption that is necessary for the formation of any knowledge.

You can express doubt about anything you want, but ultimately everything is doubtful to some degree or another. The only thing that is known for sure is that you exist and that your thoughts exist. Everything beyond that could be fake. You could be dreaming, you could be a brain in a vat or a Boltzmann brain, you could be in the Matrix or Plato's cave or the world of the Demiurge, but any of those conjectures are indistinguishable from true reality.

Have you been to the Eiffel Tower? Angkor Wat? The Grand Canyon? Antarctica? How do you know for sure that a place you have not been to actually exists?

It is a level of trust and understanding that you assign to other places and this varies depending on your subjective values. You can take the time to learn astrophysics and assess for yourself the probability of black holes existing based on what you learn, or you can accept that that is something you do not wish to take the time to acquire personal expertise regarding and relegate black holes to the section of your mind reserved for the things you do not personally have the knowledge to assess. The more expertise you acquire, the more your personal standard of evidence can be respected by others. But right now you are merely making broad assessments on a message board regarding facts and theories of astronomy and astrophysics that I do not think you have enough knowledge to be making.

[Marius]

Originally posted by how bout i do anyway:

If you physically went ... enough knowledge to be making.

I like this. It's the way I've been thinking for years. I makes your mind crazy. I still do not know what's real or not.

[how bout i do anyway]

"Real" is a distinction that only makes sense when you already assume that there exists a reality beyond yourself. "Real" is that which you observe which others agree with. A hallucination is only known to be a hallucination if you know other people don't see or hear what you see or hear.

It is that distinction that allows for falsifiability and the generation of knowledge. If all the people you know and interact with are an illusion generated by some force you cannot observe yourself, then for all intents and purposes they are completely and entirely real since they cannot be distinguished from "real" people. You have no frame of reference that allows you to look behind the curtain and see what is there. In order to pull yourself out of the death spiral of solipsism you must accept what is in front of you as the reality that you will interact with and determine the rules behind. Until the point at which you can pull that curtain away, if the curtain even exists, this reality is reality because there is nothing else you can experience but it.

No truth can be conjured up whole-cloth from your own mind. You must make your observations in some manner through reflections provided to you by your environment. Whether it is the perspectives you derive from other people or from tools of observation (and preferably you derive them from both) your own individual perspective is necessarily formed through perspectives of those outside of you, and it is through that reflection that you can understand yourself and your environment.

A system of formal logic cannot prove its own validity (Gödel's incompleteness theorems). We exist as subjects necessarily, and cannot make objective observations of our environment as a result. Through no means of our own will we ever construct a "theory of everything" to perfectly explain our existence and the environment in which we exist. This does not change if we become robots or beings of light or some other such entity; so long as we exist within the universe and not without, our picture of the universe will be incomplete.

[moon]

Any alien life or w/e from another reality or universe would view us in a similar way to how we would view an amoeba & people seem to think that we could actually communicate with a completely alien life form lol Earth is insignificant to the tiny part of the known universe let alone the rest of it (w/e it might be). The Earth hasn't even been fully explored yet so alternate realities aren't even worth taking seriously. Or trying to discover & understand them. It's not like it's going to benefit anyone so maybe these scientists should spend more time focused on the reality we're currently living in right now. Philosophizing about meaningless ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ instead of doing something useful lol

[/.]

Originally posted by Rotting In My Chair:

Any alien life or w/e from another reality or universe would view us in a similar way to how we would view an amoeba & people seem to think that we could actually communicate with a completely alien life form lol Earth is insignificant to the tiny part of the known universe let alone the rest of it (w/e it might be). The Earth hasn't even been fully explored yet so alternate realities aren't even worth taking seriously. Or trying to discover & understand them. It's not like it's going to benefit anyone so maybe these scientists should spend more time focused on the reality we're currently living in right now. Philosophizing about meaningless ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ instead of doing something useful lol

For all we know, humans might just be the smartest alien life in the universe. Maybe not, but we don't know because we haven't encountered alien life. Maybe we're amoebas to some, maybe everything else that MIGHT be out there are amoebas to us.

And yeah, alternate realities aren't worth actually thinking about scientifically, and I'm pretty sure most if not all scientists are focusing most, if not all, of their attention on the actual reality we live in. However, despite that, there's still so much we don't know, especially about black holes and the universe at large... So even though none of this can be proven or disproven (yet), I wouldn't call it "meaningless". Drunk philosophizing is fun either way, regardless if it is pointless or meaningless, and that's exactly what the OP was.

I am also not a scientist, so I can philosphize all I want regardless if it's useful.

As I said at the note at the bottom of the post, this was just me thinking about stuff. It isn't my actual beliefs, just something I was thinking about and decided to write.

[37]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MH-iyCoonsA