It's also that these dweebs don't understand what physicists meant by simulation.
Edit: I guess it'd help if I described it. "Simulation" in physics doesn't mean "running on some dude's computer," it means "our 4D universe is a simulated abstraction of higher dimensional physics." Physicists usually use the word "hologram" for this though, but that's where the general public leaped from for the "simulation theory."
The only analogy I can give that makes sense is to imagine a 2D [1] universe existing in our 3D one. Now imagine you took our 3D globe and projected it into that 2D universe. They would observe weird behavior near the poles, their bodies and physical reality would seem to stretch due to the inaccuracies presented by stretching a globe onto a plane. They would chalk up these reality distortions to gravity near the poles or something because their 2D reality cannot sufficiently abstract the 3D globe they're living on, so there are weird distortions in their reality. Some physicists think this might be an explanation for gravity warping space the way it does. It may be a force in a higher dimension that's weirdly projected into our 3D reality. So reality itself is not a simulation, but our 3D conception of it is a simulation of the full reality. This is all hypothetical though. You'll never get more than a might out of physicists about this because it's untested and only makes sense in certain frameworks like string theory and such.
Due to the overload of bull shit when you google "simulation in physics," this is about all I can give you.. Only this specific section on the page is relating to physics. The rest is "lol Matrix" guff.
It's also that these dweebs don't understand what physicists meant by simulation.
Edit: I guess it'd help if I described it. "Simulation" in physics doesn't mean "running on some dude's computer," it means "our 4D universe is a simulated abstraction of higher dimensional physics." Physicists usually use the word "hologram" for this though, but that's where the general public leaped from for the "simulation theory."
The only analogy I can give that makes sense is to imagine a 2D [1] universe existing in our 3D one. Now imagine you took our 3D globe and projected it into that 2D universe. They would observe weird behavior near the poles, their bodies and physical reality would seem to stretch due to the inaccuracies presented by stretching a globe onto a plane. They would chalk up these reality distortions to gravity near the poles or something because their 2D reality cannot sufficiently abstract the 3D globe they're living on, so there are weird distortions in their reality. Some physicists think this might be an explanation for gravity warping space the way it does. It may be a force in a higher dimension that's weirdly projected into our 3D reality. So reality itself is not a simulation, but our 3D conception of it is a simulation of the full reality. This is all hypothetical though. You'll never get more than a might out of physicists about this because it's untested and only makes sense in certain frameworks like string theory and such.
Due to the overload of bull shit when you google "simulation in physics," this is about all I can give you.. Only this specific section on the page is relating to physics. The rest is "lol Matrix" guff.