NWT

A common field of evolutionary experimentation is in the field of Artificial Life or Computer based artificial ecosystems. One can expect that, in the future, computers will be vastly more powerful and sophisticated than they are today – probably incorporating Quantum Computation. It seems possible if not probable that such Artificial Ecosystems would develop sentient artificial organisms. If the artificial world is internally self-consistent, I don’t see any way that the artificial beings would be able to tell that they exist only in computer software – an old sci-fi idea (I can’t even tell that my dreams aren’t real, until I wake up). And, of course, that implies that our Universe could be artificial, and we exist only in an Alien Computer.

It seems to me, that this would be a much better (i.e. self consistent and not refutable) theory of Intelligent Design, than the current one. It would also explain certain difficulties with our theories of the development of our Universe, such as, Fermi’s Paradox – where are all the aliens? Answer: allowing the computer model to allow complex ecosystems to develop on many billions of planets would overwhelm the resources of the computer hardware – therefore the alien programmers would limit the model to ecosystem development on only a small number of worlds.

Curiously us artificial sentient beings could design artificial computers that produce more artificial sentient organisms – and the aliens that programmed us would have no way of knowing that they were programmed themselves.

Can anyone find flaws in this model?

Damo

Not saying it isn't a neat idea, but

1. It can't be tested (no ability to be falsified, it can't be distinguished from a Goddidit universe or a naturally-caused universe)

2. It does not explain how these alien computer programmers came to be... if they in turn are also simulated by even higher level of computer programmers... then it's turtles all the way down... it gets eliminated by Occam's Razor

Santas little helper

No I can't find faults in the model in the same way I can't find fault in the "I'm a brain in a vat" model. But as it was said above "it gets eliminated by Occam's Razor".

Well , actually I have a slight objection to this:
Wouldn't it be simpler not to have so many galaxies or stars ?

NWT

It might be easiest to program an entire universe by starting with some basic Laws of Physics (i.e. the Standard Model - Inflationary Theory - String Theory etc) and let it develop, which would likely result in multitudes of Galaxies, Stars and Planets. If that were limited by placing boundaries on the model development, sentient beings created by the model could easily figure out that their universe must be artificial - which would take all the fun out of it - wouldn't it? It would be most efficient, and limit computer resources to generate the environment as the sentient beings are capable of observing it - i.e. Does a tree fall in the forest if no one is there to observe it? Answer: No, the software only generates the video of the tree falling if a human observer is present, to save on computer resources.

NWT

That is my Question? Is the model self consistent? Can it explain certain facts better than other models? I'm not so sure that it can't be falsified. Even if it can't - unlike the current Intelligent Design Theory, then this exemplifies a fundamental problem with the I.D. Theory - i.e. if the universe (say for instance humans) are too complex not to have been designed, than The Designer is most assurredly too complex not to have been designed by who? - Designer #2?

Jobar

Here's a really good thread from 2002 where we discussed this. Long winded fool () got sorta tiresome after a while, but this, the first thread where he brought up his ideas, was rather enjoyable.

NWT

Thanks for the link, I expected that this topic has been explored previously, but was unable to find it.

ninewands

This post by Per Ahlberg addresses a similar situation and finds (surprise, surprise) that there is no scientific difference between YEC, OEC and the scenario ('You' - your personality and memories - were 'created' 20 minutes ago during an electrochemical experiment on a brain in a laboratory jar on the Planet Tharg. All your 'perceptions' of the 'world' are illusory.) he postulated, i.e., it's untestable and unfalsifiable, therefore it is no different from some hypothesis based on the Bible or any other hypothesis based upon non-natural causes.

Bersec

This sounds a lot like a movie I saw a few years back. The title scapes me, but the story line sounds just like it. The digital beings in the simulation created their own simulation.

llanitedave

The idea that the universe is actually a holographic projection implies that all those galaxies and stars might use less computing resources than it appears.

Read the current Scientific American.