We are NOT a computer simulation, say scientists

[jeffbert]

O.k., this is over two weeks old, but here it is: According to this article, scientists say that our existence is just too complex for it to be a computer simulation. So, there is no hope of finding the cheat code that turns you or me into Superman. I always wanted death-ray eyes.

https://www.techspot.com/news/71243-qua ... ation.html

[fafner]

Not convinced. I mean by the argumentation, for the simulation thing I don't know.

Why would simulating a handful of quantum particules need too much data? I work in computers, so I know that depending on the model you choose, you may end up with a nice and slim model, or with a Frankenstein gobling up most of your resources. In most cases we end up on the later case because we just didn't have the right idea. And later in the project we find the correct model and simplify greatly to reach the former. I don't understand why we should conclude that quantum physics are sufficiently understood that we know for certain what is the best possible model.

I remember a paper a few years ago that considered that the weird behavior of quantum particules showed that they were subject to smart optimizations (continuous space being simulated by quanta), and therefore was a proof that our universe was a simulation. So yesterday, proof we are in a simulation, today proof we aren't. Make your choice.

Cheer up jeffbert, you still have a chance to shoot laserbeams with your eyes some day

[jeffbert]

Not likely!

[Tetsuwan Penguin]

If we are a simulation, and we can hack our existence with 'cheat codes', is there any doubt what we'd do? (Like transform into )