Angelo

If the universe is a simulation, that means that you are simulated and are along with everything else just not real but composed of 0 and 1 assuming that the creator of the simulation uses a binary code which he or they may not. Tyson is literally saying that the universe is a simulation because the current speeds of the furthest galaxies violate relativity as they are estimated at 5 times light speed in motion. When you access a computer simulation you do so from a real world, Tyson is claiming that reality is not real. How is that science? Why is it logical and acceptable for Tyson to say that the universe was created but not logical or acceptable for an evangelical to say EXACTLY the same thing? This is why it matters, because what Tyson is saying is exactly what religions have been saying forever. This matters Tysons argument is that the universe was created by a far superior to humans programmer. If he thinks that he or any modern scientist created this idea he is wrong. Now I myself do not see any evidence that God created the universe, so this puts me in the role of atheist which I am not and Tyson as endorsing a creator. As Charlton Heston said in Planet of the Apes, "it's a madhouse"

Yes I also listened to Tyson be forced into saying that if the universe were a simulation that there must be a creator of the simulation which means that he now believes in God after spending his entire life denying God. In other words he is a clown that does not know what he believes

Yes there is another at some science fiction symposium. The most comical part was when Tyson had to admit that his hard drive simulation needed a creator, which is the other word for God. This is not science, it is confused adults who can not accept the speeds of galaxies as now measured so to adjust they invalidate reality.

It's OK, Galileo was not well liked either.........................

Enlighten me as to why NASA says Einstein was wrong

Which part of science explains galaxies moving at 5 times light speed as recently observed, which in my opinion births the simulation theory as there is nothing else in known science that explains this. Sad that people like Tyson believe that they know everything I know that there is no accurate description of what Tyson is doing, unless he is becoming a science fiction writer. Hell it worked well for George Lucas

Do you believe it is a possibility that the blood in your veins is really 0 and 1? Oddly enough DNA is clearly a molecular code for assembling life The real problem is that Tyson fell into the same hole that the Catholic church was in when they demanded that the Earth was the center of the universe without any rational reason.

Do you think that Tyson is rational for rejecting all known science and championing the idea that everything in the universe is really a 0 or 1?

Thank you.....!

According to Tyson Newton was a simulation and gravity is computer code

Facts are all based upon evidence, what facts are the simulated universe based upon? LOL you do know that according to Tyson there are no gravity waves right? Just a great big creators hard drive. Nothing you can claim is real according to Tyson. Except for the great big hard drive in the sky that is

Interesting, but what makes your computer not part of the simulation?

What makes you accept what you hear on a Larry King infomercial? I mean next we heard that fish oil cures impotence and prevents cancer

You said and I quote " Without evidence, you’re just another person with an opinion." So you agree that Tyson is merely expressing his opinion since there is no evidence that we are both computer simulations on a hard drive conversing back and forth on the drive

Actually you interjected without evidence of any type. That said since there is none, that is to be expected I assume

If you have evidence that the universe is a computer simulation, please grace us with your knowledge, or if you understand why Tyson thinks that people and planets are not real but computer code on a hard drive again please explain? Also why would the computer programmer that Tyson claims created the universe be different than the creator that most religions mention as God. Somewhat strange don't you think for Tyson to champion a universal creator after being such a devout atheist?

The offspring is actually not part of my core question which is how does a painful situation in a healthy adult which centers around a brain response to stimuli modify that adults somatic cells? This situation implies that an individual can by some unknown means determine what traits their offspring will have. Like wishing for what you need and birthing it

Actually evidence is needed only to determine reality, but not fantasy. So if you believe that Tyson is right tell us on what evidence you base your adjunct conclusion?

If so what is your basis for this conclusion. Also what allows for such complete nonsense to go unchecked by the scientific establishment?

Thanks for responding but you seem to be detailing the changes. In the mouse and the cherry blossom smell with electricity experiment the changes that are initiated in the mind are in some way effecting the sperm cells of the male mouse where a learned fear of smell that is housed in the mind travels to living unmutated sperm cells. The changes are well documented in the offspring but what is missing is the method of change that begins in the mind as the offspring are endowed with a life extending fear of cherry blossom odor. Note that zero evolutionary time is needed for this

Hi all I have been intrigued recently by epigenetics which allows for beneficial changes to happen deliberately in a parent individual. Now I am not interested in the changed or turned on or off genes I am only interested in how these genes are instructed to be altered by a living parent without the need for any random mutation? So anyone know?