• redballooon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not only about levels of detail. We have no theory about how to compute a universe.

    Moores law already does not hold up any more. There’s nothing to extrapolate.

    I think the analogy is perfect. Thinkers think, but they’re bound in the context of their time and place. Our time and place is full of technology, of course thinkers will spin up an origin myth that is based on technology.

    But that’s really all it is.

    • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s a false dichotomy… “Moores law or bust”. Of course there will be advancements in future.

      I guess there’s two valid positions here:

      We don’t know how to do x therefore it’s not possible, or… we’ve made significant progress in the right direction of doing x and its therefore likely that we will achieve it in time.

      As you said, our thinking is bound in the context of our time and place, it’s difficult to step away from that.

      • redballooon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, what I’m saying is, the progress that we’ve seen may be a necessary part (a very small one) of a universe simulation if such a thing can be build.

        But my claim is that we have absolutely no evidence that such a thing can be build, and even less that we’re living in one. As of today the simulation “hypothesis” is as well founded as every other metaphysical claim, creator gods included.

        A sentence like “it’s very likely we live in a simulation” is about as well founded as trying to place us in any other science fiction world that has a 21st century earth at its heart.