cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/56676015
Their findings, published in the Journal of Holography Applications in Physics, go beyond simply suggesting that we’re not living in a simulated world like The Matrix. They prove something far more profound: the universe is built on a type of understanding that exists beyond the reach of any algorithm.
I’m sorry but 10 day review time from this journal? And it’s very much not a math journal.
At best, this is an argument that if our universe does non-computable things, then we can’t be in a classical simulation. But if our universe does non-computable things, then CHURCH TURING IS WRONG, and we can build more powerful computers (or there should be some serious experimental barrier, which I do not see here), so we are again plausibly in a simulation.
In short, I don’t buy this at all. Headline is literally false.
Not necessarily. We could be in a simulation in a computer that can only exist in a universe with different physical laws
They specifically claim to refute the ‘simulations all the way down’ anthropic-flavored argument which goes as follows:
We can make pretty good simulations already
Later we’ll want to make more and more detailed
Therefore most folks that exist are inside simulations
Ergo we’re probably in a simulation
If our universe allows us to build more powerful computers, then this argument goes through just the same as it did with Church-Turing.
(I agree with your broader point: every thing our universe does is a new requirement on the universe simulating ours. But I don’t think this is a particularly relevant observation for the ‘are we in a simulation’ question? Anything our universe does is tautologically something a universe can do.)