[Fluffy]

Today I'd like to share with you a thought experiment I devised while reading about the Simulation Hypothesis. In a nutshell, are we living in the Matrix? This one might be hard to follow, so make sure you can take it slowly and absorb everything.

The Theory of Everything
Advancements in physics over the last few centuries has given us a good understanding of matter, and how it interacts to form the reality we perceive. Atoms and electrons (protons and neutrons are not so important to this discussion) are the first fundamental particles that we learn about, and for the purpose of this thought experiment, is as far down the rabbit hole as we need to go. (Those interested in quarks, gluons, and quantum mechanics, need not apply).

Our reality is built with atoms, combining in myriad ways, all the way up to the macro scale. Rocks, computers, sandwiches, cats, dogs, and even you, are all built from atoms. Our biological sensors we use to perceive this world is also built from atoms, and their very function governed by those same atoms and electrons.

For this mental exercise, suppose we have in our hands the holy grail of physics, the Theory of Everything, such that we can perfectly describe all particles in existence, and determine their interactions with mathematics alone. The results of such equations would be indistinguishable from observations made of reality.

3 simple simulations
Scenario 1
If we write down, on a piece of paper, the mathematical equations that describe the motion and interactions of a single atom, for 1 second, then we have created an atom for that slice of time. It exists only for 1 second, and no more.

Scenario 2
Let us take our single atom from Scenario 1, and extend the time of our simulation from the beginning of the observable universe (~14 billion years ago) to the known end of the universe (a helluva long long long time). You're going to need a lot of paper for this one.

Scenario 3
Let us take scenario 2, and create 100 atoms, all mutually exclusive from each other. We can confine the space to a the size of a sugar shaker, such that they can have meaningful interactions over the billions and billions of years of the life of the universe. Accounting is definitely going to flip their lids on this year's paper budget.

If we create each of these 3 scenarios in real life, and subsequently make observations on what happens, they would perfectly match the predictions made by our mathematical representation. We can simulate the universe on a piece of paper, if we're so inclined.

The BFS (Big F***ing Simulation)
Imagine unlimited computing power. This isn't so far-fetched, considering the pace of growth of our computing capacity. Or, if you can't conceive that we'll reach it before we as a species will kill ourselves, consider a hypothetical alien race who does have this technology. If you still can't agree, then get off my lawn you damned hipster!!

Now imagine that some scientists of this alien race have just discovered the Theory of Everything, and they want to test it by simulating the universe on their shiny unlimited-processing-power computer that can also run Crysis. It's also not very far-fetched, considering our scientists have already done so on a weak-by-comparison computer.

Some housekeeping assumptions:
1) The computing power available to the scientists allow them to run their simulation at a resolution at least as small as the Planck Length (most likely even smaller).
2) Let's stop there as far as technicalities go, and assume we get a nice, warm universe pop up in our simulation.

The story of the universe
Starting their simulation, they reproduce the big bang, the first galaxies, right through to the end of the universe. It takes only a few moments from start to end. Feeling proud of themselves, they celebrate with a good ol' fashioned alien booze fest. They archive all their work, and go home for the day. They'll come back tomorrow to analyze the results.

One of the assistants is an avid gamer, and stayed back to finish off her thesis. In reality she was curious whether any life emerged spontaneously, like a souped-up crazy version of The Sims. There was way too much data to sift through manually, so she wrote a script that would search on her behalf. To her delight, she finds the universe teeming with life, and begins exploring the evolution of life wherever she could find them.

She zips across the universe, jumping from one galaxy to another, honing in on planets that harboured life. Rewinding time, fast-forwarding time, freezing time, slowing down time. She did all these at her leisure to sate her curiosity of the beings she found. Amongst them, she finds a planet the inhabitants call Earth. A nice-looking planet, but nothing I haven't seen, she thinks to herself before moving on.

Soon, she gets bored. This turned out more boring than I thought it would be, she thinks to herself. She closes the simulation and makes sure to remove all traces of her access, and performs one final check to ensure no data was modified. Then she turns out the lights and heads home.

-------------------------------------------------------

One of the main things you need to accept is that it is perfectly reasonable for a whole universe to exist within a simulation. The question of whether our reality is a simulation or not cannot be answered with our technology today. If the simulation is accurate enough, the resolution fine enough, we actually can never know for sure. So don't get hung up on this point.

Rather, think beyond this question, and consider the implications for religion, philosophy, existence, purpose etc etc etc.

Form your own questions and your own answers. I'd love to see if anyone could draw the same conclusions I did, and even more profound ones that I haven't even considered!!

[MasterM]

If we can never really know for sure, then what's really the point? It's sort of like the existence of God right? We can never really know for sure, but that hasn't stopped people from supporting either side of the argument. Philosophical thoughts would just have a condition before hand, like "assuming we aren't living in a simulation, then ...".

More pragmatically, I don't think it would affect very much. If you went on tv today and told the whole world "hey, you can't prove we aren't living in a computer simulation", I suspect most people would either laugh or think about it for a bit, realize you were right, and then get on with their daily routine.

[RaVeN]

This theory always reminds me of this youtube video from a couple years ago:
WARNING: Thar be curse words ahead!! - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KcPNiworbo

He gets a couple things wrong, for one the universe being a hologram does not outright support the simulation theory, they are two separate theories.

For example, blackholes within our own universe act like hologram's within themselves - projecting what is inside the blackhole to its surface - which acts like a 2D surface. We didn't program that, so this is a "natural" forming hologram.
Evidence so far shows that our universe acts in the same way, but it doesn't mean it's a simulation. So these two theories are not mutually exclusive.

-Anyway back on track-
Using basic logic, reason, and mathematics/statistics - then yes, chances are we are in a simulation.
This rings even more true based on the simple fact we, ourselves, are getting very close to making simulations like our own universe:
E.G. - this game:
http://www.no-mans-sky.com/

Now, of course, this is clearly a very basic model of our own galaxy - it's nothing compared to the original (ours).
But video games and simulations are only ~50 years old.
And within those first 50 years we are already working on basic models to recreate our own simulation??
Do you realize how crazy that is?

What kind of games/simulations will we have in 100/1,000/10,000 years?

We, as in humans, will create trillions of trillions of simulations of universes, and each one will possess A.I. (not artificial intelligence, but actual intelligence.) And many of them will question if they are in a simulation or not too.

This is inevitable.
Unless we all die first.

Or if someone pulls the plug.

[Frog]

o_o

[Mnsomc]

Not sure why being in a simulation will make our lives much different. In simulation or not, I wouldn't be surprised of existence of bigger/different universe than ours. In simulation or not, there is a chance that a bigger force (e.g., god(s), aliens, lab assistant to those aliens, Qui Gon, etc.) will alter the very way we live our lives. The bottom line is, I think, therefore I exist.

[Fluffy]

I just want to input a little into the conversation, to steer it a little in a direction I think is worth discussing.

So let's assume we all accept that our reality might be a simulation. The next question is: Does it matter?

I like your answer so far Mnsomc that it doesn't matter. I'd love you to go back and think about it more deeply. Can you relate it back to the implications for how we perceive and live our lives as an individual, or as a species?

It would also be amazing if someone could present the opposite viewpoint. If it does matter, why?

[Frog]

Though I do disagree with this theory, I will go along with it just because I am one bored poop head.

So, why would we be in a simulation? Well, I think that it'd be, like all simulators, to test us for something. Though I do not know ( this is for my case ) what sitting down and playing video games could benefit anyone. I'd assume it could be for jobs, or something. Idk, I'm not the brightest toy in the toy box. But, maybe this is like Maze Runner ( fantastic book/movie ), where really, while we are in this place of simulation, the outside world is in chaos and we have to be tested to see if we survive. I really do not know as I have a TOTALLY different perspective from this. Anyway that's my own 2 cents about this whole thing.

[Mnsomc]

Here's the first line of the link that Fluffy provided:

The simulation hypothesis contends that reality is in fact a simulation (most likely a computer simulation), of which we, the simulants, are totally unaware.

Being unaware is the key. As soon as I find out what happens after life, whether we're in a simulated universe, whether there exists a god(s), it will alter the course of my decision. In that sense, being in a simulation matters, because eventually I might find out and change my behavior accordingly.

But I will never find out. I will never know about the afterlife or whether I'm in a simulation unless my job here ends. In essence, my assumption is in line of being agnostic. When faced with uncertainty, people weigh different possibilities by probabilities associated with them. But what if we don't even know about the probabilities themselves? Adding another possibility doesn't do much then. It is amusing to think what I would actually do if I'm in a simulation, but given I will never know about it, it won't change things much.

[Samantha Crow]

[RaVeN]

My thoughts are that it doesn't matter...yet.
If we do live in a simulation then at some point we (as in humans) will have to contend with the limits of this simulation.
But for now we are still trying to nail down that 'living' part of life which is currently, within this simulation, more pressing for us to tackle as a species.

Probably around the time we finish constructing our first Dyson Sphere is when living in a simulation would begin to become quite relevant.

With regards to me as a person, again I would say it is not relevant.
Within my life time we will not know if this is a simulation or not, therefore I chuck this right up there with other unknowns that are outside of my lifespan's reach - E.G. God, the multiverse, ...gravity.

Fun to think about though

[John]

Thought I would just drop by and answer the question that's on everyone's mind.

Yes, we are most definitely living within a simulation within a simulation within a simulation. I think the 3 levels is obviously what has everyone confused. Hopefully the next simulated update will clear the logic discrepancies so it all becomes clear that you all are not living in a simulation.

[Jack Skywalker]

@John If it's a simulation able to make people with actual intelligence (not artificial intelligence), then it is, indeed, possible.

[Fluffy]

Amazing insights and opinions guys!! Love the Inception reference too, awesome movie. I'm going to add some of my own thoughts here. Hope you guys can bear with me.

Like Raven's question here http://knights-reborn.org/forum/viewtop ... 29&t=12445, much of the real lessons become apparent once we can see past the red herring: Am I living in the real world or a simulation?

As Mnsomc and Raven articulated very well, it really doesn't matter. The only real dangers you face from living in a simulation are:
1) The simulation will be turned off in the immediate future, thus killing everyone soon.
2) The simulation can be controlled arbitrarily by the creators, leading to mass chaos, thus killing everyone soon.

Seeing as the universe has existed for nearly 14 billion years, without any apparent arbitrary tampering (discounting the seemingly arbitrary definition of the cosmological constant) since its creation to this very day, it is unlikely anything of the sort will happen in the next few billion years. As a matter of fact, it is likely that the simulation has already completed, and we are just experiencing the evolution of the simulation at our own pace, as defined by the laws of physics within the simulation. If it's hard to wrap your head around, imagine accelerating your ZSNES emulator on your own PC.

So!! Now we've established there's no immediate danger whether we're living in cyberspace or meatspace, the real fun begins!! We can now ask any kind of question we like, and then compare the implications to living in the real world vs in a simulation. My favourite questions are ones that give relevant answers to the problems we face today.

The cosmic, divine destiny
Science still can't answer the question of whether God exists in the real world. But in our simulation, we can say for sure that God does not. Well, God would be the system administrator on duty at the time. But for this mental exercise, we go with the notion that God does not exist.

Then, what are the implications for us living in the simulation? For starters, the fact that we are here today, reading these words written by some stranger halfway across the world, is just one, gigantic, happy accident. We are here because of the confluence of an infinite number of uncontrolled interactions of the universe. There is no ultimate, divine destiny for us. We are as meaningless as the maggots born in the rotting corpse of an animal.

That's the depressing version, and I'm glad I didn't know this 20 years ago, because I was one confused kid. As sentient and emotional creatures, we can find meaning in our own existence. That is reason enough to carry on. I think, therefore I am. There is absolutely no need for anyone to seek permission to continue existing. Everyone deserves life, that's it.

In such a universe, religion still has its place. It should teach individuals how to be the best they can. To share and be unselfish, to build a harmonious world to co-exist with everyone else. Why? Because everyone is born equally, no one was selected by a divine entity to stand above anyone else. If we are all equals, we should treat everyone else the same way we wish to be treated.

The human race and planet Earth
In the real world, looking up from its surface, it's hard to fathom just how big Earth is. But that's the wrong way to look at it. If we could hold the universe-simulation in our hand and see just how mind bogglingly huge the universe is, and how minuscule and fragile our existence really is, we as a species could work towards better preserving ourselves. This isn't just some idealistic hippie flag-waving, either. If we look back in our history, the world has consistently become a better place with a better understanding of our environment. There's no reason for this to be different either. Knowledge is not the end-game, it simply becomes a tool for us to better ourselves.

Should robots have rights?
This is the fun question, and there's no reason to take it seriously today, as strong AI (artificial sentience) is still 1-4 decades out.

Anyways, as we've discussed, life in the simulation arose naturally through a genetic algorithm. The spontaneous recombination of amino acids etc etc etc. The takeaway is that life arose spontaneously through no intervention by a sentient being.

Strong AI will probably develop through the same path. Given basic instructions to evolve its internal programming (through neural networks or genetic algorithms), it will likely one day develop awareness in the same way humans did.

Now, it seems that the life evolved from the evolved from the primordial soup through atomic interactions governed by physics, whereas AI will evolve from hardware/software built by another sentient being. Thus they cannot be considered the same. However, is setting up the simulation from 14 billion years ago not the same thing as divine intervention? Does that make us an artificial intelligence as well? Should robots then have 'human' rights?

Thoughts and opinions?