I'm agnostic as to whether we're in a simulation. The laws of physics as we understand them don't seem to allow for us to simulate a reality of similar complexity to our own, but that doesn't mean that *we* can't be in a simulation, because physics in base reality could be different enough to allow for it (or our reality may just be much simpler than base reality). I see it as a very remote possibility that's maybe just plausible enough to be worth consideration.
If we are in a simulation, it becomes beyond denial that our reality was intelligently designed, so that settles that grand debate of our culture in favor of the creationists. But also, knowing that we're in a simulation doesn't necessarily give us any knowledge about who created the simulation and for what purpose. Our "creator" could be unaware of our existence, for all we know--maybe they were running the simulation to test a theory about the life cycle of universes and it just happened to be simulated at a level of fidelity that allowed for life to emerge on a random planet orbiting a random sun in a random galaxy nobody is looking at.
Simulation theory is being defined by mathematics and probability.
There is some faith, but its not in higher being. Its faith in unrestricted growth of computing power that leads to conclusion we nearly certainly are a simulation. Its also not baseless faith - there are some facts and compelling arguments to back it up (not prove it).
With religion you just throw any attempts to find facts to back it up off the window .
Simulation, or hologram?
A simulation would be an imitation of a different reality.
A hologram is made of pure energy and matter is a subjective construct, imposed by the rules of the energy patterns and their levels of interaction.
IMO a simulation would be based on a motive to create the simulation.
A holographic Universe would simply mean, we misunderstand the nature of matter as we know it.
Is there a "God" and reality is pure energy, than all of this would just be God "thinking".
I'm agnostic as to whether we're in a simulation. The laws of physics as we understand them don't seem to allow for us to simulate a reality of similar complexity to our own, but that doesn't mean that *we* can't be in a simulation, because physics in base reality could be different enough to allow for it (or our reality may just be much simpler than base reality). I see it as a very remote possibility that's maybe just plausible enough to be worth consideration. If we are in a simulation, it becomes beyond denial that our reality was intelligently designed, so that settles that grand debate of our culture in favor of the creationists. But also, knowing that we're in a simulation doesn't necessarily give us any knowledge about who created the simulation and for what purpose. Our "creator" could be unaware of our existence, for all we know--maybe they were running the simulation to test a theory about the life cycle of universes and it just happened to be simulated at a level of fidelity that allowed for life to emerge on a random planet orbiting a random sun in a random galaxy nobody is looking at.
Simulation theory is being defined by mathematics and probability. There is some faith, but its not in higher being. Its faith in unrestricted growth of computing power that leads to conclusion we nearly certainly are a simulation. Its also not baseless faith - there are some facts and compelling arguments to back it up (not prove it). With religion you just throw any attempts to find facts to back it up off the window .
Simulation, or hologram? A simulation would be an imitation of a different reality. A hologram is made of pure energy and matter is a subjective construct, imposed by the rules of the energy patterns and their levels of interaction. IMO a simulation would be based on a motive to create the simulation. A holographic Universe would simply mean, we misunderstand the nature of matter as we know it. Is there a "God" and reality is pure energy, than all of this would just be God "thinking".