x*o
2 楼
？
S*l
3 楼
上厕所
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 为嘛呢？
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 为嘛呢？
n*4
4 楼
恰恰相反，数学上已经证明，我们宇宙中发生的一切，都可以用在宇宙边界上事件的投
影来解释。所以极有可能，我们就是一个模拟的世界，你我他她都是某个程序中的
objects
【在 x****o 的大作中提到】
: ？
影来解释。所以极有可能，我们就是一个模拟的世界，你我他她都是某个程序中的
objects
【在 x****o 的大作中提到】
: ？
g*n
5 楼
ebiz上久了，你也学会扯蛋了？
【在 S*******l 的大作中提到】
: 上厕所
【在 S*******l 的大作中提到】
: 上厕所
d*o
6 楼
高位文明也信仰OOP？
【在 n****4 的大作中提到】
: 恰恰相反，数学上已经证明，我们宇宙中发生的一切，都可以用在宇宙边界上事件的投
: 影来解释。所以极有可能，我们就是一个模拟的世界，你我他她都是某个程序中的
: objects
【在 n****4 的大作中提到】
: 恰恰相反，数学上已经证明，我们宇宙中发生的一切，都可以用在宇宙边界上事件的投
: 影来解释。所以极有可能，我们就是一个模拟的世界，你我他她都是某个程序中的
: objects
m*s
7 楼
糊墙
n*4
8 楼
oop实际上反映了结构的哲学思想。有类，有inheritance，就有进化
【在 d****o 的大作中提到】
: 高位文明也信仰OOP？
【在 d****o 的大作中提到】
: 高位文明也信仰OOP？
k*n
9 楼
擦屁股
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 为嘛呢？
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 为嘛呢？
t*u
10 楼
u can't
S*l
11 楼
我不撤蛋都被你们耻笑，有木有？。。。学坏是很容易的事。。。
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: ebiz上久了，你也学会扯蛋了？
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: ebiz上久了，你也学会扯蛋了？
M*P
12 楼
马工牛逼大了
【在 n****4 的大作中提到】
: oop实际上反映了结构的哲学思想。有类，有inheritance，就有进化
【在 n****4 的大作中提到】
: oop实际上反映了结构的哲学思想。有类，有inheritance，就有进化
d*b
13 楼
主要是因为你家没高速打印机，想象不出纸的用途
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 为嘛呢？
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 为嘛呢？
M*P
14 楼
即使是模拟的，你还要上班，挣钱，吃饭睡觉
【在 x****o 的大作中提到】
: ？
【在 x****o 的大作中提到】
: ？
g*n
15 楼
屁叻
【在 d*b 的大作中提到】
: 主要是因为你家没高速打印机，想象不出纸的用途
【在 d*b 的大作中提到】
: 主要是因为你家没高速打印机，想象不出纸的用途
e*u
16 楼
程序里的objects还能推算自己是模拟的？
【在 n****4 的大作中提到】
: 恰恰相反，数学上已经证明，我们宇宙中发生的一切，都可以用在宇宙边界上事件的投
: 影来解释。所以极有可能，我们就是一个模拟的世界，你我他她都是某个程序中的
: objects
【在 n****4 的大作中提到】
: 恰恰相反，数学上已经证明，我们宇宙中发生的一切，都可以用在宇宙边界上事件的投
: 影来解释。所以极有可能，我们就是一个模拟的世界，你我他她都是某个程序中的
: objects
u*q
17 楼
找到agent Smith，严刑拷打
l*o
18 楼
或者被严刑拷打
【在 u****q 的大作中提到】
: 找到agent Smith，严刑拷打
【在 u****q 的大作中提到】
: 找到agent Smith，严刑拷打
M*P
19 楼
又不是老刑的机器人，不好找啊。
【在 u****q 的大作中提到】
: 找到agent Smith，严刑拷打
【在 u****q 的大作中提到】
: 找到agent Smith，严刑拷打
C*t
20 楼
释迦牟尼一早就说了：凡所有相，皆是虚妄。若见诸相非相，即见如来。六道轮回说的
就是，你的生命一个接一个还是在程序里。成佛就是要找到彻底跳出模拟程序的办法。
就是，你的生命一个接一个还是在程序里。成佛就是要找到彻底跳出模拟程序的办法。
D*g
21 楼
苏菲的世界，后来出现少儿不宜的部分的时候，就证明世界不真实了。
r*n
22 楼
转自 Quora
https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
a lot of CPU cycles.
To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
watching.
In our universe, the double-slit experiment shows that light looks like a
wave when no one is observing closely - but starts looking like particles
when we take a closer look!
It's obvious that modelling every bit of light as a particle is way
expensive. So the universe switches to a more optimal wave representation to
save cycles.
Clearly then, we are in a Matrix.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
a lot of CPU cycles.
To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
watching.
In our universe, the double-slit experiment shows that light looks like a
wave when no one is observing closely - but starts looking like particles
when we take a closer look!
It's obvious that modelling every bit of light as a particle is way
expensive. So the universe switches to a more optimal wave representation to
save cycles.
Clearly then, we are in a Matrix.
x*o
23 楼
哈哈，两个缝
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
M*P
24 楼
这个不错！
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
d*z
25 楼
牛B
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
k*o
26 楼
走到两面平行镜子之间 观察是否掉帧
n*4
27 楼
神啊，太神了
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
d*o
28 楼
这么吃CPU，
当初直接把光设定成没有粒子性就好了吧？
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
当初直接把光设定成没有粒子性就好了吧？
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
C*t
29 楼
我觉得“If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But
if no one
is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. ”这个观点有道理
。但这个例子分析的不对呀。
真实情况是：当我们只是用眼睛看的时候，光是显示波的性质的。但当我们在两个孔上
面放上检测仪（来确定每个粒子是否可以同时穿过两个孔的时候），光的波性就消失了
。所以这里也看以看出simulation的证据，就是说Matrix在逗我们玩，但却不能证明以
上论据。
if no one
is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. ”这个观点有道理
。但这个例子分析的不对呀。
真实情况是：当我们只是用眼睛看的时候，光是显示波的性质的。但当我们在两个孔上
面放上检测仪（来确定每个粒子是否可以同时穿过两个孔的时候），光的波性就消失了
。所以这里也看以看出simulation的证据，就是说Matrix在逗我们玩，但却不能证明以
上论据。
r*i
30 楼
没有粒子性就无限可分，就不符合bit逻辑
【在 d****o 的大作中提到】
: 这么吃CPU，
: 当初直接把光设定成没有粒子性就好了吧？
:
: one
: saves
: is
【在 d****o 的大作中提到】
: 这么吃CPU，
: 当初直接把光设定成没有粒子性就好了吧？
:
: one
: saves
: is
n*d
31 楼
下一个重要的问题：你们选择吃蓝药丸还是红药丸？
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
one
saves
is
【在 r*****n 的大作中提到】
: 转自 Quora
: https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-know-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-
: simulation/answer/Glyn-Williams?srid=Bo1H&share=1
: Computer simulations for games often use optimisations.
: If the player is watching stuff, it is modelled realistically. But if no one
: is looking, a cheap approximate solution is used instead. This trick saves
: a lot of CPU cycles.
: To discover if we are in a game, we need to look for an optimisation
: fingerprint. We need evidence that stuff behaves differently when no one is
: watching.
u*q
32 楼
每当人类进步太快了，它们就把光速放慢一些。。。
Bastards...
Bastards...
c*e
33 楼
那量子物理是不是间接说明我们生活在一个离散的空间（恩那不就是数字世界吗？），
能不能根据最小量推算出跑程序的计算机的字长和钟频？
相对论里的时钟变慢是不是因为模拟极端情况计算量太大了？我国古代传说里的天上一
日地上一年是不是因为天上的模拟程序设定的精度太高了。。。
能不能根据最小量推算出跑程序的计算机的字长和钟频？
相对论里的时钟变慢是不是因为模拟极端情况计算量太大了？我国古代传说里的天上一
日地上一年是不是因为天上的模拟程序设定的精度太高了。。。
c*e
34 楼
大刘有篇短篇小说说某人用超弦计算机和合适的起始参数模拟了宇宙大爆炸，然后可以
看到从大爆炸到当前的所有事情，然后煞有介事的说因为递归的原因所以不能看到未来
。其实根据递归这个计算机和模拟程序也不可能存在的。
看到从大爆炸到当前的所有事情，然后煞有介事的说因为递归的原因所以不能看到未来
。其实根据递归这个计算机和模拟程序也不可能存在的。
相关阅读