• 1 Post
  • 68 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: September 18th, 2025

help-circle

  • if there is no evidence suggesting it as a possibility

    100 years ago there was no evidence that you (and everyone) would have not just a phone, but an actual computer in their pocket. “balderdash!” they would have said if you suggested it. “preposterous! impossible!”

    again i’m not saying we ARE in a simulation, nor am i telling you what to believe, but i’m still skeptical of the “it’s impossible, proven by my math” claim, seeing as how so many “certainties” throughout history have had to be adjusted–or discarded–due to new developments


  • The point being that this kind of math is not capable of simulating a universe. If it did something else, it wouldn’t be a computer. It would be something else.

    the “something else” is the thing-- saying that it’s impossible for the universe to be a simulation is going ahead and claiming that there will never ever be a “something else” that could do the computation, or, have the “non-algorithmic understanding” they’re talking about.

    which to my mind is on an equal plane as “we don’t know why X happened, therefore god exists”

    edit: interestingly, speaking of “god,” hermeticists believe the universe itself is a mental projection “all is mind,” the principle of mentalism. from that point of view, our universe isn’t a “simulation” per se, but more like a dream. or nightmare. more nightmare than dream at this point

    https://www.mindbodygreen.com/articles/7-hermetic-principles


  • “Drawing on mathematical theorems related to incompleteness and indefinability, we demonstrate that a fully consistent and complete description of reality cannot be achieved through computation alone,” Dr. Faizal explains. “It requires non-algorithmic understanding, which by definition is beyond algorithmic computation and therefore cannot be simulated. Hence, this universe cannot be a simulation.”

    aren’t they basing this conclusion on their current “understanding” of what computers are capable of, and assuming that their current limitations will remain limitations forever? not saying the universe is definitely a simulation, but you don’t have to go too far back in time for the tech we have today to seem like impossible “magic” even to the smartest most imaginative scientists















  • lol i love how the abstract cites a paper from 1942

    look: if you’re disgusted by genitals, i’m sorry to hear that, and i’m not judging you.

    but don’t sit there and try to tell me everyone, or even “most people” feels that way.

    i can’t speak for goofy looking dicks, but vulvas are extremely attractive; i dunno wtf you, or your 1942 paper referencing “study” are talking about.

    again–i’m not judging. but i suggest you post to asklemmy (or literally any other forum), and ask: “are female genitalia no fun to look at/unattractive/weird/whatever tf else” and consider that maybe whatever problem you have with vaginas might not be a baked in instinctual thing that everyone has