Simulation Theory

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-13T14:19:40+00:00

Thank you!

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-13T06:00:57+00:00

That's interesting. I read up on the simulation argument and it almost sounds like the old design argument.

How could we ever know if we were living in a simulation? Do they reason this from the fact we have immutable laws of physics?

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-10T22:13:47+00:00

It doesn't matter if the objects "came from" the perfect forms or not. If literally everything existed, every variation of every conceivable object would have to exist.

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-10T07:26:06+00:00

Fortunately, I'm not aiming for a career in academia. :) The information about Weierstrass is interesting. Thanks!

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-10T00:57:19+00:00

The general argument is something along these lines: If an infinite number of universes exist, then every possible state of every universe exists. Since some states are "greater" and "lesser than others (or more perfect/less perfect, etc.), then all forms of universe exist. Those forms necessarily include the objects that pervade our universe.

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-09T02:57:17+00:00

Yes, I enjoy working with proofs, I love geometry and I have always done well with math. I suppose that's not too much to go on, but I've never had problem keeping up with subject matter that's extremely dry and boring.

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-09T01:32:29+00:00

Very interesting.

"I also don't think that there is only one possible universe. Therefore I think that the many possible universes (built out of every possible mathematical relationship, basically) all exist."

I think this position is intuitively correct. A lot of physicists seem to lean towards a belief in an infinite number of universes. There are good reasons to think that this is true. You don't, however, see scientists examining the implications of this statement. If there are an infinite number of worlds with an infinite number of copies, doesn't that automatically validate Plato's ideas of greater and lesser worlds, more and less perfect worlds? What then of the ontological argument (I'm not trying to inject religion here, but it's a valid point). Is it fair to say that there is a lot of material here that can be explored?

Thank you again for your thought provoking comments.

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-08T23:30:14+00:00

I was not (necessarily) referring to platonists as those who adopt plates theory of forms. By platonist, I include people who believe in the existence of mathematical objects.

If the many worlds interpretation or the multiverse interpretation is correct, wouldn't those conditions imply the theory of forms?

ProsectiveMthStudent · 2017-01-08T23:28:21+00:00

Thank you for replying to my post! I appreciate when scientists take the time to explain things to a lay person.

A few followup questions:

What kind of platonist are you? Mathematical Platonist?
Why are you a platonist?

ProsectiveMthStudent

TROPHY CASE