Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 10:38:46 UTC No. 16078900

Sometimes finding all those digits is a bit more like a hobby than an actual job.

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 10:53:05 UTC No. 16078917

>>16078884
it’s just proof that actual infinities are unfalsifiable, impractical, nonsense

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 11:07:46 UTC No. 16078934

>>16078884
Reality doesn't operate with numbers

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 11:09:04 UTC No. 16078935

>>16078884
Pi is only has the digits you calculate it to have, the rest are fantasy.

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 13:17:35 UTC No. 16079070

>>16078884
Why would a simulation have irrational numbers? We can't even make a simulation with real irrational numbers (heh). If anything Pi is proof we are not living in a simulation

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 13:18:58 UTC No. 16079073

>>16078884
>>16079070
Oh I didn't read your post properly lol!
Yeah I believe irrational number's does prove we are not in a simulation

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:23:33 UTC No. 16079161

>>16078884
math makes the simulation, the simulation does not make the math

all the simulation does is highlight and express certain axioms (physics)

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:46:25 UTC No. 16079203

>>16079073
The simulation has many algorithms designed to convince you it's not a simulation. Things like deep space observations and irrational numbers. These things are rendered on the fly when needed. It's nothing more than a hamster wheel to keep you running in place, it all means nothing and in no way disproves simulation theory.

By your own admission it would be impossible to verify the vast majority of Pi with real life observations or experiments so you can't prove it's anything but random numbers. Just like all the data we collect from deep space is first translated into a computer and then simple binary data. There is no difference between "real" binary data on a hard drive showing a "real" galaxy and simulated binary data generated by the simulation, it's the same 1's and 0's. The irony of people pointing to binary data on a computer as proof we don't live in a computer is laughable. Even when discussing visual observations of space we run into a similar problem as our brains are just organic computers that interpret data streams via organic sensors aka electrical impulses down the optic nerves. There is no reason identical electrical impulses can't be sent to the brain and perfectly mimic "reality".

Honestly all you midwits who try to deboonk simulation theory sound like low IQ children from reddit. This is what happens when you ignore philosophy and take a 2 dimensional view of reality based of "Muh science" and ignore anything that doesn't conform to you preconceived indoctrination . You can't prove picrel is real or exists, you just can't. In the next 10 years AI will be able to use all known deep space images to begin generating unique Hubble/JWST style images that are entirely fake. Then you can't say shit.

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:54:10 UTC No. 16079213

>>16078884
The universe doesn't really follow human mathematics. I'm not sure there even is such a thing as a perfect circle in nature anyway, things are more imprecise in the real world, math is more of an idealisation. Maybe aliens don't even use math, maybe they all have synesthesia and do math with colors or something, who knows. The computer running the simulation might use something not even possible in our universe

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:54:22 UTC No. 16079215

>>16079203
Simulation theory is unfalsifiable

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:55:30 UTC No. 16079219

>>16079213
>I'm not sure there even is such a thing as a perfect circle in nature anyway
There isn't. Zoom in enough and you end up with discrete particles. A "circle" is a human fantasy (although many things are similar to this fantasy)

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:03:50 UTC No. 16079238

>>16079203
Anyone who has ever worked with computers knows your "everything is just perfectly projected instead of accurately simulated" wouldn't work since that introduces huge amounts of complexity, where bugs and issues creep in resulting in inconsistencies.

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:05:57 UTC No. 16079240

>>16079238
>huge amounts of complexity in our universe
Might not be complex relative to the engineering and computing capabilities of the parent universe.

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:07:18 UTC No. 16079243

>>16079203
>NPC v1: no hear words
>NPC v2: no see apple
>NPC v3: no free will
>NPC v4: just like vidya!
When will their goal posts stop moving?
I will up it like this: I have little doubt that your life is a simulation.

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 18:31:18 UTC No. 16079623

>>16078934
Truth
>>16079070
>>16079073
Falsehood. A computer does not have to operate on numbers

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 19:02:55 UTC No. 16079664

>>16078884
how many digits if you do it at planck scale precision?

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 19:10:38 UTC No. 16079670

>>16079623
> A computer does not have to operate on numbers

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 19:13:52 UTC No. 16079677

>>16079664
65

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 19:23:31 UTC No. 16079699

>>16079677
so 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923 is the best precision we'd find in nature?

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 19:25:02 UTC No. 16079702

>>16079623
wut, a computer is a specifically developed system which allows you to operate on quantitative properties