[FUBAR-BDHR]

Your assuming the universe isn't just an animated skybox. 

[NGTM-1R]

No simulation devised by man can match the power of the brain of lower mammal.

Then where is the break? As I said, if we're going to break the simulation, the last place to do it is running out.

Or are you posisting that we just happen to be in the only simulation that isn't being subjected to some form of outside influence to test a theory/provide entertainment?

[General Battuta]

No simulation devised by man can match the power of the brain of lower mammal.

Then where is the break? As I said, if we're going to break the simulation, the last place to do it is running out.

Incorrect. The fraction of the phase space of all possible actions occupied by the incredibly narrow human environment in its incredibly tiny lifespan is miniscule. Nor is the human mind a particularly likely place for any breakdown to occur - the brain is a tame system, relatively simplistic when compared to phenomena on the cosmic scale.

Furthermore there is no reason to believe that the simulation is inconsistent or glitchy in any way detectable by man - we would observe these inconsistencies or glitches as simply part of the natural universe.

This is complicated by the fact that the simulation could easily detect perception of any inconsistency and redact it seamlessly.

I suggest this paper for a good overview.

Another question is why you should care: if you live in a simulation, the simulation is the universe, and it is in no way a 'counterfeit' or a 'fake': it is the cosmos as it has always been.

The universe is undeniably a computational system, to the point where arguing over whether it's a simulation or not is sort of pointless - we have laws like conservation of information and physics is already treated as a form of computation.

[butter_pat_head]

Another question is why you should care: if you live in a simulation, the simulation is the universe, and it is in no way a 'counterfeit' or a 'fake': it is the cosmos as it has always been.

True, but in a simulation as big as the universe, big enough to simulate things like atoms and smaller, then there are bound to be bugs here and there.  Such a large simulation would be impractical to debug by hand so you would most likely have another program do it for you.  Rather than just deleting offending pieces of data, potentially throwing the rest of the simulation off kilter (what would happen if Sol were to disappear?) instead you would send something in to correct it for you

Anyway, I love when I find these theories and ideas used in fiction, taking us back to black holes.  I find it hard to imagine how a black hole that has only consumed about a few hundred city sized space monsters being able to start a new big-bang...

I now return you to your normal service...

[General Battuta]

Why are there bound to be bugs? If the universe is the simulation then the bugs are part of the universe and our universe hasn't display any bugs...so why are you worried?

I find it hard to imagine how a black hole that has only consumed about a few hundred city sized space monsters being able to start a new big-bang...

The torsion theory suggests that new matter is generated inside the event horizon without violating conservation of mass/energy.

[butter_pat_head]

Why are there bound to be bugs? If the universe is the simulation then the bugs are part of the universe and our universe hasn't display any bugs...so why are you worried?

As it has been mentioned before, from the inside any bugs in the simulation will be interpreted as fact. Say somebody discovers free energy due to a flaw somewhere in the simulation's 'sub-subatomic' simulation or something like that.  Stuff like that affects how everything interacts and if the entire universe has this flaw in it's makeup then you can't just patch it out without adversely effecting the entire simulation.

Now that free energy puts a considerable extra strain on the simulation, perhaps to the point that if say a nearly an entire galaxy's worth of intelligent life was to use it it would most likely cause the entire simulation to crash.  Now intelligent life has rights and there's even talk nowadays that even artificial intelligence will have to be granted those same rights and I bet that in the world outside the simulation will have similar rights.  Now if you has a simulated universe with a untold amount of genuine intelligent life inside it you would be bound to do all that was necessary to keep it running, even if that meant the destruction of the species that discovered the bug that could destroy the universe.

This is where your Executioners/Shivans/Great Destroyers come into play... or another species inside the simulation takes it upon themselves to do the job.  Heck for all we know we aren't inside a simulation but another civilisation decides that we all are and begins purging all those who the see fit.   

With humanity's thirst for knowledge, if we are in a simulator, with bugs, I would be worried about finding that one bug...

(yep, theres a bit of anti-spiral/Vendeeni/4D Being in this post)

[Aardwolf]

And how do we know E=MC² isn't an exploit?  

After all it's the IDKFA of our sim.

So wormholes are like IDSPISPOPD ?

[chief1983]

or IDCLIP

[SpardaSon21]

So what's the IDDQD of our universe then?

[chief1983]

Being born as Chuck Norris or Isaiah Mustafa.

[Aardwolf]

or IDCLIP

Same thing. But IDCLIP's history is less interesting.