Can We Prove We’re Not In A Simulation? | Neil deGrasse Tyson

#education #science #neildegrassetyson Neil deGrasse Tyson explains why he believes we are not in a simulation. He provides a logical explanation, based on a conversation with a friend, as to why he changed his mind about The Simulation Hypothesis.

[oscarcastellanos]

You know how i know we are not in a simulated universe... because mosquitoes. Who tf

[LoveGame]

Devs please add more money to my bank account !

[ttrep]

It doesn't matter if we are a simulation or dream or fantasy or whatever. What matters is; pain feel bad, love feel good. Feel the difference? That's all that matters.

[zeldamax]

No, the probability does not go down by using this chain argument. Any simulated reality, regardless of where it is in the chain, can have many many simulated realities that don‘t have the ability to simulate themselves.

Also, you don‘t even need to be able to „simulate yourself“ for it to count as a possible simulation to be living in. Upper realities could very well feature much more complex physics we don‘t have. So we could still be inside a simulation. Compared to our simulators we could be like Super Mario, but it doesn‘t matter, still simulated.

[TheBelovedDesirableIsland]

That feeling when you realize that a simulated reality would literally just make it “reality”.

[magicofjafo]

That's predicated upon the assumption that a universe will try to simulate something self-similar.

If we are a simulation, we have no information about what type of universe may be simulating us.

It could be so vastly different than our own as to even be unrecognizable as a universe to us.

[shanikhattak]

The Devolpers probably found the glitch in Neil and fixed it because at first he said we are in a simulation now he says we are not 😂😂

[USdefender]

I never thought that we were in a simulation, but I did wonder if we are in a loop. And life keeps repeating itself over and over and over.

[craigcorson]

I am convinced that, whether we are in a simulation or not, it would make absolutely no difference in our daily lives. If we learned the definitively true answer tomorrow, bartenders would still tend bar, machinists would still operate machines, truck drivers would still drive trucks, etc., etc.

[dragon_of_metal]

He seems to make two big assumptions:
1: Every reality would want to simulate themselves exactly.
2: Once a reality is able to make a simulation of themselves, they stop at 1.

Therefore either we are the origin reality and haven't reached the point yet, or we are the end of the chain, hence the 50/50. However I see no basis for either of those assumptions. We can see in our own world that there are infinite possible simulations, and that most if not all of them can exist simultaneously.

[tthinker]

If his friend is so smart how did he miss the fact that whoever wrote the code for the simulation could just write it in there that they could not make their own simulation, or could not make one until a certain point?

[jal]

Some thoughts come to mind:
1 - WE don't, but who knows if another intelligence in the universe does?
2 - (contradicting 1?): Although in order to create the simulation this intelligence would have to use the universe itself for storing the simulation. So they would know about us.
3 - Every subsequential universe would have to be smaller, because the storage of information available is the simulated universe itself. Even if we culled out the information that is not observed (as the universe seems to do) the previous universe would be doing the same thing, so we still only have the same storage the previus universe provides us.

[MrJoshg]

I feel we are the link in the chain who’s evolving to get to the point of creating a simulation. But I also believe we are just a point in time which has and hasn’t already happened. When you think about it all we really are is a creation of a creation, which the creation creates. And it’s just keeps on going. We are stuck in a infinite loop of ourselves and the infinite possibilities of ourselves which ultimately are different layers of dimensions of ourselves.

[jameszhang]

Keep posting. You'll get to an average of 10K likes sooner than later.

[tottTownbiz]

I need friends like him I can talk to because my mind be all over the place with theories

[phunkydroid]

I don't agree with this argument that it's odd at all that a simulation hasn't yet reached the point of simulating itself. It's not "we're the odd one who can't simulate ourselves", every simulation that can simulate itself must first go through a phase where it can't.

[Versatire]

Whether or not the simulated universes would have the ability to simulate themselves would depend on what they are trying to simulate.

[jacobgary]

No stimulation should be able to simulate a reality more complex than theirs. Therefore, NES PacMan would qualify for

[zero]

Feels like the word "now" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that thought. Can't help but notice ... there are a lot of tomorrows and growth waiting for us.

[reddillon]

Idk why he said "I'm convinced we're not in a simulation" when everything he said points to the fact that his conclusion is that it's a 50/50 chance

I think what he's saying is he USED TO BE convinced we WERE in a simulation, and then he was flipped into believing we're NOT in a simulation, which makes his FINAL CONCLUSION that it's a 50/50 chance and he's okay with that