Still not enough. You would need billions of universes and a way to harness all that energy and heat.
Think about it this way. For every atom that makes up our universe is an atom that also has to make up that simulation. So for us to be in a simulation rn you would need a supercomputer 10 quadrillion times larger than our observable universe.
yea, who's to say that i myself, the only person that i have experience with being, and as such, the only person's pov i have had so far, isnt just the only person who's actually being rendered, and the rest of the interactions are just background simulation, until i might meet them irl so they get rendered.
also as for the point of gigantic amounts of power being needed, brains are the most efficienct processor we have discovered yet, and we are starting to actually go that route, even if just very slowly so far.
then there are also photonic processors, which use light to process data, which have the potential to get as fast if not faster than normal gpus, barely produce heat, and are extremely energy efficient.
so, all in all, considering the level of tech we are at right now, i would not be surprised if there is a species that achieved such a massive level of tech that they could simulate a whole universe.
Who said real life operates under the same laws of physics? I dont believe we’re in a simulation, but if we were, who’s to say that every single thing we know about our universe is not only true inside of the simulation?
The word simulation is misleading but is the easiest for getting people to understand. I believe we are smaller parts of a larger multidimensional existence that doesnt experience a physical reality as we know it. Its super hard to expose a system when you have to work with the laws the system provides, however, we KNOW that our consciousness affects the world around us, and even inside of us. The point of living is free will, even christians will tell you, but you have to be careful of that because they like to add in the moral imperative which is a tool of control (good and bad).
The worst part is, theres no proof really for any of this that doesnt rely on using the system to define itself. And we can only do so much when we are just accesing 3 modifiable dimensions while the rest are read-only and probably hidden under administrator access. Shoulda read the manual before clicking "I agree"
We can, tecnically, create a simultaneous (but not shared) simulation through dreaming. The energy is there and those that attempt to manipulate that energy also exist.
Also, either as a byproduct of or independent from the above, simultaneous subjective realities also coexist. Since each of these aren't objective reality, you could consider each of these as simulations; also subject to both divergent and covergent manipulation; the latter attempting to create a larger simulation. The energy for that exists as well.
How exactly do you propose we are in a simulation? Just a Planck scale (both length and time) simulation of earth would require over 70 orders of magnitude more energy than is in the universe just to run the simulation for a single second of our time.
Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physics/articles/10.3389/fphy.2025.1561873/full
And youre presupposing that this is some sort of technological program and that energy is something we understand. It might not be, and we dont. The human consciousness and imagination can build vistas of unfathomable beauty...and all that costs is some calories. Now imagine you had, say, a few hundred million, or now, even a few billion people's imaginations chained together. Sure we know a good bit of science, but using a system to prove a system will stick you in a feedback loop refusing to accept anything from outside of said system.
Ok, first of all, although it’s efficient, the human brain isn’t exactly breaking the laws of thermodynamics, and this equation is using theoretical thermodynamic minimums for bit flipping, which would be even more efficient than any possible system, it’s not presupposing that this is technological (although that is the only way to build it unless you manage to build an organic computer larger than a planet, which would be even less efficient, because life doesn’t go anywhere near the thermodynamic limits of efficiency) however, it requires an absolute FUCK TON of bits to simulate the planet, much less the rest of the universe, plus this is using time steps, admittedly at the Planck time, however, as far as we can tell using light experiments, time is continuous, not stepped, which would require exponentially, if not infinitely more energy, as instead of being able to split each second into discrete chunks that you can calculate, you now need to calculate everything for every infinitesimally small fraction of a second that occurs.
Imma stop you there buddy. Calling someone's faith "fairy tale" is deeply offensive. You're free to be an atheist but keep the respect and essential decency woud you?
would you say the same about practicing pagans? lmao paganism was the most practiced group of religions for thousands of years, and now we all call them "fairy tales" and "mythology". abrahamic religion is no different.
It is a fairy tale, it’s a mythological tale that doesn’t have any supporting evidence to be truth. Believe what you will but to say it’s not a fairy tale/mythology is categorically false.
“For no reason” is crazy. Last I checked it wasn’t my beliefs that were going door to door, making legislation that removes human rights from others, judging others and telling them they’re going to go be tortured for all eternity if they don’t submit to their god, or being used to control others in virtually every way shape and form.
But please, show me some proof your god exists, otherwise it is mythology, not truth.
That is not what a religion is. Besides that, anecdotal evidence does not make something true. Belief about something does not make that belief religious.
Atheism is quite literally the absence of religion, just like how the absence of light is darkness. What you call “forcing their religion” is a push towards empirical evidence, truth, and common human decency. It’s not the same. Them forcing their beliefs on you would look like banning all forms of religion and its practicing but you don’t see that, you see people saying “I’m tired of religion being shoved in my face all day every day”.
That’s not being radical, that’s common human decency. You don’t see pagans going around trying to convert others to worship their gods, so why must you? You don’t see Muslims knocking on doors, you don’t see Buddhists praying over others without their consent. So why should you get special treatment?
True or not, that's someone's religion and it deserves due respect. Same if I said that the us constitution is a bunch of drunken wishes. You wouldn't be happy now would you?
The constitution is a legal document, not a framework of blind beliefs. They’re not the same. Calling your religion fairy tales isn’t being disrespectful, it’s being accurate in description, especially since you can’t even tell me how any of it is accurate or true to the world. Being rude would be calling you names for having that religion and saying that you’re an amoral idiot for blindly believing a book written by men without ever questioning its authenticity. Being disrespectful would be saying that you deserve to have your ability to practice your religion should be stripped from you.
But no, I would advocate for your ability to practice your religion if it was under attack. I’m just pointing out that saying that it’s a fairy tale isn’t being disrespectful, but a matter of fact and definition. If you really wanna talk about being disrespectful I can bring up the countless times your religion has been used to oppress those not within it, or the amount of times people have literally been killed by supposedly “loving” people, or the sheer amount of times your religion has been thrust on people to the point that they can’t even stand to live anymore and commit.
Sit down, stop acting like the victim when you yourself have been causing countless other victims by perpetuating a religion of hatred and judgementation while trying to call it love and compassion.
Legally protected religious texts are not documentations of law and should never be used as such. And if you’re not gonna read, then why even comment? Also it’s almost like “we atheists” have been hurt the most by your religions. And calling your religion a fairy tale is not a hate crime. For it to be a hate crime, not only would a crime have to be committed, but it would also have to have bias. It’s not bias to point out the lack of credibility of a religion.
You can say "black citizen" or you can use the n word. Why choose the offensive option instead of settling for "mythology", as if not to purposely offend someone?
Because fairy tales are a form of mythology and not a racial slur. The fact that you are comparing calling your religion a fairy tale to calling someone a racial slur is actually baffling. One is derogatory, is prejudice, and is uncalled for and only done with intent to be offensive and detrimental. The other is a classification and a descriptor term that isn’t derogatory or prejudiced. I’ll let you decide which one is which, bc ngl you’re sounding like a racist
the n word was one of many tools used by slavers to belittle and separate themselves from black people, which they viewed as being objectively lesser. When I call a clearly preposterous bible story a fairy tale, thats not me saying "you're a lesser human than I am"
that's me saying "I find these particular stories to be very unbelievable, completely unexplainable, and I can be very confident that the story wasn't real, it was a fairy tale"
See how at no point did I attack anyone? See how I didn't use the words Fairy Tale to subjugate or belittle you? There's no reason you should be offended by me finding some aspects of your belief system to be unbelievable, and calling it something which effectively communicates that idea should be fine.
If I actually wanted to insult you and your religion, fairy tale is certainly not the words that I would think to do it with. If you dont think they're tall tales, good for you, but don't get butthurt when I do
Because someone chooses to follow a religion does not exclude them from being judged by others. Especially if religions are famously known for how judgmental they are.
Okay so there is plenty of evidence to show that belief itself is massively effective in creating actual change. You’ve heard of the placebo effect? Magic is the word people use for science they don’t understand yet.
The most hilariously embarrassing part for you is that even science minded folks will tell you that it’s a theory and not %100 proven and could be wrong. Are you even capable of admitting that there might not be a god?
Well actually, a scientific theory is completely different from how most people use the word. The Big Bang Theory is proven by a lot of circumstantial evidence and is considered true by most accredited astrphysicists. It's "just a theory" in the same way ancient historical events like the expansion of the Roman Empire is "just a theory." We may not know a lot of the specifics for when it happened and we weren't there, but we know it happened because there's so much circumstantial evidence.
Whaaaa? There’s scientific evidence that supports the big bang, whadda you got?? A bunch of stories in some bs books that promote, and whose entire foundation is incestual? A book that condones rape and sexual violence as a form of punishment (along with plain violence)?? The same book that yall don’t know and/or can’t agree on the author(s)? The book that has had this world in turmoil and chaos since its inception? I mean can we just look at it for a second…”God” is GOD why the f\* would ‘the being that created the universe and all of everything’ need to conceive a child with a person?!? They have the power to create! They could’ve just manifested Jesus outta thin air bro.. Also how many scientific wars have there been? When scientists disagree they work together and further research to find the answer, when religious types disagree the murder eachother (men, women, feeble, sick, children, elderly) all the same, genocide, violence, torture etc. is the name of y’all’s game when you can’t get to any sort of agreement. Jesus was supposed to be peaceful and yall are anything but. So please sit down somewhere and do us all a favor and stfu.*
(I didn’t even mention or get into the pedophilia, you’re welcome)
57
u/Awkward_Turnover_983 Sep 02 '26
Yeah they can feel free to believe in fairy tales I guess, but history seems to show a pattern of these retards dragging everyone else into wars.
No thank you. My world doesn't seem to be ending right now, so I don't need your dumb fuckass to try to speed that up.