Atheism vs Simulated Universe theory

[Lazarus]

It's always a possibility. Even so though, the computer does not need to simulate an expanding universe, only the illusion of one. For all we know the stars outside of our solar system could all be stationary. A fixed backdrop that just has its light properties fiddled with to create the illusion of movement. Even travelling at the speed of light, getting away from our solar system is likely to be a one way trip, never mind the mathematical impossibilities that come with attempting to travel at the speed of light, so it's extremely unlikely anyone will be able to make the trip to actually find out and report to us - a sneaky skill that programmers have been using since forever, and has been brought up in this thread many times (It's just like playing battlefield or CoD or whatever. The backdrop looks real enough, but if you got close you would see how fake it is. Clever area design is how you prevent people from getting close enough to find out).

[elfdude]

This doesn't affect atheism at all because these beings are not omnipotent. They are merely omnipotent with regards to our reality which is not all of reality itself. Which is to say, you've merely moved the goal posts from considering this universe real to considering the origin of the simulation real and there's no practical reason to consider said beings omnipotent in their own reality. Thus this does not challenge atheism at all. Atheism does not deny there is a creator of us or this universe, it simply states if said creator exists then he she does so within the confines reality places upon them. This is not a god. Godlike yes, but not a god. More importantly such beings are unlikely to be omniscient or omnipotent if they're running a simulation in their own reality as doing so would be utterly pointless.

Methinks OP doesn't understand atheism. Case in point a human could theoretically obtain omnipotence but they still would not be a transcendent god. In fact current theories of science demand that such beings probably do exist (the godlike ones not the trancendent ones), there should be many entities throughout the universe (multiverse) that might qualify for godlike status. These however would not be gods to an atheist but merely very powerful beings.

[Himster]

But someone/something totally controlling our observable universe would be transcendent and omnipotent with regards to us. That is precisely what gods are/could be, it doesn't matter if those gods have their own gods or those gods have their own gods and so on.

But yeah, as far as I can tell, the technical requirement to pass from powerful being to god-hood requires worship (like the Chaos gods and C'tan in warhammer and the Valar of middle-earth). So these beings aren't necessarily gods until they are worshiped.

[Mangalore]

But someone/something totally controlling our observable universe would be transcendent and omnipotent with regards to us. That is precisely what gods are/could be, it doesn't matter if those gods have their own gods or those gods have their own gods and so on.
...

God with capital "G" is usually reasoned to be the first cause and absolutely omnipotent and omniscience. Just being one of the gang within a multiverse would make him a god not the God.

[Habelo]

Wouldnt atheism just be denial of a god with magical powers? As in non technological or explainable? :S

[Lazarus]

Again, Theism is derived from the word god. Atheism is being absent of Theism (belief in god). Whether the god has magical powers or a universe machine doesn't really matter. Just as long as he's god. As was pointed out though, if someone needs to run a simulation, they probably aren't gods.

[Shams al-Ma'rifa]

What difference does it make? Well for starters if this were a simulation then all religious dogma is pointless. Why would the alien running the simulation care if you had sex before you got married, or ate a pig, or use contraceptives? In fact even the concept of heaven and hell are pointless unless the person running the simulation can directly control the simulation - and if they can directly control the simulation, then they can control your actions, which really means that someone else has already decided whether you're going to heaven or hell if such places do indeed exist.

Well if you're running a simulation, why would you interfere in your subject's actions? Then it wouldn't be a proper experiment anymore... -_-

Maybe you can change the independent variables, but you can't change the dependent variables and call it a simulation... And why would you assume this experimenter wouldn't care about the results, assuming we're talking in bad metaphors?

[Lazarus]

Maybe you can change the independent variables, but you can't change the dependent variables and call it a simulation... And why would you assume this experimenter wouldn't care about the results,

Where do I say that the experimenter wouldn't care about results?

assuming we're talking in bad metaphors?

Who is talking in metaphors? If you're referring to the hypothetical scenario, the thread is about the hypothetical scenario that the universe is a simulation, so why would I talk in anything other then the hypothetical assumption we're in a simulation?

I'm not quite sure what you're driving at...?

[Shams al-Ma'rifa]

Where do I say that the experimenter wouldn't care about results?

"Why would the alien running the simulation care if you had sex before you got married, or ate a pig, or use contraceptives?"

[Lazarus]

"Why would the alien running the simulation care if you had sex before you got married, or ate a pig, or use contraceptives?"

Read the part about religious dogma and it should make sense. If not, I'll try and rephrase.

Why would an alien running a simulation punish you for having sex before you were married, or if you ate a pig, or used contraceptives?

[Shams al-Ma'rifa]

Why would an alien running a simulation punish you for having sex before you were married,

Maybe bad character deserves to be punished.

or if you ate a pig,

Maybe that's a punishment in and of itself...

or used contraceptives?

Maybe this is a Catholic thing I don't know about.

[Menelik_I]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health...her_we_re.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2339109.html

Basically the theory goes that eventually humanity will develop computers powerful enough to simulate entire universes, and that considering this is possible and the vastness of space and time, it is incredibly likely that we are in fact in a universe that is a computer simulation of some other species.

Atheism on the other hand is a strict denial of any kind of all powerful creators or supernatural powers, both of which would exist if we live in a simulated universe.

Maybe it is more suited to the Science section, but there was an experiment to prove if we live in a Simulated Universe that relied on trying to find the "pixels" in some background Galactic radiation. Just like we have pixels in pictures, which assumes the simulation is run in a Binary system but still a good exercise.

But wasn't there a MIB movie with a pocket universe inside a pocket universe ?

[Ima Farmathar]

Well if reality is a simulation, I'm sure we can find its bugs and exploit em. If not there must still be some exploits somewhere.