Brain In A Vat is a thought experiment and fiction trope saying that a computer could trick a disembodied brain into thinking it is is in a normal situation, like walking in a field of flowers, or eating ice cream or talking to your boss at work. It does this by stimulating the areas of the brain for sight, hearing, feeling, smell, and taste. How likely is this to be possible? Is it already a thing? Is is it possible we are already in such a situation?I heard about scientists making human brain cells think they are a butterfly, but idk how sentient they are. Closest thing to thus I know so far.
>>106596602Watch the movie "The Matrix" then return and we can discuss what color leather jacket you should wear.
>>106596602Already operational in the form of glowie-curated social media aislop brainrot.
Did OP just celebrate his 13th birthday or something?
>>106596602ok zoomer>>10659665812th
>>106596602this already exists inside every religion, that this world is the fake one, and heaven is the real oneif ur good and aren't a faggot them you'll get to live in the real world
>>106596602>thought experiment>fiction tropeI have news for you anon
>>106596602It's not any different from VR porn, brain in a vat is plausible. Not any different from believing in God either.
>>106597159Don't be retarded.
Bump
>>106596602Go learn about whites and kikes and their MK Ultra child raping and torturing they've been doing for centuries
>>106596602So like Source Code the movie?https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0945513/
>>106599622meds
>>106596602>babby's first epistemology class
>>106596602It's a thought experiment because it's interesting to consider the implications of us being able to simulate qualia for an experiencer, not because it's likely to be true or could even possibly be true. It's a dumb thought experiment anyways, as it assumes there's a clear delineation between the brain and the rest of the body, which there is not. Just the work of dualists who have replaced the soul with the brain.
>>106596602If this were happening, there would be no way for you to determine how likely it was, as your knowledge of the real world outside would be zero.
>scientists recently found out that even distance is quantizeduhoh bros, we might all be in a sim
>>106596602Why does everyone think about tricking the brain and not the heart or the stomach? SMDH you people have forgotten what we are.
>>106600159source?
>>106599633It's actually factual you faggot
>>106596602If you think about the brain and the body as separate components, Isn't that exactly what we are? A brain in a vat that gets external stimuli and transmit it to the brain?
>>106596619Where does it end?
>>106599622>>106599633MKULTRA checked. But centuries is a stretch. There is a reason Blood Libel is a recurring theme with one of the groups mentioned however.
>>106596602I wish a computer would trick my brain into thinking I'm in a field of naked women all the time
???This is not a "thought experiment" it's just how brains work. Brain and sensory interfaces are decoupled which means your brain is a brain in a vat right now, that vat being your skull, floating and all and connected by "wires".What you propose is just a matter of understanding of the wires and plugging it elsewhere.
>>106601337understanding the wire's encoding*
>>106596602Its not a brain in a vat. Its a vat in a brain.Think about it. If you get it, then you understand the fundamental problem.
>How possible There is no way to gauge that. You run into the Descarte problem. You either trust your senses or you don't. If you don't trust your senses then the only existence you can verify is your own by the fact that you are thinking. Honestly I don't think it matters. If you are the brain in the jar would you really want to know? Its not like the brain can change its lot in the situation and knowing would only be depressing because nothing you did would matter. Personally I would rather just believe my senses.
>>106601385I'd argue the Descarets problem is on a higher order of magnitude of doubt. Brain in a vat legitimizes senses: either it's your own or external ones plugged in.But Descartes doesn't trust the brain's knowledge of itself or it's workings. Just conscience matters everything else may just be a sham.
>>106596602That means it doesn't matter if I kill myself
>>106596602>How likely is this to be possible? Is it already a thing? Is is it possible we are already in such a situation?Unlikely. No and No.The problem with using computers to simulate real world things is that computers operate on clocks. They go tick-tick-tick and discrete operations happen at each step. That's unfortunately not how the real world works, our brains neither. We can clock a computer really really fast and approximate it to a casual observer, but the infinite divisibility of reality means at every step there's an observer that is aware of the time stepping.For instance, how does your brain know the difference between YOU touching your own arm and someone else touching it? We actually DO know. It's facilitated by the touch sensation happening within a very short window of time where if your own fingertips are registering contact within a few microseconds of your arm registering touch your brain interprets that as you and not someone else. This can be fooled by having you touch another person at the same time they touch you, but it's hard to pull off because the time difference has to be really really close. It freaks out the person because they are constantly feeling themselves touch their arm and then someone else as the synch goes off. That's what a computer trying to emulate an analog system would feel like to your brain.
>>106601337I mean it is possible most likely, but it is used as a thought experiment in philosophy. Just look up Brain In A Vat.
>>106601525Maybe this tech as fixed this issue.
>>106596602Read book VII of Plato's Republic
>>106600404Especially, if you consider that everything that we perceive is synthesised anyway, before it moves along to the analysis department, it kind of is.
>>106596602I don't see why it wouldn't be possible but it would require us to have a complete understanding of the brain, all inputs and outputs and with the brain mapped to a neuron level like they did with that fly except this is like a 100 million times more complex. We would have to figure out every mechanism the brain uses to process information, which we still don't fully understand- there are some people that think quantum level processes may even be involved. And making brains and computers speak fluently to each other is difficult because they are so fundamentally different in their structure and processes, that's why the best we have right now is brain-computer interfaces that rely on AI attempting to decode impulses, and computer-brain interfaces are still basically nonexistent.It's possible but this tech is at least a century away, probably more, and probably never if we're being real.
>>106596615obviously black wool peacoat instead like my heckin wholesome keanu!!! (fun fact he didnt wear leather in the matrix because he he just loves animals so much!!~)
>>106600159Whatchutalmbout? Planck length is space "quantized".
>>106601385>because nothing you did would matterdoes it?
>>106600159>recentlyplanck units have been a thing for over 125 fucking years
>>106596602You could do it, but it would require fairly complicated stuff so that you can connect to the brain's inputs and connect to all its plumbing to keep it alive. Keeping it alive would be the hardest part, and keeping it alive between the time when you've removed the brain from the head till you've attached all it's complicated delicate plumbing and autonomic neuron interface, would be extremely difficult because it would begin dying as soon as you remove it from the host body.Essentially you are preforming a brain transplant, which has not yet been done successfully. Maybe if you don't mind mangling the host body you could begin installing the plumbing early before removal. But yes, it could be done.
>>106603254>if i'm stuck in a sim, then the tech level outside the sim MUST be the same as what im experiencinghow would you feel if you didnt have breakfast this morning
>>106603280It's not that, well not entirely, it's that our bodies naturally grow to provide the requisite harness for our brain and its a complicated harness with many small connections, to keep it alive, to feed it, to give it inputs, to respond to its outputs, to flush its waste. You would need to artificially provide most of those things just to keep the brain alive, and pretty much all of it to make the brain think nothing has changed.
>>106603328Might be a cake walk for base reality scientists. Assuming biological we are the same in base reality. We might be insects or something tricked into thinking we are humans.
>>106603566God I Wish That Were Me
>>106601385>Honestly I don't thinkYou ain't
>>106596602We know now that the brain isn't just the brain, the human body is an interconnected system of systems. Mitochondria and gut bacteria influence your behavior heavily. This thought experiment is fake and moot now as far as I am concerned, only used by people justifying ridiculous hypothetical ideas.
>>106601423I'd argue its the same thing. The brain in the vat is just the justification for not trusting any knowledge. The only assumption that the brain in the vat makes past Descartes is that brains exist, vats exist and computers exist.
>>106604367>We know now that the brain isn't just the brain, the human body is an interconnected system of systems. Mitochondria and gut bacteria influence your behavior heavilyTheoretically, the machine could fire the shocks in a way that simulates their influence or somesuch.
>>106604777>777Holy trips of truth.
