this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2025
757 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

17360 readers
995 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rikudou@lemmings.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What a bunch of nonsense. So, pseudo-scientists repeat after me: you cannot derive rules of the outer universe from the inner universe.

The only way to "prove" the hypothesis is if an admin sends a message or leaves some other way for us to discover we're in a simulation, other than that it's unprovable and undisprovable.

[–] Acamon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, I think the "simulation hypothesis" is a super pointless take, partly because it is so profoundly unfalsifiable. It's no more plausible or convincing to me than "the universe exists in God's mind" or "we are figment within a dream of a dragon".

Propenents try to argue things like "if we can create lifelike simulations, then we'd create loads of them, therefore we're statistically likely to be inside one". But that's to draw conclusions about what the "outer" universe is like from features of the simulation. If our reality is within a greater one, I don't find more evidence for it being a "computer simulation" than for it being inside Tommy Westphall's snow globe.

[–] rikudou@lemmings.world 3 points 1 day ago

Well, unlike God this at least sounds possible, even though yeah, it's a pointless discussion, not provable nor unprovable.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

While you're totally right IMHO, I'd argue that the inner universe indeed can prove this. Just within the rules and boundaries of the inner universe. With our given measures and abilities. Which are or might be totally different from the outside.

[–] rikudou@lemmings.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, we can't prove we're in a simulation or outside of it. We can prove that we can't currently create such a simulation but that doesn't change anything.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

After re-evaluation, you're right. We can't. We could just define the outer walls of what we can know. No matter how hard we'd think out of the box, we can't measure the box itself. We could create such a simulation. But being more limited beings than our creators, our creations could only be even more limited. Like an LLM. It could asses everything there is to know and calculate a theory around it. Yet it will be confined to OUR specifications and the data we let it consume.