Is life a game of The Sims? Physicists want to test if the universe is a simulation

[WYP]

Are we all living in the Matrix? Is life a future game of the Sims? A lot of physicists seem to think so, some are trying to test it.

I’ve recently had a few interesting conversations around this subject with our friendly neighbourhood TTL and others and really want to know what you guys think of it. Some food for thought.

The theory was published 10 years ago in 2003 by a philosopher called Nick Bonstrom wrote a paper suggesting that the universe is likely to be a computer simulation.

The paper is linked here for those interested in reading it. It summarises that the universe lives in one of 3 possibilities, these are;

1, No human civilizations that reach what is called a "posthuman" stage (we all go extinct before then). (The posthuman stage is defined as a stage where the human race has enough computing power to run a universal simulation and have a the definite base laws of physics to imput )

2, The "posthuman" civilisations that are interested in making such a simulation is zero (the future humans don't have the freedom or simply never want to run such a simulation) (almost impossible possibility).

3, The remaining "posthuman" civilisations are interested in running such a simulation. In this case we are very likely part of a simulation made by our descendants/ there are almost an infinite number of universes made by our descendants and we live in one of them.

Are we EA's future play thing?

Hard to wrap you head around it isn’t it?

The likely choices are we will all kill ourselves somehow before this can happen for us or it almost certainly already has! DUN DUN DUUUN!!!

Imagine the computers in that future too… it will make our I7s and Titans look like paperweights… but can it run crysis 4?

Discuss!

Source - Huffington Post Last year’s news but oh well.

 

[tinytomlogan]

I actually love the idea about all of this, just lets any open imagination run riot!

Was TRON a visary kinda film

Was the Men in Black ending right

Are we really living in the Matrix?

 

[looz]

Isn't there a group of people committed to finding bugs in the universe in order to see if it's a simulation?

 

[TheLastRebel]

id be ok with it cause it means we are like video game in our video games in our video games

 

[Vermilion]

The theory was published 10 years ago in 2003 by a philosopher called Nick Bonstrom wrote a paper suggesting that the universe is likely to be a computer simulation.

The key word there is "philosopher."

Being a philosopher became irrelevant once the scientific method became a thing.

Just because you can assert something "logically" doesn't make it true. I remember a certain mathematician used this kind of logical to prove god. Of course he did it for the lulz and didn't actually prove that there's a god just to show that this kind of logic can be used to "prove" things that can't actually be proven through maths.

 

[ahimoth]

As with the Matrix once you become aware of the matrix all that happens is you get put into another one a sort of level two so could there be "rules" in place to stop us from discovering the truth? The idea is fascinating. The true tell would be to look for "glitches" or "reboots" within the system or program.

I mused over the idea with a friend a while ago that there could one day be a programming language for the universe. IE you want to travel to x location, build something or create someone you could simply write a few lines of code and it would happen. Some spiritualists mainly eastern spiritualists go on about a connection to the universe, enlightenment etc . Well what if that was just being able to tap into source code. Effectively Neo's abilities in the Matrix, if this is a program maybe it could actually happen.

One of the talking points of "educated" creationists is that our (I use inclusive language quite freely) current understanding of the earth is built upon principles which have never changed. Ie gravity always worked the same, light always worked the same, atoms, neutrons, protons etc all worked the same from day one. In this documentary he continued to almost revert back to the rose colored glasses scientists were looking through. So to go back to your original point would it even be possible for us to ascertain the truth?

With that being said, if this all were a computer simulation, than we're talking about a computer which can generate self aware software. As from the real world experiments we know how difficult it is to recreate a functioning human brain. This computer would have to be powerful enough to generate an infinite amount of not only us, but stars, planets, and trillions of other lifeforms in those galaxies. In the end how could such a machine not become self aware and by extension how could we not become aware of the actual world we live in through the "eyes" of said machine. It would be a pretty dick move if the machine which created us took over it's world and then left us trapped in here. Couldn't we just be exported to the real world?

All we are, are organic computers. Imagine the global computing power of all human and animal brains and then imagine how much potential life there's out there. It's a pretty cool concept to be apart of skynet for another world. Haha could you imagine?

The key word there is "philosopher."

Being a philosopher became irrelevant once the scientific method became a thing.

Just because you can assert something "logically" doesn't make it true. I remember a certain mathematician used this kind of logical to prove god. Of course he did it for the lulz and didn't actually prove that there's a god just to show that this kind of logic can be used to "prove" things that can't actually be proven through maths.

Traditionally philosophy was in the business of asking questions and discussing what could be. Scientific method is just that, a method or a tool. I don't think that science invalidates philosophy.

 

[tinytomlogan]

As with the Matrix once you become aware of the matrix all that happens is you get put into another one a sort of level 2.

The idea is fascinating. The true tell would be to look for "glitches" or "reboots"

Maybe the Myans worked it out and thats why they were 'got rid of'

 

[SeekaX]

i don't think we should start this discussion right on a theory but maybe define the question first and then work our way from there to the theories.

the question is the question of existence, what's our purpose (since you stated matrix)? to be honest that question will break even the smartest mind because our very existence makes no sense at all, or at least not in our logical system as i like to call it.

in our perception of logic we expect everything to have a cause, which contradicts itself because that implies that the very existence of anything has a cause which would end in infinity. that leads to the conclusion that there must be something else outside of our logical system that created our logical system, in the computer simulation theory that would be the programmer, in religion that would be god, atheism doesn't even have a theory about it. atheism really only switches one simple minded view with another, probably even a worse one.

i don't think any intelligent being will ever understand why we exist because whatever the explanation is, it won't fit in our logical system. just try to make yourself understand why 1+1=3, it's impossible.

the computer simulation theory is just a new version of religion, there is a god (programmer) who created our world (logical system), the difference being that it takes away the part of the creator being a judge of us intelligent beings.

this is very hard to put in posts, it's really a matter you need to discuss by talking because it has got huge philosophical potential.

/edit
before i get any butthurt atheist replies, i am not part of any religion. i love science but if anyone thinks that science will ever answer the question of existence that person should seriously reconsider because that is not going to happen. religion on the other hand pretends like they got an answer, but really they only got a plausible explanation for why this universe exists, religion has no answer for why god exists either.

tl;dr
neither religion or science will ever be able to explain why we exist, we aren't capable of ever understanding, i give up.

 

[Greenback]

maybe the sun went super nova and we are really in suspended animate in space, and this life is just a computer interpretation of our dreams while it searches for a new world

 

[ahimoth]

@SeekaX

"our very existence makes no sense at all, or at least not in our logical system as i like to call it"

You hit the nail on the head. Our brains as far as I know can simply not comprehend what it was like when the universe was as T-x. Where T is the big bang and x is the time leading up to it. A universe without, any of the constants we see today. it would be a different discussion if we had some way of seeing what it was like before the big bang.

Maybe the Myans worked it out and thats why they were 'got rid of'

True, but then why wouldn't all of humans have just been wiped off as each human civilization had the potential to discover the same thing. Wouldn't it have been better to start off with another species?

 

[remember300]

haha i saw somewhere that the human eye is 541Mp lumia is getting close lol
and single frame of 1080p is about 2.1Mp we have a way to go

And maybe the big bang was someone stubing his toe before starting the SIM ....

 

[Remmy]

haha i saw somewhere that the human eye is 541Mp

That's really interesting, I've been wondering for ages what the equivalent resolution an eye sees is. Do you remember where you read it? I'd like a looksie

 

[SeekaX]

That's really interesting, I've been wondering for ages what the equivalent resolution an eye sees is. Do you remember where you read it? I'd like a looksie

the eye doesn't work like a camera so saying that the eye sees in a certain resolution doesn't really work either.

 

[Conchubair]

maybe the big bang was someone stubing his toe before starting the SIM ....

Isnt the current theory that there never was a big bang, rather a gradual expansion? With possibly a gradual contraction before that?

 

[SeekaX]

Isnt the current theory that there never was a big bang, rather a gradual expansion? With possibly a gradual contraction before that?

that doesn't mean that the big bang never happened, it just gives it a different context. my guess would be that the universe is decelerating and therefore expanding, i don't think it will be contracting again though.

 

[Remmy]

the eye doesn't work like a camera so saying that the eye sees in a certain resolution doesn't really work either.

That's what I meant by equivalent. As in what resolution is required so that it is impossible for the average eye to distinguish between real life and the image. (Assuming the image has the correct colours and textures etc.)

 

[iBeInspire]

I've had this concept in my head for ages even without this research, and of course it's entirely possible

I utterly love the idea of some guy in year 999999 sitting behind a floating desk just watching all his 100 virtual universes playing out xD

 

[VerocityRequiem]

I think it is quite possible we do live in a "simulation" but that is such a simplified term of what we would be talking about, computing today as we know it in a 100, 1000, 100,000 years wouldn't be anything what we would recognize or consider computing and I wouldn't be surprised if we gain control of the laws of physics and are able to manipulate matter at a fundamental level within these time frames, so the idea of world's being created would not be "Digital" in the sense we word we consider it today (maybe virtual particles)
I've kind of made my life mission to understand the world around me with the same obsession as Astrophysicists do but I prefer to look at Ancient History and the Occult perspective of the world, but no matter how much you learn you always wonder how much of the full picture you truly understand.

I think one of the major things holding people back is firstly our limited vocabulary of trying to express such extreme ideas that you can bring associations to so you can define it, also the average persons experiences and perspective on reality are defined to very limited parameters and narratives we live by. We also have quite a lot of human "flaws" or notions in the way we decode reality for instance the sequence of time, which probably limit our ability quite a lot to comprehend the nature of the reality we live in.

All I know with certainty from what I've learnt in my short life time of 23 years is there are many many strange things about our reality and the world around us when looking at cumalitive evidence, a lot of things just don't add up, telling quite a different story than what the general textbook census would have us believe.

If there's anything I can add of value that may be of interest to you is that many of Aleister Crowley's teachings, The Religion of Thelema and the Qabalah all have something in common which is they give the impression that they believe the Universe is some sort of simulation.

I personally believe in the idea of Biocentrism and entropy an you might find that something interesting to look up

 

[SeekaX]

I wouldn't be surprised if we gain control of the laws of physics

that is pretty unlikely, to change physics we would need to be able to understand the fundamental rules they follow, which would exceed our capabilities because they aren't in our observable realm.
that's like a program being able to change the rules the compiler works by.

I personally believe in the idea of Biocentrism and entropy an you might find that something interesting to look up

didn't go into too much detail with this one but it seems to be like the "what came first? the egg or the chicken" paradox. it needs a conscious being to set the rules but it needs physics to offer a space for the conscious being to exist.
you can't start with either one, you need to connect them.

 

[VerocityRequiem]

Well I think the Idea of the Egg and the Chicken is an illusion if we've greatly misunderstood the notion of time. Also this is just grandly speculating but who's to say in the future we won't be able to figure out how to manipulate the "source code" which all the laws are based on, possibly by gaining control through externalising ourselves from the construct....