Ok so tonight, at about 2am, I finally found a decent "theory", its not fact, its not proof, its just a moderately decent theory on the proposal and it does not come from Elon Mush (afaik).

It's Honestly for me, the only attempt to prove that I have witnessed and of course it changes nothing, but I felt like sharing it since we had freshly had this conversation here. (omg syncrowhatevers, j/k).

Here is the video and my synopsis (the video is more detailed).

When the video starts going on about GTA5, a game I rather liked, I was appalled, I was thinking they were not taking it seriously and this was another fluff piece, I stand corrected as they are, as many hobby programmers will know, correct about "culling" and optimization etc.

The portion on time dilation, I take issue with, but for my own objections and observations (they contradict themselves if you watch that part closely).

The part that did grab me and make me say "Ok, now thats a decent theory..." was the portion on the collapse of the waveform due to observation. Most of us are probably aware of this and the various interpretations. The virtual model does in my opinion, somewhat fit the entangled spooky action.

This still requires the acceptance of many things almost none of us can test, such as the experiments themselves. However I am simply happy to have found a decent theory that also touches on my background as a programmer, so for me it was delightful.

How can spooky action at a great distance occur, if nothing can move faster than the speed of light? That becomes the test, and there is only one (known) easy answer. Consider a simulation world (game,whatever, simulation still), in the simulation world, the rule is that entangled particles can communicate instantly over any distance, even faster than the speed of light, a known limit. How can that occur? Simple, there is no space or distance involved in a simulation, in the base reality, the distance is null, because it is merely a representation of distance, not an actuality.

...tl:dr... If the simulation dictates that the variable 1 and variable 2 are in sync(entangled) then it does not matter how vastly different their x and y values are numerically, since this is merely translated into a representation of distance and is not really distance in the base reality. That means the x,y,z position of either have absolutely no effect on how quickly we can update the rotation vector of 2, when 1 changes and requires an update to the other.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CyN8rYdX6g

It is still agreeable that this changes NOTHING, but I was after a non fluff theory and this one seems fairly decent. It also demonstrates that I have no bias in the matter, since this is not the outcome I voted for in my earlier comments and views. Yay.

x. non sequitur please try again. x. non sequitur please try again. x. non sequitur please try again. x. non sequitur please try again. x. non sequitur please try again. x. non sequitur please try again. x. non sequitur please try again. REBOOTING.

2 likely scenarios exist. Either this universe is not a simulation, or all of them are ( simulations all the way up ). Both of these exclude the possibility of a computer-based simulation, due to it being too computationally expensive to create more than one world deep ( try nesting virtual machines and see how far you can get ).

More than likely we are living in a computer generated sewer

Simulation theory is Musk doctrine for the worshippers of Elon.

Look up Itzhak Bentov's video, from the atoms to the cosmos. Dude was on about living in a simulation in the 70's.

My problem with the simulation hypothesis is the fact that everyone has individual consciousness. We know that we know. We're aware. Think of the typical character in a video game. They aren't aware of themselves. They are all controlled by the same CPU(s) and there is zero consciousness involved. They don't know of themselves.

kind of. called 'the matrix'. its tech seems to be fired by relais stations on saturn, inside of the moon, and inside earth.

one occurence shows this significantly.

have you heard of the mandela effect about earths position in the milky way?

some older people like me remember to have learned that our solar system is situated at the rim of the galaxy, on the sagitarius arm.

this seems to have changed in 2016.

if you look it up now, you find our solar system on the orion spur, on the other side of the galactic center, half way between center and the outskirt.

heh?

so why do the stars in the sky look the same? shouldnt it be much more bright here, closer to the galactic center with its billions of suns? shouldnt the constellations in the sky be totally different?

so why arent they?

because we live in a simulation? a hologram? a matrix?

Does it matter if we are?

Because we are able to simulate the universe in software does not mean that this reality is a computer simulation.

It seems to have been trendy to navel gaze and talk about this for almost the past decade or so. I'm not quite sure why.

no

nah, endless loop of something CERN like causing a small big bang which sparks a universe and solar system which spawns life that eventually evolves to the point where it can create a CERN like lab which creates a small big bang which sparks a universe and solar system which spawns life blah blah blah

If we are in a computer simulation, it means there is a reality of higher complexity/dimension than our own where it is taking place, perfectly plausible.

If during the existence of that higher universe, aliens ever develop a computer simulation that is complex as our universe, and they run it a thousand times over the course of their civilization, that means there's 1:1000 odds that we are in the real thing.

You'll never be able to prove it without the simulation owner directly telling us that we're in a simulation. But you can yield that if it is possible that we're in a computer simulation, it is much more likely we are in one than not.

bleep bloop no

While I would be willing to discuss the theory, the proposed 'proofs' offered by musk and others strike me as nonsensical.

Possible? yes.

Plausible? Perhaps!

A Solid Maybe.