[extropy-chat] Analyzing the simulation argument

[Mike Lorrey]

--- Dan Clemmensen <dgc at cox.net> wrote:

> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> >
> >The entanglement problem doesn't let you work that way. You have to
> sim
> >it all. Inertia alone is proof of that, being caused by the
> >gravitational influence of all the other matter in the universe
> going
> >forward in time then back to the moment you push on a mass... If it
> >were merely some code faking inertia, there would be servere
> >repercussions in our astronomical observations.
> >
> >  
> >
> What do you mean by "we", kimo sabe?
> 
> If you believe you are in a sim, why do you think the sim includes 
> anything but yourself and your perceptions? By what criteria can you 
> distinguish between a sim that encapsulates just yourself, and a sim 
> that includes any particular larger "universe"?

If it just encapsulates me, then you are all simulacra anyway and it
doesn't matter what I do to you. Only a simpleton would conceive a
universe simulation like a brain in a vat.

> 
> For example, you mention "inertia," "gravitational influence," "other
> matter in the universe," and "astronomical observations." If you are
> the only object in the sim, then all of these concepts are amenable
> to direct manipulation. How can you select a point on the sim
> continuum?

If this sim is for my edification it has done a piss poor job of it. It
is quite obvious to observers of my life that this sim wasn't meant for
me, if it had such a simplistically solipsistic focus.

> 
> At one end of the continuum, The entire universe is being simulated.
> All of us are emergent consequences of the laws of the simulated
> universe. 
> At the other end of the continuum, your current state is the only
> thing 
> being simulated. it was constructed one microsecond ago, it embodies 
> only the current microsecond of your existence, and it will terminate
> one microsecond from now. How do you choose?

I choose the end that allows the greatest number of emergent
consequences to result. Otherwise it's all just a one man circle jerk.

> 
> For myself, the question is intrinsically undecidable, and all points
> on the simulation continuum are indistinguishable from the no-sim 
> hypothesis. I therefore choose to treat the simulation hypothesis as
> a non-starter, except as a basis for harassing fellow extropians.

If they are sim emergent phenomena, and you aren't, they aren't your fellows.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250