this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
51 points (82.3% liked)

Ask Lemmy

34367 readers
2091 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

Less than the odds that we are living in a false vacuum.

[–] humanoidchaos@lemmy.cif.su 4 points 1 day ago

I don't know about ya'll, but from my perspective, the simulation would only have to simulate my world.

You all might not even exist.

[–] whaleross@lemmy.world 77 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Counter question; would it make any difference?

[–] humanoidchaos@lemmy.cif.su 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think it would matter if these simulations existed if we could interact outside or between them somehow.

[–] whaleross@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

If we'd manage to communicate with parallel universes, would it matter if they are all real or simulations along with ourselves?

How could we possibly interact with any machinery sophisticated enough to be our entire universe or the parent universe where these machines can be conceived?

It's like pacman breaking out of assembly language and figuring out how to sneak out of the arcade.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 35 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's the point - it wouldn't. People seem to expect that things would be different or meaningless if we did but I've never understood that logic. Even if we do live in the base reality it could just as well be a simulation and nothing would need to change.

[–] whaleross@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Exactly. Even if it was definitely proven that this is all a simulation, there is exactly zero chance humans could ever break out of it or hack or exploit or even begin to understand the machine the simulation is running on. We have still not even figured out the rules for our universe and understanding what the real universe where this is a simulation is way beyond the scope of human understanding. We could not affect it in any meaningful way except maybe some laboratory tests or cause some hideous corruption. Yet we think and feel and experience living in the only way we know. Hence, I'd argue it would not matter.

[–] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago (5 children)

This is quite literally how many religions view their divine beings. They are so massive that they are beyond your comprehension and we would be powerless to impact them.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A simulation could be hacked, and that's really fun to think about

[–] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago

If we are in a simulation, I'm pretty sure it's already been hacked or infected by a bad virus at least.

[–] whaleross@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Fictionally, sure. Realistically, humans could hack a simulated universe like fish can hack the aquarium.

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 25 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] gilokee@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] hakunawazo@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago


Just connect me to my reality.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Alsjemenou@lemy.nl 2 points 1 day ago

You mean that reality might have been created by intelligent being(s)? wow.. Nobody ever thought about that one before.

[–] frankenswine@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (3 children)
[–] ChetManly@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

It was at that moment I realized frankenswine was a 30 story tall monster from the paleolithic era!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] callyral@pawb.social 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

it depends, can simulations run simulations inside themselves? because if so, i think this would increase the odds. if we were able to model reality, down to the subatomic level, with perfect accuracy, then maybe there's another world simulating us. unless we're in a pretty bad or locked-down simulation that doesn't allow recursion.

[–] pebbles@sh.itjust.works 1 points 16 hours ago

I think the smallest computer that can simulate the universe is the universe. Though I guess you may be able to get rid of one of the dimensions due to that one projection theory. Which means you may be able to get ride of more than one dimension. Which means maybe the universe can fit into a single infinitely dense point. So maybe we can make black hole computers. We'd just need to bend space time in a real specific way because what's the point of a computer you can't get any output from?

tl;Dr: I bet we could figure out how to simulate a whole universe within a decently small computer. Seems hard though.

[–] humanoidchaos@lemmy.cif.su 2 points 1 day ago

We don't need to model reality, only people's perception of it.

Did you really interrupt my minecraft game to make me read that?

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 29 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] Lembot_0004@discuss.online 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

50?! You're crazy! 0.5 at best!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BiggestPiggest@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Just because we do t know something doesn’t masks it 50%

I don’t know if there’s a gorilla in my upstairs bath at the moment but the odds aren’t 50/50

On the question of god or a simulation, they aren’t 50/50 either

  1. Whoosh
  2. Given the lack of any meaningful information to base an estimate on, they essentially are.
[–] BiggestPiggest@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In reality, simulations would outnumber reality. So that’s the ratio and therefore the chances.

[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Assuming reality and/or consciousness can be simulated, which we have no way of knowing is true (for now).

[–] midribbon_action@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Belief in a simulation implies intelligent design of some sort, so this is, in my opinion, just a 21st century way of asking the age old question, does God exist?

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 10 points 2 days ago (8 children)

God is a loaded term though. Yes there would be a creator but it could be a completely passive observer.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] bitcrafter@programming.dev 9 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I figure that we are all definitely living in a simulation because, even if the world has real physical existence, consciousness is essentially a simulation created our brain to make sense of the world.

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

consciousness is essentially a simulation created our brain

Have you ever been surprised?

[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

surprise is simply the sensation of unexpected information

[–] bitcrafter@programming.dev 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have no idea what you are trying to get at by that.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MTK@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Same as the odds that a higher being (a god) exists.

Can't prove it, can't disprove it. All arguments for it speculative and subjective.

People claim that it is the most likely option because eventually tech will be so advanced that we could make a world simulation, and then we would make multiples, and therefore the probability of this not being a simulation is low.

This claim assumes that computers CAN get that complex (no indication that they could) it also assumes that if they could, we would create world simulators (Why? Parts of it sure, but all of it?) And it assumes that sentient beings inside the simulation could never know it (Why?)

It is as pointless as arguing about god.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don't know why people assume that computation power increases indefinitely forever until it simulates a universe. why would it do that?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Pudutr0n@feddit.cl 13 points 2 days ago

well, you're asking this question in a platform which has the sole purpose of presenting a digital representation of social interaction, so I'd say pretty fucking high.

You don't need the matrix plugging needles into the back of people's heads for the world to be a simulation. smartphones and computer screens are more than enough.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

A simulation wouldn't be this stupid

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

I hope so

Also, can somebody please turn it off? I think we took this one as far as it's worth

[–] Una@europe.pub 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I mean is there any proof we don't live in a simulation? Like I am not arguing for simulation, neither am I arguing against it just, personally, I don't see simulation theory as something life changing and important. Odds would probably be 50/50, but don't see how it changes anything. If I live in simulation, I live in a simulation and someone is either controlling me or someone predestined me to do what I do, and it would be their fault for bad things happening. That would actually raise question why didn't they gave us more clear understandings of morals so we don't do bad things to each others, also why did they make us kill, and get sick...

If simulation is not real, then that doesn't change anything we still have questions about who or what made us, who or what was before our universe even existed.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You can't prove a negative.

The positive assertion is "we live in a simulation". All that can be done is gather evidence to support this assertion.

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You can't prove a negative.

That principle doesn't apply here, because you can use simple language to turn the words around, and then you have a positive, while the task of proving it remains the same.

Specifically: when you say you can't prove that we don't live in a simulation, then it is the same as saying you can't prove that we do live in reality.

But "we do live in reality" is a positive. Now the words are different, but the task is the same: prove that we live in reality.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›