= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Inyuki comments on Simulations Map: what is the most probable type of the simulation in which we live? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Comments (46)
Yes, I do understand the phrase 'defining a process' so broadly as to not suggest temporality. Just like defining an order for a set in mathematics doesn't require the concept of time.
Indeed, just because we can show an example of how an illusion of time could be constructed in a system without time, would not seem to imply that our world is also such system.
So, yes, it doesn't makes sense, as long as you don't show that our perceived world is derived from a system with same properties. ( I'm referring to something like this: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/3ZdcQpJCPpE/Kwfh69V4Y24J ).
You can view everything as one thing.
If you understand "defining a process" so broadly as to not suggest temporality ... then in what sense does your system "appear to have time"?
It is hard to see how any argument or evidence could possibly show that our perceived world is derived from (say) a universal Turing machine carrying out every possible computation. (Even if it's true.)