| For this
task you should deeply logically analyze this
topic as described in the following prompt, and, when
you have done that, only then write up a proper
(minumum three page) Thesis
Paper fully describing, clarifying, supporting,
and defending what you presently think is the most
logically supportable conclusion we can come to about
this topic.(Three pages, double spaced, odf, .doc.
.docx, .pdf, submit through Turnitin.com.) Remember that a thesis paper starts with your thesis, and does not have an introduction or a conclusion. |
|
|
Is Our Universe PROVEN to be MOST LIKELY a Hologram?Some people have the idea that we're probably all
living in a computer simulation of a universe rather
than an actual physical universe. Other people think
this idea is wrong. Your task for this prompt is to
figure out, as best you can if those who think we're all
living in a computer simulation of a universe have proved
it's probable we're all living in a computer
simulation of a universe. It may be impossible to prove, for certain, that we are
not living in a simulation, just as it may be impossible
to prove you're not dreaming, or that you're not in the
matrix, or that solipcism is false. (If solipcism is
true, then I exist, and you don't.) So, figure out whether or not the people who
believe we are in a simulation have proved that
we are probably living in a simulation. 1. Find one argument in favor of the simulation hypothesis. ("Simpothesis.") 2. Find one argument against the simpothesis. 3. Figure out which argument is good and which argument is bad. 4.
After figuring all this stuff out, write a paper in
which you: A good place to start would be Are
We Living in a Computer Simulation? - PBS And for more information, you might read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
|
Simulating 1 second of human brain activity takes 82,944 processors
I suggest you watch the movie The 13th Floor or the miniseries World on a Wire to get a feel for how this all might work.
Any discussion of this issue should take into account the following facts:
1. Based on what we know about possible future computers, it's very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very unlikely that anyone anywhere will ever have even a tiny fraction of the computing power needed to make even a moderate-scale, (13th Floor-type) long-term universe simulation.
2. If anyone ever does have this capacity, a universe simulation would be very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very expensive to create and maintain.
3. It's hard to see that any civilization would really want to spend enormous resources creating and maintaining a simulated universe.
4. If there actually was a need to create a simulated universe, there doesn't seem to be any reason why the simulators would bother with the enormous expense of giving consciousness to the simulated people, since any knowledge we might want to learn from the simulation would seem to be achievable with less-expensive nonconscious simulated beings that just behaved like people.
And remember, if all they can do is prove that it's possible that we're in a simverse, then they've completely failed to prove that we're probably in a simverse.
You can look for arguments on both sides in the following webpages:
Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?Older links. (Some may be broken.)
Nick Bostrom's argument that we are living in a computer simulation,http://www.livescience.com/25579-what-if-reality-was-really-just-sim-universe.html
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/07/hologram-universe/
Is The Universe A Computer Simulation? Physicist Martin Savage (HuffPost)
http://news.discovery.com/space/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-2-121216.htm
http://www.messagetoeagle.com/simulatedlife.php#.VIkuajHF9MU
http://www.messagetoeagle.com/compsimulationtests.php#.VIkubjHF9MU
To get an emotional feel for the idea, you could find and watch the film The Thirteenth Floor
Bostrom doesn't mention the important fact that, if we made a simverse, it would not be us that were in inside the simverse. It would be digital copies of ourselves. Flesh-and-blood humans cannot be moved into a digital world. in theory, their minds can be copied, but those minds cannot be moved. If we made a simverse and put a copy of you into it, you would still be walking around in the world while the copy went about its digital business (unless they killed you.)
For a contrary view, watch The Simulation Hypothesis is Pseudoscience
If you still need a pro-simulation
argument, here's my take on the "trilemma" argument:
1. At least one and perhaps many space civilizations will last
long enough to develop technology capable of creating
simulated uiverses containing computer-generated conscious
beings.
2. At least one and perhaps many of those civilizations will
last long enough to develop an interest in actually creating
at least one and perhaps many simulated uiverses containing
computer-generated conscious beings.
3. At least one and perhaps many simulated universe
civilizations will contain computer-generated conscious beings
that will go on to create their own simulations containing
computer-generated conscious beings in their simulated
universe.
4. Pretty much every such simulation will contain beings that
go on to create another simulation, which wil result in
millions, or billions of sims inside sims inside sims inside
sims . . . . so that computer-generated conscious beings
will soon vaaaaaaastly outnumber natural conscious beings.
5. As a result, the probability that any given conscious being
is a natural being in an actual physical universeis
vanishingly small, which means that you an I are most likely
computer generated beings in a simulated universe.
I say this is an argument. I don't say it's a good argument
<Added 9/17/26>
Make sure you follow all the advice and instructions in the Odyssey
Instructions
