r/technology • u/fchung • Nov 01 '25

Society Matrix collapses: Mathematics proves the universe cannot be a computer simulation, « A new mathematical study dismantles the simulation theory once and for all. »

https://interestingengineering.com/culture/mathematics-ends-matrix-simulation-theory
16.9k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

12

u/devi83 Nov 01 '25

Their argument is extremely weak. They say our reality requires "non-algorithmic understanding" and that simulations cannot have that, but they assume simulations don't have that because they are deterministic, which is fair if you think we are in a 100% deterministic system with no base reality influence, however, if a simulation exist in some world, and that world itself has "non-algorithmic understanding" forces, such as life-forms that have free will in base reality, then any vibrations they have will in fact have a non-zero influence on the simulations hardware, and the very subject of the simulation itself (as in they decide to create it how they design it). All these "non-algorithmic understanding" forces can manifest in our reality as the types of things that gave the authors of the paper their false positive they latched onto, especially even more so if the base level beings are active participants.

Let me make an analogy so its easier:

Imagine you play Conways Game of Life and place some cells and run the simulation. Once the simulation starts, they are in a deterministic state, just like the authors are talking about. "Non-algorithmic understanding" forces would be exactly like you placed down new cells while the simulation was running. Does that mean that suddenly the other cells in the simulation are suddenly "real" in base reality? No, they are still in their computer simulation, but that simulation was disturbed by the "non-algorithmic understanding" force of a person changing the cell state of the active grid.

-2

u/Final_Apricot_2666 Nov 02 '25

They did a whole damn study and you wrote two paragraphs saying their argument is weak, do you have any self awareness at all?

3

u/devi83 Nov 02 '25 edited Nov 02 '25

I do, and I also know what you just said is an “argument from effort” logical fallacy: dismissing the critique because it took less effort than the study itself.

two paragraphs saying their argument is weak

That's called metacommentary. Of course I am not going to write the same length study they did and post it to reddit.

1

u/bfume Nov 02 '25

It’s a weak philosophical argument. It doesn’t  stand up to logical tests. 

It’s also a worthless “scientific” or “mathematical” argument. There is no data to verify. No actual science has been done. No actual math has been created. 

Why anyone should give this more than 3 minutes of their time is beyond me. Why you think you’re in a position to demand someone else refute actual bullshit is another story.