Re: The real reason that physics is stuck



J.A. Legris wrote:
From nytimes.com:

August 14, 2007
Findings
Our Lives, Controlled From Some Guy's Couch

By JOHN TIERNEY
Until I talked to Nick Bostrom, a philosopher at Oxford University, it
never occurred to me that our universe might be somebody else's hobby.
I hadn't imagined that the omniscient, omnipotent creator of the
heavens and earth could be an advanced version of a guy who spends his
weekends building model railroads or overseeing video-game worlds like
the Sims.

But now it seems quite possible. In fact, if you accept a pretty
reasonable assumption of Dr. Bostrom's, it is almost a mathematical
certainty that we are living in someone else's computer simulation.
[...]


Bostrom's idea is an ancient SF conceit. The earliest version (late 50s IIRC) I know of assumed the universe was a school project. The younger brother rescued us when the older one lost interest.

--
Wolf Kirchmeir
"Just because it's true doesn't mean it's the right answer."
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Energy of Gravity is Nonlocal
    ... >>alternative theory that could explain the basic features of the observed ... > It is the essence of science. ... The light had not disengaged and the Universe was dark. ... > `philosopher' might say this destroys the credibility of these ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Energy of Gravity is Nonlocal
    ... >>alternative theory that could explain the basic features of the observed ... > It is the essence of science. ... The light had not disengaged and the Universe was dark. ... > `philosopher' might say this destroys the credibility of these ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Energy of Gravity is Nonlocal
    ... >>alternative theory that could explain the basic features of the observed ... > It is the essence of science. ... The light had not disengaged and the Universe was dark. ... > `philosopher' might say this destroys the credibility of these ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Many-Worlds again
    ... physical constants should be just what happens to be ... needed to have a universe in which enough can happen ... shows that the philosopher knew that he didn't really ... regard to Many-Worlds.) ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Many-Worlds again
    ... Many physicists give an answer that sounds to me like they're throwing up their hands, though they might disagree with me: that the universe is what it is precisely because if it weren't that way, we wouldn't be here to say anything about it. ... I don't think variations in the physical constants are included in any "many worlds" conjecture that I've heard of, but it seems to me a trivial step to extend many worlds that way, in which case there are unimaginable numbers of universes that don't even have time, or that don't allow much of anything to happen. ... I love that explanation, since it shows that the philosopher knew that he didn't really see "motion", he just saw something and had a "memory" of the thing being elsewhere. ...
    (soc.retirement)