Konkvistador comments on If we live in a simulation, what does that imply? - Less Wrong

18 Post author: JoshuaFox 25 October 2012 09:27PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (59)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 26 October 2012 06:38:44PM *  1 point [-]

If we are in a simulation, then (a) at least one universe, ours, is a simulation; and (b) at least one world includes a simulation with sentience. This gives some evidence that being simulated or being a simulator are not too unusual, and the stack may lead way down to the basement world, the ultimate unsimulated simulator.

...

[1] If there is a stack of simulators, with one world simulating another, the "basement level" is the world in which the stack bottoms out, the one which is simulating and not simulated. This uses a metaphor in which the simulators are below the simulated. An alternative metaphor, in which the simulators "look down" on the simulated, is also used.

Or maybe there isn't a basement universe. Maybe the stack never bottoms out. Think about it do you actually need one of those or are we just assuming you do because we assumed we lived in an unsimulated universe for most of our lives?

The basement universe if it exists seems likely to have certain odd traits.

Comment author: DaFranker 26 October 2012 07:59:55PM 0 points [-]

If the stack never bottoms out, I would expect by Occam's that we would eventually find some evidence that we are not the top, and that there is probably no top, ever.

This would, as far as I can tell, imply various uncomfortable things, and would require getting over the deep-seated objections some people have against any conception of the universe that contains the concept "infinity" anywhere in it.