The first version of the idea, at least, would seem to be self-refuting, as neuroscientist Michael Egnor has noted in the past. https://evolutionnews.org/2019/04/mits-rizwan-virk-on-simulation-theory-aka-intelligent-design/ … via @discoveryCSC @ScottAdamsSays
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
The simulations could not anticipate all the ways each character evolves.
- Show replies
-
-
-
This discussion reminds me of kids discussing if Superman or Batman would win in a fight.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Meaning is precisely what computation lacks. The most fundamental human power — the power of thought to have meaning — is just what a computer simulation cannot do." So our thinking about it is itself seemingly a contradiction of simulation theory, at least Virk's first version.
-
These people are all failing to understand what logic is.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If we live in simulation, and creators allow us to change reality with words ( Trump. Affirmation). Why can't we ESP, energy healing, regrow limbs... Re: our last tweet exchange on ESP.
-
Could we be base entities playing as human in this simulation but our memory surpassed to see who will eventually conquer this world? Or could we be simulated beings who are observed by creators to see which of us is worthy enough to be chosen to be their equal?
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.