Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Noax
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Noax »

attofishpi wrote:Our reality tells us we have a system called a human body which appears to be an extremely complicated gloop of matter capable of consciousness. The example i used suggesting ones brain could be on a rack and fed the inputs of the five senses, was just that, an example. The example i used was to provide a simple method for how the human consciousness could exist, without the need to lug a lump of matter around (the human body) and hence make the entirety of its existence, much more efficient.
I would think the life support for the Brain-on-Rack would consume at least the energy of a body. No change to entropy would result since entropy is already pretty constant here. I'm trying to figure out whose purpose is served by feeding a simulated reality to such a setup, or by feeding a real one (senses provided by real artificial bodies that sense real things, not a simulation at all) to said BoR.
Assuming the former (the latter is not really any simulation), perhaps this stems from a purpose of maximizing the quantity of human experience, a strange goal, since we'd not really be human. I could torture animals without the moral weight of actually hurting anything. I cannot think of a way to distinguish a good from a bad life. So again, whose purpose might this serve? Certainly not the poor saps on the rack. Maybe just a way to rid ourselves of the welfare class without killing them.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by attofishpi »

Noax wrote: Sat May 27, 2017 3:21 pm
attofishpi wrote:Our reality tells us we have a system called a human body which appears to be an extremely complicated gloop of matter capable of consciousness. The example i used suggesting ones brain could be on a rack and fed the inputs of the five senses, was just that, an example. The example i used was to provide a simple method for how the human consciousness could exist, without the need to lug a lump of matter around (the human body) and hence make the entirety of its existence, much more efficient.
I would think the life support for the Brain-on-Rack would consume at least the energy of a body. No change to entropy would result since entropy is already pretty constant here. I'm trying to figure out whose purpose is served by feeding a simulated reality to such a setup, or by feeding a real one (senses provided by real artificial bodies that sense real things, not a simulation at all) to said BoR.
Assuming the former (the latter is not really any simulation), perhaps this stems from a purpose of maximizing the quantity of human experience, a strange goal, since we'd not really be human. I could torture animals without the moral weight of actually hurting anything. I cannot think of a way to distinguish a good from a bad life. So again, whose purpose might this serve? Certainly not the poor saps on the rack. Maybe just a way to rid ourselves of the welfare class without killing them.
I think you are mistaken regarding the amount of energy required being equal. Consider the amount of energy consumed each day you have a hot shower, you drive to and from work, catch a plane, all the energy required in bringing your food to your plate etc.. A simulated reality projected to ones consciousness would be extremely more efficient.
The purpose being served is decreasing the rate of entropy - such that an intelligent species that consumes a lot of energy can become far more efficient.
User avatar
Noax
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Noax »

attofishpi wrote:I think you are mistaken regarding the amount of energy required being equal. Consider the amount of energy consumed each day you have a hot shower, you drive to and from work, catch a plane, all the energy required in bringing your food to your plate etc.. A simulated reality projected to ones consciousness would be extremely more efficient.
I would know it wasn't real if it was dumbed-down enough to use less energy. I would live differently, knowing that, differently enough that I would lose my humanity. Where do the new people come from? For whose benefit is this reduction of energy?
The purpose being served is decreasing the rate of entropy - such that an intelligent species that consumes a lot of energy can become far more efficient.
Yes, you've said that, but the entropy rate right now is pretty much zero (not being a closed system), so I don't know how that can be reduced. Reduced energy, sure, but then I ask why? What would be the benefit of energy reduction if we're all on a rack unaware of energy consumption?

I ask all this not to be a pain, but to address the general idea that all is likely to be a simulation because it is eventually possible. Elon Musk takes such a stance, and he's no dunce. But he contradicts his own stated view by trying to accomplish what would be meaningless tasks if done in a simulation, such as make cars with a lower carbon footprint.

Why are goals in a simulation less real than the same goals in a reality?
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by attofishpi »

Noax wrote: Sat May 27, 2017 6:21 pm
attofishpi wrote:I think you are mistaken regarding the amount of energy required being equal. Consider the amount of energy consumed each day you have a hot shower, you drive to and from work, catch a plane, all the energy required in bringing your food to your plate etc.. A simulated reality projected to ones consciousness would be extremely more efficient.
I would know it wasn't real if it was dumbed-down enough to use less energy. I would live differently, knowing that, differently enough that I would lose my humanity. Where do the new people come from? For whose benefit is this reduction of energy?
The energy level being projected to your senses to simulate reality would not be 'dumbed down'. You wouldn't know it was a simulation.
As far as, 'where do new people come from?' - the simulator of the reality - lets call it 'God' would judge and reincarnate people based on their previous lives and whether they have earned the right to reincarnate.
The benefit is for all humanity - perhaps to continue on as long as possible towards the heat death!

Noax wrote:
attofishpi wrote:The purpose being served is decreasing the rate of entropy - such that an intelligent species that consumes a lot of energy can become far more efficient.
Yes, you've said that, but the entropy rate right now is pretty much zero (not being a closed system), so I don't know how that can be reduced. Reduced energy, sure, but then I ask why? What would be the benefit of energy reduction if we're all on a rack unaware of energy consumption?
The solar system for all intents and purposes is a closed system. We would not be judged by our energy consumption (since it is just a simulation) - moreso - how we treat others - and yes a reason for - DOUBT - would exist. (as with the reason for FAITH).
Noax wrote:I ask all this not to be a pain, but to address the general idea that all is likely to be a simulation because it is eventually possible. Elon Musk takes such a stance, and he's no dunce. But he contradicts his own stated view by trying to accomplish what would be meaningless tasks if done in a simulation, such as make cars with a lower carbon footprint.

Why are goals in a simulation less real than the same goals in a reality?
Yes i see Musk is a proponent of Nick Bostrom. The issue i have with Bostrom is that he doesn't provide an adequate reason for a simulated reality whereas i think i do. Goals are what get us up in the morning. In a simulated reality lets face it - we would have no reason for anything - doctors, pilots etc...The goals of life remain the same - Elon Musk is living a comfortable life, because he is acheiving his goals - even though in a simulated reality, he is benefiting nobody but himself and those fortunate enough to be part of his ride. (no pun intended)

Of course - the above IF we are already in a simulation.
User avatar
Noax
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Noax »

attofishpi wrote:As far as, 'where do new people come from?' - the simulator of the reality - lets call it 'God' would judge and reincarnate people based on their previous lives and whether they have earned the right to reincarnate.
The benefit is for all humanity - perhaps to continue on as long as possible towards the heat death!
I thought it was a simulated sensory input fed to physical brains. Brains age and die over time, and simulating the sensation of health to it does not delay that. SImulating the sensation of a pregnancy and the birth of a child does not produce a new brain on the rack.

You're confusing me as to what's being simulated here. If I found myself witnessing the heat death, I would suspect the simualtion was inaccurate. What you are simulating is not what I presently experience as my external reality.

The rest of your post makes no sense without getting straight what you are envisioning. You seem to be describing a simulation of a false reality to real minds that are the immortal souls that have no physics of their own, a kind of idealism. If I kill a simulation of a person in that simulated world, does a real person die on the rack, or do I just experience the lack of further interaction with what now appears to me as a corpse? It's your vision here. I cannot figure it out.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Arising_uk »

Do people think Bostrom's argument was just that we are living in sim? As it wasn't, it was that if you think that it is ever possible to run an ancestor sim then you should think that you are already in one now. That it is extremely unlikely that there will be ancestor sims in the future If you don't think that you are in one now. The other options were that we'll be extinct before any post-human culture develops or that post-human cultures won't bother running such sims. Take your pick.

I think with all this talk about why an ancestor sim is being run it's being forgotten that there is a post-human culture existing and as Bostrom points out the cost of running such sims would be a negligible part of the possible computing power available to such a culture so whilst it may well be the case that delaying the onset of entropy or at least the efficient use of available energy resources is the driving factor for that culture it does not appear that it would have much to do with 'us'. And given the amount of energy being expended by such a culture I doubt it's even a factor, as they'd be tearing up planets, solar systems and even galaxies to create their substrates an.d I guess entropy will be chugging along quite happily
User avatar
Noax
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Noax »

Bostrom's argument gave three possibilities, the third, and the least probable, is the one with the sim.
But the sim described is not a dualistic sim which an artificial sensory input being fed to a non-simulated brain-on-rack as atto seems to picture the arrangement. Bostrom envisions that the sim, down to the atomic level, would create actual people. I agree with that. A simulated pregnacy/birth actually creates a new consciousness. That scenario cannot consume less energy than the real physics it simulates, and hence Bostrom's second possibility (no such sims are run) being more probable. Not sure what would be learned by it. The post-human would still not know what it is like to be a human any more than I could learn what it is like to be a bat by hooking up the entirety of bat-sensory input to my mind.

I now cannot find the quote saying Musk suspects we're in a simulation. Being on board with Bostrom's argument would suggest the first and most probable answer: That we're going to be extinct before we can move to the next level, and he's trying to bring about that next level before time runs out. Without that, there is no post-human future, and we revert to simply smarter than average animals, if we don't go extinct altogether.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by attofishpi »

Noax wrote: Tue May 30, 2017 4:49 pm Bostrom's argument gave three possibilities, the third, and the least probable, is the one with the sim.
But the sim described is not a dualistic sim which an artificial sensory input being fed to a non-simulated brain-on-rack as atto seems to picture the arrangement. Bostrom envisions that the sim, down to the atomic level, would create actual people. I agree with that. A simulated pregnacy/birth actually creates a new consciousness. That scenario cannot consume less energy than the real physics it simulates, and hence Bostrom's second possibility (no such sims are run) being more probable. Not sure what would be learned by it. The post-human would still not know what it is like to be a human any more than I could learn what it is like to be a bat by hooking up the entirety of bat-sensory input to my mind.
Mate - for the third time - the brain on the rack was an oversimplified example just to get the point across of simulating a reality and making it far more efficient.
Of course, by the time mankind evolves into a 'machine' - it could likely do away with our cellular brain for individual consciousness or in fact the system itself could be biological.

You underestimate the value of what it is to FEEL human. Nobody is going to jump into a simulation (except for kicks) to feel they are not human.
And regarding the energy not being less than the physics it simulates - ridiculous!

From the book 'Alpha Two' - the whole universe could be condensed from a conscious point of view and powered on a 12 volt battery.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Arising_uk »

attofishpi wrote:Mate - for the third time - the brain on the rack was an oversimplified example just to get the point across of simulating a reality and making it far more efficient.
Of course, by the time mankind evolves into a 'machine' - it could likely do away with our cellular brain for individual consciousness or in fact the system itself could be biological. ...
Why? What would be the point? If consciousness is substrate independent(still very unproven) and it becomes possible to covert matter into 'computronium' such that we can 'port' onto it we would then be very less or more than human and presumably all the current senses, 'feelings' and thoughts we have now would become immaterial and 'we' would think and sense very differently so why on earth bother with recreating a 'reality' that we've just superseded?
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by attofishpi »

Arising_uk wrote: Wed May 31, 2017 10:45 am
attofishpi wrote:Mate - for the third time - the brain on the rack was an oversimplified example just to get the point across of simulating a reality and making it far more efficient.
Of course, by the time mankind evolves into a 'machine' - it could likely do away with our cellular brain for individual consciousness or in fact the system itself could be biological. ...
Why? What would be the point? If consciousness is substrate independent(still very unproven) and it becomes possible to covert matter into 'computronium' such that we can 'port' onto it we would then be very less or more than human and presumably all the current senses, 'feelings' and thoughts we have now would become immaterial and 'we' would think and sense very differently so why on earth bother with recreating a 'reality' that we've just superseded?
You do make me laff when u know perfectly well my reasoning and ask me again my position on a particular subject. As I have been saying, things would get extremely more efficient in a simulated reality and thus there is a huge benefit to an intelligent species, where resources are finite, to 'live' in comfort. On that note - imagine a dystopian world where reality is basically shite and there is an alternative - a simulated paradise - you know, with 73 NPC virgins etc..
User avatar
Noax
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Noax »

attofishpi wrote: Wed May 31, 2017 11:06 amYou do make me laff when u know perfectly well my reasoning and ask me again my position on a particular subject. As I have been saying, things would get extremely more efficient in a simulated reality and thus there is a huge benefit to an intelligent species, where resources are finite, to 'live' in comfort.
I see. The purpose of the universe is to provide positive experience to the (as AUK puts it) substrate-independent immortal consciousness. I'll take the shite reality over the 73 VR virgins, thank you. At least there I can be fit, find meaning, and make a contribution to the species.
Ever notice the video game addicts? Seems like not much of a life being led there, despite the more exciting world in which they immerse themselves. Pain and death have no meaning, and that means the pleasure and excitement do not either.
In your simulated reality, might a simulated tree fall at exactly the wrong moment and actually terminate your existence? Or would the simulation not be an actual death trap like that and be programmed to not let the tree fall when people are under it?

As for lowered entropy, the sim only does that if the consciousness in the sim can still serve his purpose as well in there as he could in the shite reality. But sounds like he has no purpose, in which case anesthesia would have the same entropy benefit.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by attofishpi »

Noax wrote: Wed May 31, 2017 1:57 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 31, 2017 11:06 amYou do make me laff when u know perfectly well my reasoning and ask me again my position on a particular subject. As I have been saying, things would get extremely more efficient in a simulated reality and thus there is a huge benefit to an intelligent species, where resources are finite, to 'live' in comfort.
I see. The purpose of the universe is to provide positive experience to the (as AUK puts it) substrate-independent immortal consciousness. I'll take the shite reality over the 73 VR virgins, thank you. At least there I can be fit, find meaning, and make a contribution to the species.
Ever notice the video game addicts? Seems like not much of a life being led there, despite the more exciting world in which they immerse themselves. Pain and death have no meaning, and that means the pleasure and excitement do not either.
In your simulated reality, might a simulated tree fall at exactly the wrong moment and actually terminate your existence? Or would the simulation not be an actual death trap like that and be programmed to not let the tree fall when people are under it?
It's ok, i'm not liking the concept myself. All i'm doing is considering what our current existence may in fact be, in the knowledge of there being an intelligence which some would call 'God' capable of morphing 'matter' (among other things). Take which ever direction you will on that!

A tree falling on an unfortunately positioned individual would kill the victim. What happens to the individual's consciousness after that (death) is nothing according to atheists, I am just aware of something else. In a simulated reality? Certainly a 'pointer' could manifest its way within the "substrate-independent immortal consciousness" system and allow a regrowth - a new body - a reincarnation to occur.
Noax wrote:As for lowered entropy, the sim only does that if the consciousness in the sim can still serve his purpose as well in there as he could in the shite reality. But sounds like he has no purpose, in which case anesthesia would have the same entropy benefit.
Eh? :D
User avatar
Noax
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Noax »

attofishpi wrote: Wed May 31, 2017 2:27 pmA tree falling on an unfortunately positioned individual would kill the victim. What happens to the individual's consciousness after that (death) is nothing according to atheists, I am just aware of something else. In a simulated reality?
Atheist? It's a simulation, an virtual sensory feed to a real user. The question was if I, the tomb-raider player, should have to die in reality if I make a mistake like being under a simulated falling tree. The question is not if either the player or Lara Croft is an atheist or not, disbelieving in the designer of the tomb.
Or are you saying that the simulation will examine the beliefs of each of the players, and kill only the ones that don't believe in the designer of the simulation when some virtual calamity occurs? That would be actually sort of consistent with the crazy rules that seem to be used.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by attofishpi »

Noax wrote: Wed May 31, 2017 6:20 pm
attofishpi wrote: Wed May 31, 2017 2:27 pmA tree falling on an unfortunately positioned individual would kill the victim. What happens to the individual's consciousness after that (death) is nothing according to atheists, I am just aware of something else. In a simulated reality?
Atheist? It's a simulation, an virtual sensory feed to a real user. The question was if I, the tomb-raider player, should have to die in reality if I make a mistake like being under a simulated falling tree. The question is not if either the player or Lara Croft is an atheist or not, disbelieving in the designer of the tomb.
Or are you saying that the simulation will examine the beliefs of each of the players, and kill only the ones that don't believe in the designer of the simulation when some virtual calamity occurs? That would be actually sort of consistent with the crazy rules that seem to be used.
Sorry, i may not have made that clear..

This bit - is talking out our current REAL reality:-
A tree falling on an unfortunately positioned individual would kill the victim. What happens to the individual's consciousness after that (death) is nothing according to atheists, I am just aware of something else.

This bit, is talking about the simulation:-
In a simulated reality? Certainly a 'pointer' could manifest its way within the "substrate-independent immortal consciousness" system and allow a regrowth - a new body - a reincarnation to occur.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Simulation theory and detecting virtual machines

Post by Arising_uk »

attofishpi wrote:You do make me laff when u know perfectly well my reasoning and ask me again my position on a particular subject. As I have been saying, things would get extremely more efficient in a simulated reality and thus there is a huge benefit to an intelligent species, where resources are finite, to 'live' in comfort. ...
But why bother? As the species has moved on into post-human existence and can be chunks of computronium with sensors but still in the Universe. Why bother recreating what has been, especially when you won't be that thing? Any intelligent species that wants to stay in its current form but wants to live comfortably would build dyson spheres/rings/swarms around their suns and just live on those in the 'open' air.
On that note - imagine a dystopian world where reality is basically shite and there is an alternative - a simulated paradise - you know, with 73 NPC virgins etc..
Rapture of the Nerds? No thanks. If a culture has got to the stage where it can make computronium then I doubt there'd be any point in having a dystopian world when you could just remake into a utopia.
Post Reply