I'm not really answering your post here, but I'll hopefully help you out a little here, or at least I'll add to your musings...
What I don't really understand is, how anyone can assume anything about the "real world"... If our world is just a simulation, then Descartes (I believe) says that our world must be simpler than the 'real world'. This implies that 'laws of nature' in our world don't necessarily apply to the 'real world'. Henceforth, the moaning about how useful the matrix is as a powersource, or neo's power over machines are irrelevant because they are not bound by the rules of our science.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not really answering your post here, but I'll hopefully help you out a little here, or at least I'll add to your musings...
What I don't really understand is, how anyone can assume anything about the "real world"... If our world is just a simulation, then Descartes (I believe) says that our world must be simpler than the 'real world'. This implies that 'laws of nature' in our world don't necessarily apply to the 'real world'. Henceforth, the moaning about how useful the matrix is as a powersource, or neo's power over machines are irrelevant because they are not bound by the rules of our science.
Heck, that might even apply to Godel's theorem...