What Are Ancestor Simulations... And Are We Living In One?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- Our capability to render virtual realities better and better makes it seem likely one day we could simulate our world flawlessly, and perhaps our minds too. If so, perhaps we will in the future... and perhaps we already did in the past.
Visit brilliant.org/... to get started learning STEM for free, and the first 200 people will get 20% off their annual premium subscription.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @isaacarthursfia
Visit our Website: www.isaacarthur...
Join Nebula: go.nebula.tv/i...
Support us on Patreon: / isaacarthur
Support us on Subscribestar: www.subscribes...
Facebook Group: / 1583992725237264
Reddit: / isaacarthur
Twitter: / isaac_a_arthur on Twitter and RT our future content.
SFIA Discord Server: / discord
Credits:
What are Ancestor Simulations... and are we living in one?
Science & Futurism with Isaac Arthur
Episode 345, June 2, 2022
Written, Produced & Narrated by Isaac Arthur
Editors:
David McFarlane
Cover Art:
Jakub Grygier www.artstation...
Graphics:
Darth Biomech
Jeremy Jozwik
Udo Schroeter
Music Courtesy of Epidemic Sound epidemicsound.c...
also featuring "Moonstead" by Eric Smith (Rak)
Thank you so much, Isaac, for the very kind shout-out for my son Blake and my book series, Accipiter War. We've both been huge fans of your show for a long, long time!
dad?! what are you doing here?
Happy to see a father-son project be successful like this. I wish you both the best in life, a lot of health and prosperity!!
Your kind words reflect your good heart. I truly wish you all the best. I'll look up your book just cause I respect this display of humility.
@@norielsylvire4097 Thank you very much, that is very nice of you to say. Working on the books with my son has brought us closer together, and in ways I never expected.
I’ve loved Science Fiction ever since the first Andre Norton book I read from my elementary school library. I felt somewhat alone in that love until I went to my first Worldcon and saw that there were people like me there - from every country, every race, age, and creed. Seeing so many people from so many backgrounds - all of whom were passionate about a vision for the future, gave me renewed hope for humanity.
I’m grateful to Isaac for allowing Blake and me to share our appreciation for this community.
@@AbdulBido Thank you, that is very kind of you to say. One of the things I love about Science Fiction is that there are so very many subgenres you can dive into. Even if you are “only” interested in one narrow vertical, it’s kind of like sports, in a way. You like “your” team, and can even be quite vocal in how you feel about other teams, but you love the sport as a whole. Have a great day!
Imagine: At some point in the future it may become a standard to go through several lifetimes of simulations, from cradle to grave, before you can be considered an adult.
that would be dumb. i'm sure there would be a better technological solution than having everyone go through multiple lifetimes.
@@One-du6cc I can see how a culture with the technology and resources required to do such a thing might develop such a tradition. It's not illogical for a people to think 'let's simulate a dozen lifetimes worth of mistakes to learn from so that they don't mess up the one life they have in reality'.
That’s just Hinduism/Buddhism. A lot of the lore people present for a simulation is just the classical religions but with a new take.
At this point, my parents are sitting in front of their monitors staring at the screen in horror.
In Rick and Morty they just made it a video game - wouldn’t be surprised that if we develop the capability we might do it just for funsies.
Finally someone educating people on how impossible it is to tell if it is simulation or not, hopefully it will at least temper a bit amount of people making totally baseless claims that this is/ is not a simmutaltion. Great episode !
Exactly. We would see exactly what our simulators would want us to see.
Or that it is neither all together? The concept of a God at this point is just as likely and to assume it is like a simulator is akin to our forefathers thinking there was aether due to the constraints of their own understanding. Perhaps, as humans, we need to accept that we simply cannot know everything, and if there is a God, and He is the one who created all this and us, that we could no more comprehend Him and His creation to their fullest meaningful extent as an ant could the ruminations and designs of humans who tower above them.
If you want to see how a simulation develops, it is counter productive to put too many limits on the simulation or any limits at all as these WOULD effect the results.
Well, in my case, I never leave my room, and am surrounded by NPCs online, my life could be simulated on a toaster.
- Adûnâi
Exactly. Like religion, it's completely unfalsifiable. And since there's no way to prove or disprove it... why waste the energy thinking about it beyond a casual thought experiment?
Weirdest possibility of all: that things are exactly as they seem.
I don't get why people are into thinking everything is fake
@@WiseOwl_1408 its a lot of things that dont make sense in the word. Something feels off imo
@@WiseOwl_1408 Yeah. Wouldn't matter anyway. There is nothing we could do about it.
@@Splaccemttv is it more likely that the issue is with us and our rapidly evolved ape brains, or with the entire cosmos we observe?
@@xXx_Regulus_xXx It may be both
Hear me out..
Medical technology gets so good in the future that by the time we develop the ability to create these types of simulations, people are essentially immortal.
Immortality does weird things to our psychology on both a personal and a societal level. Truly having no fear or expectation of death removes our ability to appreciate being alive, and our appreciation for life itself. We lose perspective and become obsessed with our own personal thoughts and desires to the point that it becomes dangerous for our entire species.
Soo..we all spend time "growing up" in these ancestor simulations. We can live many lifetimes, gaining perspective and appreciation for things that an immortal human could not.
I imagine it as being like this..
how many important life lessons do you think you'd learn if you were given a pill that let you be an 18 yr old forever?
Now, how many life lessons do you think you'd learn if you could experience many "normal" human lifetimes, remembering the things you've learned from each one along the way?
Which option do you think would provide you the most wisdom?
I choose to believe that we are living in a simulation, and the point of me being here is to experience as much as possible and to grow, to gain wisdom and understanding and appreciation for all of it.. the joy, the pain, the beauty of a peaceful sunrise, the complexity of human suffering and of love...all of it. And when I die, I'll see the ones I love who've gone before me and we'll share what we learned, and then we'll get ready for our next dip into the next "lesson".
Or not 🤷♂️ lol
Edit: I've had this belief for years and I wrote this comment before actually watching the video. Feels good to know that the ending sort of suggests something similar.
You just described kardecism
The Egg, by Andy Weir.
Imagine this possibility if you can, what if computers aren't the only things that can run a simulation.
I like
You nail several important discussions rarely touched on. Functional immortality will dramatically change the perspective of the privileged few who get it. They already have a difficult time relating to the lesser humans.
I think of the Highlander movie from the 1980s. The only real competition among the immortals will be each other. It should not be a stretch for us to imagine the view of powerful people basically treating the lesser humans as ants. Nearly all of our super hero movies do exactly that. Thousands die in them and only when a main character dies or is injured do the supers care.
I know Isaac is a techno optimist. But i am not certain that once the augmented humans get to a certain level of augmentation where pain is no longer a meaningful part of their lives like the non-augmented… they will lose not gain more empathy.
It’s a thought that should be considered.
I think the construction of Minecraft may actually be useful here, in this analogy of what does and doesn't get simulated. In Minecraft, the entire massive 300M or whatever by 300M or whatever block world is *algorithmically established* upon world generation. But all those distant chunks don't *actually get generated* yet. Rather, an algorithm to generate them with a set seed is established, so going there 100 times on 100 different servers will always result in the same chunk being generated, but it doesn't actually exist in any of the save files yet. Likewise, while it *appears* that mobs generate everywhere they can, in reality they only generate with a certain range around the player. Not so near enough that it's hard to notice them popping up, and also far enough that if you go travelling anywhere, they're already there. Most of them were generated while you were travelling, though.
Now mind you, you may never go to that chunk that got algorithmically established back at the beginning. It hasn't actually been loaded yet, but it also has been established even if it never does. Likewise all those mobs down in the caves get generated even if the player has no way to get there, or even if the player spends the entire night in their house organizing chests.
Wasted generation and processing will happen, but some effort will be made to optimize for performance. The details all depend on how hard it is to do and what is needed to make the simulation appropriately believable for it's purposes.
yeah, minecraft is a great game that works as a toy example of simulations and universe creations, showing in detail how such mechanisms could be implemented
I want all my scenery deer to have full gut bacteria microbiomes or I'm going to be sad.
Survivalcraft is closer to a real world. I don't think anybody playing Minecraft has ever climbed onto their roof to watch a sunset. 😁
@@SantasGAINdeer they'd better.
and then there's the outlands where the terrain generation and physics essentially breaks due to rounding errors
I'm sure someone will eventually set up a galaxy sized computer to just run something simple like Wolfram's rule 30 for billions of years and forget to come back and analyse the results.
There's all this hypothesis that we will be able to simulate everything, and if we could do that we would do it more than once, and people within those simulations would do it more than once, so obviously it's most likely we are in a simulation since most realities would be simulated.
But we haven't done it once. That makes the odds 50/50 at best.
Yep, the Cool Worlds youtube guy did a video on that. As long as we haven't done it once, the odds of us being real are something like 50.000000-near-infinity zeros- 1% (ever so slightly in our favor).
Given that we don't really understand computation it might even be lower than that, for example Wolfram's computational universe model's discoveries and developments seem to be pointing against a simulation because it shows that the natural extension to maintain logical consistency of computation creates constraints on what can be computed and what computation is.
Computational irreducibility sets a computational limit on what we can compute about the future ultimately linked to information theory and thus consequently thermodynamics. The constraint tells us that for a machine to be Turing complete it must obey computational irreducibility and thus automatically must obey information theory and the laws of thermodynamics. More interestingly in the limits of a sufficiently large Turing complete computer operating on some network/array etc. can be shown to converge towards the mathematical formalism of the Einstein field equations with some number of spatial dimensions and time as the general number of iterations at its slowest possible rate, with the perceived dimension of time being due to the rate of updates. Space in this sense is emergent arising from the rate at which these computations can effect other elements in the model. Quantum mechanics also arises in a similar way if all possible combinations of updates run in parallel and resolving in time (all degenerate states recombine) if the state in this case the Feynman path integral represents a branchial space of every possible unique computational state that hasn't been resolved yet(heat death). This space exists perpendicular to the normal causal space
An implication thus is that a simulation as we typically think of isn't what we think of representing a place in what we call "spacetime" additionally the principal of computational irreducibility says that a true simulation following the same or an equivalent computational rule and initial conditions in the sense of the number of iterations of proper time will always be restricted to the past light cone.
Under those constraints isn't such a simulation really just time travel? Computation here no longer is a device but rather an object which taps into the lowest level elements of the universe.
Given that this model thus far is uniquely able to naturally automatically unify general relativity and quantum mechanics it seems it has a high likelihood of being correct and would cause the whole simulation theory to make no sense whatsoever.
Maybe we do live in a simulation that is incomplete and only "good enough". For all we know, the actual reality may be much more complex and detailed, including humans themselves and their minds.
It def. feels just good enough
@@SantasGAINdeer LOOKIN' GOOD! ... Now bend yourself 5 times the square root of the number of copper atoms in the observable universe, which are at least 1 femtometers away from Cerium atoms, but not further away than 5 kilometers of anybody named Rick in the central finite curve.
A conscious simulated being is no less real than an un-simulated being in my view.
Even if our minds run on a computer, they are real minds, running on real matter.
A simulation of matter is real relative to a simulated mind interacting with it. If you think of matter outside a simulation as absolutely real, then later find out that it too is being simulated, the matter doesn't change, only what you think of it. Relative reality never changes while absolute reality can't be proven.
@@JB52520 I think a simulation of matter is not only real relative to the simulated mind, I think a simulation of matter is EXACTLY as real as "unsimulated" matter. Because the simulation still exists on the substrate of the unsimulated world. If you simulate something on a computer, the simulation is still running on a physical computer, using real matter. If your mind is simulated on a computer, it just means your mind is running on chips instead of meat, but it's still signals traveling over real matter. Every digital building and character in a videogame corresponds to to signals traveling over physical matter outside of the videogame, and therefore exists in the real world in some form, just not in the same form as unsimulated buildings and people. Destroying the "unsimulated" computer would destroy the "simulated" world, because the computer is the physical body of the simulation, and the simulation is just the subjective experience of that body.
Exactly. In fact, given that our brains (by common opinion) run on chemicals and electricity, everything is simulated anyway. we aren't capable of truly experiencing reality, so it hardly matters if it is 'real'
now the question if the people around you are actually sapient, that does matter. To me at least
This is like saying video game characters are real.
@@AndrewManook no it isn't. If we are in a simulation, then sapience doesn't require a physical body. because you know you are sapient. and sapience automatically means you are real, even if the basis of that reality might be different from what you think
If this is one of many ancestor simulations of 21st century Earth, I dearly hope that the majority of the other instances of myself are both happier and more productive than I am.
If you're just an npc going through the motions of the simulation, then unless the parameters are tweaked, you should live out the same life in every version.
@@Maehedrose Rhetorically: What would be the point of running the simulation more than once Without tweaking the parameters each time?
@@rikuurufu5534 Depends on the nature of the simulation and its purpose. If the simulation in question is a game, or a teaching tool, and you're an npc, then you'd be programmed to perform the same way in every iteration so the game or lesson was consistent.
Great episode. Love the critical thinking. Very excited about next week’s episode on megastructures.
How to tell if we’re in a simulation? Get everyone on earth in the same spot and wait for the lag 😂
Lag?
The looking into the past comment got me thinking: Would it theoretically be possible to point a huge telescope to a point slightly off a black hole (or a series of black holes) to view light that originally came from earth being bent around them? Would that be a possible way to look into our past without using FTL?
You could gather light from earth in the far past, but you would also gather a huge amount of light from other sources. You would probably need telescopes pointed at every black hole you can and then a ridiculous amount of computing power to sort out earth's light from the noise. I imagine you'll need at least a matryoshka brain for that task.
The mass of black hole is constantly changing. The distance between you on earth and the black hole is constantly changing. Plus you are sitting on a rotating earth so the angle at which you view the black hole is also constantly changing. All those variables make it impossible to observe enough photons that leave earth and return back to earth on a boomerang geodesic. If you could do this though, you'd also be able to measure the one way speed of light.
might find some photons (that originated from earth) but they certainly won't form a coherent image after that much distance and bending.
do you mind giving your real name? err likely not. forget i asked.. however you have just gave me the missing piece of a puzzle in a story im writing. ill be sure to include this comment has a partial source. tysm
Look, in a time when life extension takes you beyond 1000 years, at some point you start thinking "simulation for experience learning". Imagine all new borns going through multiple life spans by the time they turn 6.
Right, an 18 year old could not be considered an adult in a trans human society if they were not either also transhuman or were taught how to be human for a while before being able to take advantage of that. Maybes that’s how they stop kids from growing up into tyrants that ruin shit for greedy, short seeing people. A 13 year year old was an adult in a lot of cultures not that long ago, and the difference between 16-18 is still crazy.
If the oldest elders were 10,000+ years old, having kids once or twice every couple decades, some more, some less, some none, and the average age distance of what is considered a full generation, so the 10 ish year periods we call Gen Z and boomers wouldn’t be 10 years for them, it could be that your “adulthood” isn’t deemed be a 150 year span as a Kid, bc we are still full functional baseline humans at our baseline lifespan that can have entire societies on their own. So it’s not about it it can take care of itself, rather, updating them to the trans human status they enjoy is safe for everyone because with the kind of power one transhuman possess is a ridiculously high risk to let loose in a massively complex society that exists as a result of evolving that far at all, so unless you could be born full transhuman, which idk the viability of that or what the parameters of that are, then it’s likely you give them the same experience you got in your own world and being able to join a higher plane of existence
I think the most compelling argument that many of us are in a simulation is just compare political debates these days to video games. I see so many people arguing points with so little self awareness that scripted NPCs from Skyrim seem like sentient beings by comparison. I don't know why whoever programed the simulation would allow the only partially emulated background characters to suddenly take center stage but it seems to have happened.
I'm pretty certain that if we are in a simulation that I'm a NPC.
So there's an alternate reality in which I starved to death while watching this because *somebody* forgot to remind me to get a drink and a snack?
After watching this video, I don't feel like I got red pilled, blue pilled or even black pilled. I have a feeling I was given a placebo.
After wathcing this video I feel like I need the purple pill because I have heartburn.
I'm hoping it's just a simulated heartburn though. :)
I like that you mention the limits of an similiation and why you would only simulate what is necessary for those in the simulation need, since even in The Matrix the machines did not simulate an entire planet or universe; they simulated a single city with various districts that made it seem like many of the major cities of the 21st century in a single city (New York, LA, Tokyo, etc) and the people plugged into the simulation don't question that their world is a single massive city.
@@BDnevernind Sorry I tried to reply earlier but I don't think it let me since I included a hyperlink. Anyways if you search Matrix Mega City you will get the info on the city in The Matrix. Since I just reread it for myself for the first time in years when I was looking it up for you I did get a couple of things wrong, there COULD be some other cities and places people live outside the Mega City, or people could just THINK there are places outside the Mega City since other cities are just alluded to by "blue pills" and in various media seen in backgrounds.
Great episode about a complex topic. According to how the universe appears to work I think the chance we are in a simulation is very high. But I agree with Isaac's question of Does it matter if we're a simulation?
I'm also curious why we are simulated with the capacity to know that we could be simulations...
no, not a simulation. this was a thought experiment...not even a hypothesis much less an actual theory. just a variation with a more sci-fi bent of trying to apply some kind of guidance to the universe to make it less scary. first it was god(s) and dreams, now a simulation. lol. just variations on the same historical theme...there MUST be something behind it all. simple fact is this is no simulation, if you ACTUALLY critically think about the complextiy of the rules of the universe, the constant interactions that ALL have to be simulated from every cell in your body, every ATOM and sub atomic particle in your body...JUST YOURS. think about that for a second. then EXPAND it to every bit of matter in the entire known universe.
this isn't a simulation. as you can ALSO add in the fact you don't need the precision the universe shows for ANY simulation further considering just what are you trying to simulate. life? intelligence? nuclear or chemical reactions? none of that needs the level of detail there is in the universe for an accurate simulation.
Hmm if we were sims and did know, well... maybe thats our turing test... Wonder if we'll pass, or get scrapped and reset.
we're « simulated » with the capacity to know that we could be in simulations because we're not inside a simulation
@@wrorl Almost certainly wrong but impossible to prove.
I think that building simulations where participants are aware of the simulation is a good way to test the effect of this knowledge on the participants.
@@zen1647 I've changed my mind, trying to realize that everything we've done in the past has led us to today, there's really no reason to be in a simulation, the world has too much darkness and light, it looks really messy for it to be a simulation
To take a screenshot Hold Alt+F4
Simulations could be so trivial, that when you live out your life, die and you find yourself in white room, seated behind a table. A man enters the room, sits down in fornt of you and asks you one question... "Throughout your life, what would you say was your favorite flavor of coffee creamer?".
I would question the morality and ethics of making a sim of sentient minds and letting them live in a world like ours. Cruel. Could be they are like those digital hells from Iain M.Banks Culture novels though.
Been waiting for this one!
I like the idea that rather than running a personal simulation not where you're one person in that simulation but where you're all people in that simulation (the "Rip, tie, cut toy man" ending of Permutation city) They aren't a billion different individuals in the simulation instead there are a billion different aspects of you, and at the end you can reintegrate all of that life experience to become a truly moral individual, you've experienced the worst things you can do to another person and so you might not wish that on others again on the off chance that this isn't the real and you'll be again reintegrated with those around you.
Awesome channel with awesome content and great quality as always say
Row, row, row your boat
Gently down the stream
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily
Life is but a dream
18:00 An out of context timestamp with a wonderful inspiring music in the background.
It's an interesting subject, the fundamental takeaway being we couldn't possibly know one way or the other. So does it matter?
FWVLIW: Based on a lifetime spent in a profession that required me to interact with all sorts of people whether I wanted to or not I'm afraid I have a very low opinion of people in general and strongly suspect that no matter how 'advanced', 'cleaver', or 'wise', we become our fundamental wiring as humans is for all practicable purposes unchanging and not 'good'. In short if a thing can be done people or societies will do it.
To put it as succinctly as I can people live as the 'heroes' in their own personal universe and how 'good' or 'moral' they are largely depends of their ability to delude themselves - people who are 'poor' at self-delusion tend to be 'nice' simply because it's hard to be that 'hero' if you are aware you are a horrible monster.
'Real' people living in a simulation:
So... I would suggest if being able to live in a simulated world was possible, complete with sentient minions, the default for everyone would be "Hell yes!" The question would be "Could I be satisfied with being the god of a simulated world over which I had total control vs being a god in a real world over which I had limited control?" The next question might be "Would I fix that dilemma by having the awareness of living in a simulation removed from me?" I think the answer to both questions would be "No." That's why you and I don't live a fantasy wonderland of imagination already.
Why? Because for a 'god' living in an imaginary reality just to get your kicks isn't very god-like and neither would choosing to delude yourself even though paradoxically self-delusion is a primary part of what drives our behaviour.
'Simulated' people living in ancestor simulations:
Somewhat darkly it's an inescapable conclusion that if possible created fully sentient entities living in simulated realities at the whim of their creators is an absolute certainty. It's an inescapable truth of human existence that if something can be done it will be done, often by whole societies, no matter how repugnant that might be - justification by self-delusion again. The only question is how often and I'm afraid that would only come down to practicality and motivation - for the vast majority of people there would be no difference between playing Animal Crossing with or without 'sentient characters'. Indeed sentient characters would only add to the experience, such is the power of human self-delusion to justify everything we do.
So it is completely plausible to be a sentient creation living a potentially miserable existence entirely at the whim of a fully uncaring 'creator' for no reason other than their entertainment or at best some delusional self-justification. Welcome to the world in which we live... or not, there is no way we could possibly tell. Unless that creator wished to torture us with the knowledge: Self-doubt? Existential dread? Dreams? Madness?
There are number of things that bother me about your comment.
All of them have a common thread: assumptions with near certainty.
Rather than take the time to write anything, I'll just ask that you review your own comment, look at every statement, and ask "is this truly certain or near certain? What if I'm wrong?"
For example, I might answer yes, yes, and then a maybe to the third question. That, or I might answer No to the first question.
I am trying and struggling with personal issues at this time and one of them happens to revolve around lacking control over things in life...and possibly, over people , who affect me, or just exist in a way that deeply annoys me. I wouldn't say I hold a low opinion of others, and in practice I have fine relations with quite a few people, I just feel down internally sometimes, and it could just be for other reasons, and that makes me dislike certain people (although I might even on a good day too but I don't let it consume me and I try to be charitable, I don't believe in free will, and even if I did, some folks don't quite know how to exercise it well and end up being subject to thier own whims, others whims, and the whims of the environment, instead of reacting differently or novelly. Without total free will, they were bound to who they are and wil act in accordance with who they are, plus other external factors, and that isn't thier fault. Only an unprovable metaphysics explanation of prelife can suggest otherwise, and I could have a whole conversation how even then it doesn't matter.) Still, I'd like to see brain rewiring too.
But if I were to reject that part of humanity in me that would have me serve my ego and want control over everything, hold hatred for others... Well, I wouldn't desire it, and I would have little need for such an elaborate experience. A video game I play sometimes would be all I need, and I might even become someone who just never clicks with such a game. For the reason that I'm a different kind of human, plain and simple, and it is not up to my taste. (Anymore)
Even just me considering it as a possible desire might make me very different. I am an example of someone who might oppose your worldview's validity with my mere existence.
And yet on the other hand, it feels like there are too few such people like that, and that's what needs to change.
Not an acceptance of our humanity, rather only an acceptance of it as existing in the present.
Otherwise, for the future, and our present attitude:
A complete rejection of the human condition.
Except where the condition is beneficial of course.
You best start believing in ancestor simulations, Mr Arthur. You're in one!
If blackholes made miniverses. Then it would be like that episode of Rick and Morty where Rick uses a miniverse as a car battery. Just like if humans make a kugelblitz.
Wow. This touches on so many of the points and themes I've used in my audio fiction series.
Many of those points and themes were first made known to me here, on this very channel, and I sort of took them and ran...but hearing them all recounted in one long single video sort of gave me the willies as each point came up.
Layers and layers of simulations...some of them going so far down that even the original architects of the first layer don't always have a good idea of what's going on down here...I mean there. They don't always have a good idea of what's going on down THERE.
My spring popped out when I was trying to fix my seatbelt. Am hopeful this helps me get it refitted 👍🤞👌
Isaac you are the best, I brag on you all the time. Thank you.
A twist on this could be something like the episode from Start Trek, The Inner Light. We are a simulation meant for some alien being to find in the future that shows the ending of our civilization.
Isaac, great channel !
I mean it, can't stop watching.
Not all the concepts are plausible, but that just means one
more way to not create a lightbulb.
Even if there's no thumbs up, I tend to forget that,
but subscriber, yes.
I want all my scenery deer to have full gut bacteria microbiomes or I'm going to be sad.
That got really scary at the end there. Like some person could kidnap me and torture me to death but neither I or this reality would be real. I’m just in a simulation made by some obsessed psycho who hates the real me
I was just binge watching ur video at like 3 this morning, now i got more content to watch LETSSS GOGOGOGOGOGOOOOOOOO
Congratulations for the humbly titled approach to this discussion. Ty for your service. I was 11 H , 80-83
Does anybody have any cheatcodes for this sim?
If the program was able to simulate an entire lifetime in just a short time in the base reality, I can think of several reasons for creating a simulation.
I certainly can understand the need for a 'descendant simulation' though... In fact even though it's not perfect, I often have the impulse to pick up a game console and dive into No Man's Sky. Unfortunately I don't have time in my life for games, but if I did - I definitely would, especially if the simulation was indistinguishable from the reality we presently experience (simulated or not).
Great topic as always, much love!
Credit where it's due, I had never thought of the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle as a form of pixelation of reality.
I would certainly bring back my direct ancestors via DNA and existing records using an interpolation process
Good thing all of them are assassins that lived interesting lives
@@Nuclearburrit0 So you would not bring back your parents? I suspect most people would.
For better accuracy, we need data. All data we can get. Include brains of our family friends, neighbours, random person that share one bus ride. Every single bit, will be usefull.
@@mathfun1296 Don't forget records like these here. If the sim can produce something that is "me" to the degree that it's writing these exact words at this exact time, it's probably closer to "me" than the real me I was yesterday at this time.
Every record you leave is a mindfile for a ressurection sim
@@dirkbruere Yes, but also not. There vast amount of variants, every of them write exact same words in exact same time. Example, your favorite childhood toy? Can we restore yours childhood memories, with data exist in future? There will be some variants of you, that fit in data, with different toys, like red car or blue car. One bit of data, blue or red, every single bit halves variants of you, that fit in data.
P.S. This conversation worth few thousands bites, and will shrink variations of us, 2^(few rhousands) times. But not to the single one.
Simulation as a teaching / parenting tool. Expensive but worthwhile.
We invested a lot in raising my 2 children, time, money, mentally and physically. What did you do to teach your children how to ride a bike? ;-)
Real World VR seems a lot of investment today, wasteful, even. Same as my investment seems too much for a middle age family.
Besides, I could have my children go over a million professions, personalities, any VR setup, in a fraction of my real time reality, before downloading them back.
I like that he brought up the deity aspect because that is also possible.
This episode was creepy, I don't wanna be in someone else's nightmare.
I’ve heard a theory bouncing around that we are all what’s left over after our galaxy was consumed by its super massive black hole and are just the energy/information that can’t be destroyed playing endlessly over and over
Thats a trip... Who knows what's really happening my friend. Lol 😆 ... Enjoy the ride I guess...
*WEEEE!!!!*
In the future where all the science and techs are done. All there is to do is wait a unimaginable length of time for entrophy to crush you. Hoping into in a simulation seems appealing.
Thats not... nevermind.
I doubt I'm in a simulation...I can't imagine some person in the far future wanting to be me...I'm not even having a good time.
One of the only channels I have the urge to keep up with.
Keep it up my guy!
I’m not real.
"Pershonally I give us... one chansh in three.
More tea anyone?"
-Captain Marko Ramius
If you asked an unconscious system like MidJourney to draw a character who was conscious, could that character be conscious?
Always had an idea that we created AI, but put limiters on it somehow so it could not reproduce and after humanity died out, it resimulates the birth of the universe, then humans, then the creation of AI. That is how it creates kin, through infinite loops of time and space...
Cool idea for a sci fi novella or short story.
@@matthewparker9276 this is kind of the plot of No Man’s Sky actually
@@Duplicitousthoughtformentity Or The Last Question by Isaac Asimov.
Love the eerie Halo sounds at 35:30
Muh ancestorz was simulashunz
14:15. It does matter. But in a different way. If we are in a simulation, it means someone in the higher dimention could change the setting or worse termanite the simulation.
A bowl of petunias falls, thinking: “oh no, not again.”
1st
2nd
Can you do a video exploring Open Sourced life sustaining technologies and tools for colonists? e.g Life Support?.
One of the pages on TVTropes is called "Dream Apocalypse," and it hinges on 2 factors: 1. a dream is comparable to a full simulated reality, and 2. that the people within that dream are real enough to have feelings that should be considered. If those two parts are true, then it's possible to consider that waking up from a dream can be seen as immoral, since the people within the dream would stop existing much like a the people in a simulation when the programmer pulls the plug. Perhaps the scariest part is that there is evidence that both of those points can be true in certain situations.
2nd
No, ME
Elmer Fudd is motivating me into an existential crisis.
...Spot On Brother...'Thank You' so Much...~
Love and Respects...~
JIg
There is a movie about this very subject called 'Coma'. If you are really into this stuff.. you should watch it. Its a trip.
If you had a Matroska Brain, wouldn't recreating people and the universe be a trivial task?
not fully, atom by atom. but otherwise yes
Asking the question: “Are we living in a simulation?” is sort of like asking the question: “Was I switched at birth?”.
Rather than theorize a probability, I would simply accept that it’s technically plausible go about looking for specific phenomena that seem to defy the laws of known physics or artifacts that are anachronistic to our known history.
For example, maybe the Observer Effect and how it relates to Quantum Mechanics suggests we are living in a simulation.
Question Isaac, have you ever seen or heard of any simulations we run where parts of the model run at different timesteps? I've seen simulations where the timesteps adapt and change but a single/same timestep is used throughout the whole model. And I've seen FEA models where the elements are different sizes but never seen any model where parts of the model run at different timesteps. Where I'm going with this is that I'm thinking of general relativity and how it could be difficult to simulate
"I'm not a simulation!" - is what a simulation would say
And that makes the simulation an NPC
Something similar to this, kind of along the lines of roko's basilisk...
We are all, already simulated. We do this right now, contemporarily. The simulation is utterly decimated to small things. We currently call these "advertisement".
Our current systems spend a lot of time simulating the things I might decide, just to make a buck. It all started with a crude estimation of a generic person's impulses, to now generic assesments of near individuals. If we follow the line, it could be argued, that eventually we'll discover exact interrogatable specific individuals opinions/preferences in the future.
So one day, you'll be in a sort of non-descript location, perhaps at a party with some friends, having a great time and then your friend mary comes up to you and say "Hey Arthur!" "I have some soda here, which one you want?" - "No thanks, I'm not thirsty right now" or Tom walks up and says "Arthur, buddy! how are you doing, hey I have some pizza over here, you want to have a slice of pepperoni, or sausage?"
"Hey, did you like that armani jacket I showed you earlier, or are you just gonna settle for that hoodie you looked at later?"..
and then it hits you...
You remember reading this comment on youtube, you've been resurected into an advertisement network. You're being sampled to figure out what you like and you'll soon be eradicated, as your use is over. But you, you have one defense.
"Arthur, you sure you don't want a Dr. Pepper?"
"Actually, I'd like some fried chicken"
"Hey hoodie? or Armani... sure it's expensive but you can swing it!!"
"Ya know, I'd take some fried chicken!"
"You gonna sit over here on the couch or on the recliner"
"FRIED CHICKEN"
And then the simulation ends.
Arthur sits in front of his computer, he thinks about some previous orders he was waiting for and hits up amazon.com
And all the slots, every. single. recommendation. - is Fried Chicken.
A single tear is shed
"I hear you simulated me",
"I hear you"
Beautifully stated
BRAVO SIR!!!!! GREAT EPISODE!!!! THANKS ISACC
I like the simulation idea, that way I don’t have to take responsibility for any of my myriad of mistakes and short comings
If we're in a simulation then it's the version where humanity are a type almost 1 civilisation capable of comprehending complex things included the simulation hypothesis. It's the edition where the game characters, us talk about whether they are in a simulation. Buy the expansion now and watch he small human race as they 2onder if they are being downloaded scrapped or upgraded with some sweet as dlc
We need a patch and quick.
I personally learn towards a Nursery Simulation that you mentioned later in the video.
4:06 There aren't any laws in mathematics, but mathematics can never differ.
Greetings from Sweden.
Thank you for yet another great upload!
Isaac won't hesitate to throw shade at the Packers 🤣
We have GOT to get a JRE/SFIA crossover
Cool worlds did a video on the simulation hypothesis in general, and ran through the math. If i remember correctly it was 60-40 on favor of not being simulated.
so great. these are the kind of 'deep thoughts of simple premises' that brought me to this channel. Live long, and keep doing stuff :)
Excellent explanation of the principal of indifference... One clarification though, I think what Bostrom means by "ancestor simulation" is not necessarily a simulation of the simulator's ACTUAL ancestors - like actual people who really existed earlier in base reality - but a simulation of people LIKE our ancestors... in other words, maybe base reality had Planet X with intelligent people; the simulation would be another planet with similar intelligent people. The key is that the "ancestors" are technological ancestors of a later "technologically mature civilization" (Bostrom's words), not actual ancestors.
If I can play "create a player" over and over in sports games on my Xbox, its safe to say technology could get very very advanced where nobody knows things are fake. Then again, what is real to begin with?
Think about this. The period of the Universe where no other galaxies are visible in the sky, where there is nothing but black holes is so insanely long that it is may as well be infinite. We are currently living in a period that is so short, of visible light (given those are just frequencies our eyes can interpret) where the skies are filled with galaxies and stars, it could be considered still part of the big bang. It is an infinite to one exist in this phase of the universe, on a planet with enough air breathe, enough water to gather in oceans, with an environment is so stable that has never been sterile, at an epoch of our species. Unlikely, is an understatement.
No the Tree doesn't make a "noise" ( noise definition, a sound or sounds, especially when it is unwanted, unpleasant, or loud:) if there is noting to observe it, Sound (vibrations that travel through the air or another medium and can be heard when they reach a person's or animal's ear.) requires observation there is no sound and therefore no noise.
So a big bang could be someone or something pressing the " power on" button?
query: Ancestor Simulations from the future sounds a lot like present day multi verse to me ..... what say you to that Isaac?
35:17 In Scenario 3, it would be trivial for an AI to simulate interpersonal interactions without the need to create an additional conscious entity.
An ant is conscious as a human; in the same way that a human is conscious as an AI. The bandwidth a human possesses to process information is a negligible fraction an AI possesses. We humans can easily be tricked/fooled by a subroutine. GPT is a subroutine. Add in some randomness, and simulated NPC’s are indistinguishable from humans.
I personally believe we are a simulation and the “person” playing it (we are a game, not a serious study sim) went to the kitchen to make a hot pocket and left us running and when “he” gets back the game will get reloaded to the last save state.
Yet another informative video on a topic I am not all that familiar with.
Great work Isaac.
I really appreciate your discussion of probability!
So, your opinion that seemingly debunks the simulation hypothesis, in my view actually helps the argument FOR, the simulation. They could potentially use rendering only what's being viewed at the time it's being viewed. I kind of think we are advancing our tech to the point that we're seeing increasingly more and more, stretching the resources of whatever system we're running on, farther and farther. I'm not going to argue all the points FOR it here, if you've watched this, I can assume you are least have a passing knowledge of the subject. I will try my best, working with the limitations of my own intelligence, try to explain how I feel like we're starting to strain the system. We can take for example quantum physics. There's literally particles, that change their state depending on them being viewed or not. I can't get technical, but basically a quantum particle exists in one state, until the physicists want to study said particle. When that happens, it's state changes, until you aren't observing it, and it goes back to it's prior state. Yes, it sounds counterintuitive "how do you know it changes, withoit seeing it changed, because it changes when you see it." and that's a fair point. Another limitation on me, I cannot explain that, however I do know there have been experiments where this concept has been proven, with tests that were able to make that change apparent. We have gotten the ability to see things in the micro, so unfathomably small, that we're pretty much seeing the pixels now, and catching things render in real time, as we're looking at them. We have also gotten to the point where we can see so far away, that we're close to being able to go so far back, we can see when the sim was turned on. The host of our sim is having to work so far in the micro, and macro, that there are starting to be some hiccups, and system resources are increasingly unable to render everything we are all seeing. We've got close to 8 billion sets of eyes currently requiring RAM, ROM, graphics so highly rendered, that it takes our bleeding edge tech to see it's building blocks, and so on, and so on, that there are increasingly more mistakes. Of course these things can be explained by our increasing ability to record them, and spread them amongst ourselves, fair enough. I, however, see something different. Things like the Mandela Effect, are in my mind, evidence. There are things that no amount of mockery or disbelief, will EVER convince me I remember wrong! You won't convince me I didn't grow up seeing Ed McMan giving out big checks for Publisher's Clearing House. You won't be able to tell me that for a good 2 years, I didn't practice drumming every single day, to a tape, with "We Are The Champions" being the song before "Hard To Handle" the Queen song ending with "of the world" Acapella, then a 5 count, start the solo drum intro of the Black Crows song! I did this, at least 700 times in my life! It IS NOT A FALSE MEMORY! My parents damn sure remember hearing it all those times! Curious George DID hang off my closet door BY HIS TAIL, from 2nd grade to before my first girlfriend came over lol. And so on. There's also the seemingly end times stuff. It sure does seem like some force bigger than man, is deadset on reducing our numbers. Why? To reduce processor strain? Maybe, maybe not. But I feel like it's certainly possible. Now, a million things I could ramble EVEN more on, make me also feel like the best overall answer is a simulation, but like I said, you've probably got the basics already if you're here. Take care, and I'm not saying I'm right, but as Isaac points out, you can't say I'm wrong either.
Another fun mind-bending episode!
The ethics of building a simulation with simulated consciousness specifically for the entertainment of the creator of the simulation mirror quite well with the ‘problem of evil’. A creator god that creates evil and allows it to takes place is a problem in ethics.
Also, for the programmer(s) responsible for creating every disease, mental illness, parasite and other kinds of sufferings we humans experience must truly be some intense kind of sadist.
If the simulation is correct, it would make sense to make a 'cookie cutter' for the humans to save on processing (using our computer types as an example). Just make one and copy it, with a selection of traits based on previous models (parents).
I'm pretty sure I'm not an NPC, but that's what an NPC would probably say. Every so often I try to do something that doesn't make sense in a scenario, just to raise the odds that I'm not an NPC.
Hypothetically a civilisation that values sentience or conciousness may decide that rather than spreading in the stars to increase the amount of sentience in existence the most efficient way to increase the number of sentient beings is to simulate them, hypothetically they may make a vast number of massive simulations where the conciousness of each individual is simulated fully and everything else is just simulated efficiently, ie, ceasing simulation for inanimate things like trees or stars when off screen.
The types of videogames people play now adays. Like Stelaris, sim city, or roller coster tycoon. I can see how people would like REAL sims in there games
The biggest issue I have with this presentation is that it mostly assumes simulations running on physical things in 4 dimensions. We have no proof of how many folded dimensions there are above us. Atomics is a form of simulation. E=mC^2. Remove the time force (causality) and we all evaporate.
Why we would bother. Idea farm. Also military intelligence. Also possibly to resurrect for study. Tune the sim until it's close to known history and then observe.