All of Existance Is Born of Mathematics

the_recruit said:

Yeah.

Click to expand...

That's more knowledge in Physics than rhine, I'm sure. Trying to explain wave-particle duality was just not something I wanted to do. I was being lazy, forgive me.

Mach said:

No idea what you mean. Here is what I mean.
1. Universe
vs
2. Universe + some supercomputer that created the universe (but is part of the universe..what!?)

1. above is the more simple explanation.

Click to expand...

Thats the wrong formulation, the super computer is supposed to be an explination of the universe. So it's

Explination of the Universe

1. Some explination (perhaps just as a brute fact)
vs.
2. A super Computer.

No explination is not a more simply explination it is just no exlination.

Math is used to count things. But often it is not clear where one thing ends and another begins - you have to make a decision that would not be based on math.

Math measures things and establishes relationships between them. But we have to choose what parameters to measure and what relationships to focus on.

Math does appear to have a magic, supernatural quality to it. Indeed, the abovementioned Pythagorean theorem was and will be correct for any three objects (three beams of light, for example) forming a right-angled triangle, for ever and ever, whether there is anyone to see it or not. Right now, there must be an infinite number of such triangles in this infinite universe, all "obeying" Mr. Pythagoras. Powerful stuff. We earn for absolute trurths, and in a sense, mathematics obliges.
But what's happening in reality is that an infinitesimal portion of actual random events comply exactly with our abstractions. Absolute truths - yes, but without any giant ontological implications.

Now, is it possible that our world is a programmed simulation of something or the other? Sure, why not. And I guess it would be sweet for an AI character in a computer game to think that if it behaves it could be "saved" and loaded into a body like the gamers have - or at least reincarnated on the next level of the game. Allegedly, immortality does not suck.

But do we have at this point any special reason to think this is more than a fanstasy with a teeny-weeny chance of turning true? Nope, unless I am missing something big here.

As far as I understand, there are two quite distinct routes apparently leading to the "universe as a computer simulation" idea.

One route involves arguments in favor of certain computational systems being more useful in describing the universe than "standard" mathematical tools (cellular automata of Wolfram, etc). Whether so or not, going from there to the Matrix-world is one giant leap of pop-science misunderstanding.

Another route starts, actually, from the Fermi paradox, and goes something like this: In all eternity, there must have been infinite number of sapient species and civilizations. Yet we see no sign of their presence or traces of their influence. Maybe we are the first (or among the first), at least in our corner of the Universe. Statistically much more likely, however, that we are not. It is also likely that any advanced civilization is interested in its origin and ancestors, and runs "museum simulations" - populated by super-duper-AI entities...Bingo - that's us!
Solves a lot of problems. Gods, for example, do allow evil to exist simply because they want the simulation to be authentic.

I dunno...Sounds convincing to you?:roll:

Cyrylek said:

We earn for absolute trurths.

Click to expand...

And I "earn" for more than 25 min to notice and fix typos....