- Apr 28, 2010
Someone has a little too much spare time on their hands. 0.o
Maybe magic was the wrong word. I think I should have meant usage of the debug engine. Just type in a specific cheat code, and suddenly certain objects can disobey gravity, go through walls or instantly clone themselves without any negative repercussions.Ferisar said:Magic and and purpose don't factor in here. Magic is a broad brush-stroke. If this "simulation" contains nothing that would be interpreted as magic, then there will be no magic. This isn't a novel written by some random person, it would have to be a precise set of systems which all function together. It's more like... everything is magic, but comes from somewhere.
Except sandboxes do serve a clear purpose, exploration. Just because it's open ended, doesn't mean it lacks purpose. Most simulations do have open ends in order to come up with new results.Purpose is an obvious no-no. Even basic functions don't serve any purpose when just scattered around a sheet. It's the very definition of sandbox.
If our universe really was a simulation, then yes, I'd say enthropy would be the purpose. I.e., this simulation was made to investigate the creation, expansion and dissolution of this type of universe.Also, who's to say entropy is not a purpose?
I think you misunderstood me, I do not in anyway try to deny E=mc^2 or Newton's Golden Law. What I meant was that I didn't understood how this may prove we live within a simulation. If energy and/or mass can magically appear out of nowhere, then it must mean we live in a simulation. That's at least how I resonate.And why would energy not be limited, dare I ask? We know the universe had a beginning, which then puts a limit on energy based on just... well, mass. Energy doesn't just pop out of nowhere, ever.
As I said, this is a very intriguing thought experiment, and I don't want come of as a party-pooper. I do in fact wish that this is a simulation we live in. That it's something we can wake up from. Alas there is no hard proof, so I don't want to get too excited.The first point makes the most sense, but even then, the perception of time doesn't hold up. This "simulation" may take nano-seconds on a higher state, and entropy would be the shut-down point, where-as we experience the same thing in billions-trillions of years. You just have to look at this from a different perspective.
On a more serious note, I'm fairly sure this is just Wolfram with "But literally machines"Binnsyboy said:
I'm still not aware of any situation where we know that these specific states aren't happening constantly at very rapid intervals.Bobic said:Quantum systems exist as what is known as a probability density (i.e. a system of possibilities, rather than something specific). Observation makes it pick one of these possibilities, and become defined. Therefore Keanu Reeves will lead us to salvation.
Yeah! This guy, I like this guy. If you are a girl I maintain my point and just would request you change the gender of my original sentence.ShAmMz0r said:It always amazes me how people insist on making it sound like only a concious agent can be an observer in quantum measurement. This notion is in fact wrong and I implore you not to confuse public further on this matter. We get enough stuff like "What the bleep do we know" as it is.
Well, from the way you phrased that it sounds like that is just one possible explanation for the effect. Another explanation is that we're all subroutines in some massive experimental program awaiting guidance from Jeff Bridges.theultimateend said:I'm still not aware of any situation where we know that these specific states aren't happening constantly at very rapid intervals.Bobic said:Quantum systems exist as what is known as a probability density (i.e. a system of possibilities, rather than something specific). Observation makes it pick one of these possibilities, and become defined. Therefore Keanu Reeves will lead us to salvation.
Again I'm not a genius nor is this my area of expertise but I've yet to see it explained where the educator has been like "This shit is magic."
It seems entirely reasonable and not grounds for magic being afoot.
I'm not entirely sure if you were trying to be condescending or not with that pretty big deal message. So I'll assume not.Bobic said:Also, while no one has said "this shit is magic", Richard Feynmann, a pretty big deal in quantum physics, is often attributed to saying (though, may not actually have said) "if you think you understand Quantum Physics, you don't understand Quantum Physics" which is only a couple of steps away from "this shit is magic". And that has been said to me by educators in relevant fields.