news.ycombinator.com• 6d ago• 1 min read
Ask HN: How does a theory of simulated reality not undermine itself?Bostrom’s and other popular arguments for simulation theory seem to rely heavily of the premise “post human civilizations could run vast numbers of ancestor simulations.” and makes probabilistic assertions with that in mind. However, those premises come from our physics and computer science. If the conclusion is true, that physics describes the simulation, not the substrate, so we have no basis for the feasibility claim about the base level nor the basis to distinguish artifacts of a non simulated physical environment from a simulated physical environment. The argument undermines the foundation it builds upon. Bostrom is certainly smarter than I am but I can’t get past this obvious non starter.
