Actualy, if you listen carefuly to what he's saying, he's saying that the concept of a supernatural "creationism" is bogus, and that is based on the multiverse concept rather than the simulation concept. And saying "Supreme Being" does not neccessarily indicate a "God" being. A race that has existed for billions of years longer than our own would defenatly seem to us to be a race of supreme beings. This is not to say that they are gods. They may have created our universe in a simulation, but that doesn't mean they are God. Unless you liken us to ants in an ant farm worshipping its 12 year old "keeper" as a God.
Now, I don't actualy know any of the math that goes behind any of this, but when Rees talks about the simulation within a simulation, is it actualy possible to for a simulation to duplicate the randomness found on a quantum level, the same randomness that some scientists say destroys the concept of determinism? Would not a computer simulation be an excersise in determinism, or am I thinking too "21st century" here?
But if a simulation could duplicate this randomness, how then could it "rewind" as Rees stated and still advance along the same lines?
Slashdot Mirror
Actualy, if you listen carefuly to what he's saying, he's saying that the concept of a supernatural "creationism" is bogus, and that is based on the multiverse concept rather than the simulation concept. And saying "Supreme Being" does not neccessarily indicate a "God" being. A race that has existed for billions of years longer than our own would defenatly seem to us to be a race of supreme beings. This is not to say that they are gods. They may have created our universe in a simulation, but that doesn't mean they are God. Unless you liken us to ants in an ant farm worshipping its 12 year old "keeper" as a God.
Now, I don't actualy know any of the math that goes behind any of this, but when Rees talks about the simulation within a simulation, is it actualy possible to for a simulation to duplicate the randomness found on a quantum level, the same randomness that some scientists say destroys the concept of determinism? Would not a computer simulation be an excersise in determinism, or am I thinking too "21st century" here? But if a simulation could duplicate this randomness, how then could it "rewind" as Rees stated and still advance along the same lines?
Isn't it more that the assume it's interacting on another dimension, and not universe? I could be wrong, please correct me if I am.