Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#19 - probablynaked (02/13/2013) [-]
Unless one of the competing explanations just happens to be the truth..
Unless one of the competing explanations just happens to be the truth..
User avatar #40 to #19 - probablynaked (02/13/2013) [-]
**** me for trying to post funny in a science post. I forgot what website I was browsing.
User avatar #41 to #40 - retris (02/13/2013) [-]
Yeah, I'm sorry thumbed down, I was just trying to explain something I found really interesting
User avatar #42 to #41 - retris (02/13/2013) [-]
you got*
User avatar #23 to #19 - retris (02/13/2013) [-]
It's Occam’s razor, for example we could be living in something like the matrix, however there's no evidence for this so even though both theories are possible, the more complex one is not accepted unless there is compelling evidence for it. That's why it's a good thing science is adaptable.
User avatar #37 to #23 - awesomenessdefined (02/13/2013) [-]
We can prove the we aren't living in the matrix.
Here's how.
If the machines were using us for the 'voltage' an average human produces, they would know that it's easier to keep one human alive than to have a new one born. So, seeing that people are dying, they would modify it. They haven't yet, therefor, they don't exist, so we aren't in the matrix.
Of course there's a ton of other ways to prove it.
User avatar #38 to #37 - retris (02/13/2013) [-]
I said like the matrix, ie like a computer simulated reality, it was only an example
User avatar #46 to #38 - awesomenessdefined (02/13/2013) [-]
Like our brains in a vat, or we're sprites in a simulation.
User avatar #47 to #46 - retris (02/13/2013) [-]
Yeah, anything along those lines.
User avatar #48 to #47 - awesomenessdefined (02/13/2013) [-]
If we were brains in a vat, we could never learn new things.
But we could be sprites.
 Friends (0)