Search FQXi


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Brendan Foster: "just testing, please ignore" in testing

Lawrence B. Crowell: "I am favorably impressed by your essay. I think you raise a number of..." in Bit is It by Mikalai...

Marcus: "Hi Phil: thanks for your comment. I'm a long-time follower of your blog,..." in How the Peer-to-Peer...

Pentcho Valev: "Giving up sanity for constant speed of light III Albert Einstein..." in Faster than Light

Inger Stjernqvist: "Dear Vladimir, I very much enjoyed reading your wonderful, clarifying and..." in THE CLOUD OF UNKNOWING...

Vladimir Tamari: "Cristi Your point about emission in quanta need not cotradict the loading..." in The Tao of It and Bit by...

Vladimir Tamari: "family is worth more attention than any Universe!" in Which is What? by Paul...

Philip Gibbs: "Marcus, thank you an illuminating essay. The idea that our worlds acts like..." in How the Peer-to-Peer...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Discord in the Quantum World
An alternative quantum resource to entanglement could help physicists in the quest to construct a quantum computer.

A View From the Top
Thinking of causation as a "two-way street"—along which the passage of information can be inverted—could have implications for the origin of life.

Classic Article: Black Holes, Paradox Regained
In 2004, Stephen Hawking famously conceded that black holes do not devour all information when they swallow matter—seemingly resolving the "black hole information paradox" that had perplexed physicists for decades. But some argue that the paradox remains open, and we must abandon our simple picture of spacetime to unravel it.

Quantum Biology: Making Waves in the Natural World
Could quantum effects explain the mechanisms behind smell, photosynthesis and bird navigation?

The Accidental Universe
Have we been fooled into seeing one form of reality, with particular fundamental forces and laws, based on the peculiar way that we have chosen to measure time?


FQXI ARTICLE
May 23, 2013

Bookmark and Share

Comment on this Article

Please read the important Introduction that governs your participation in this community. Inappropriate language will not be tolerated and posts containing such language will be deleted. Otherwise, this is a free speech Forum and all are welcome!
  • Please enter the text of your post, then click the "Submit New Post" button below. You may also optionally add file attachments below before submitting your edits.

  • HTML tags are not permitted in posts, and will automatically be stripped out. Links to other web sites are permitted. For instructions on how to add links, please read the link help page.

  • You may use superscript (10100) and subscript (A2) using [sup]...[/sup] and [sub]...[/sub] tags.

  • You may also include LateX equations into your post.

Insert LaTeX Equation [hide]

LaTeX equations may be displayed in FQXi Forum posts by including them within [equation]...[/equation] tags. You may type your equation directly into your post, or use the LaTeX Equation Preview feature below to see how your equation will render (this is recommended).

For more help on LaTeX, please see the LaTeX Project Home Page.

LaTeX Equation Preview



preview equation
clear equation
insert equation into post at cursor


Your name: (optional)



Important: In order to combat spam, please select the letter in this menu between 'B' and 'D':




Recent Comments


The problem I have with virtual reality/computer simulation hypotheses is that, to me, they inevitably lead, almost paradoxically, to an infinite regress of simulator/programmer. By this I mean that, if we say it is possible for a sufficiently powerful computer/virtual reality machine to run *our* simulated reality so that there is no way we could falsify it, then how could the "simulators" falsify their own "reality" being a higher level simulation? And so on up the heirarchy? It's a bit like,...


The subjective reality that we all inhabit is created by each individuals brain from the input it has received and processed. Everything that is seen is generated internally by the organism and sent to the conscious mind, with the information that it exists externally.



Since the reality we inhabit is already a biologically generated simulation,if the input is good enough the virtual reality is experienced as real and therefore is real.

The reality could be said to be an...


The article comments on our not being able to prove we are not in a simulation, but don’t really talk about looking evidence that we might be.



There is a comments about drifts of fundamental constants - but really, so what.



But it never really ask the question,

“If we were simulating a universe, and machine resource was an issue, then what sort of computational tricks would we use and how might their effect be observable?”

The first thing we did...

read all article comments

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.