Jul 1, 2023 02:17 AM
https://youtu.be/hmVOV7xvl58
INTRO: The idea that our reality is a simulation is not as far-fetched as you may think. Many philosophers, scientists and tech-billionaires are seriously considering not just the possibility but the high probability that our civilization may be a program being run by another, more advanced alien civilization.
VIDEO EXCERPTS (Matt O'Dowd): As our video games become more and more lifelike, it's becoming clear that at some point, perhaps soon, our simulations will be indistinguishable from reality.
If that's true, how do we know it didn't already happen? Could we be in a simulation now?
Before I get into details, I want to share with you a conversation I recently had about this idea with my colleague at the Hayden Planetarium in New York City. In fact, with its director Neil deGrasse Tyson, along with comedian Eugene Mirman, as part of Neil's "StarTalk" radio show.
[...] But the numbers game, OK? So the idea that if you need to produce one universe capable of producing universe simulations. And that's all you need.
And if that universe produces billions of universe simulations, then any universe that you happen to find yourself in-- is more likely to be one of them-- Than the one universe that started it all.
[...] It can't simulate the whole universe, because to simulate a universe perfectly, you need a computer the size of a universe.
[...] under certain assumptions, virtual minds should vastly outnumber real minds in our universe. If so, shouldn't we be virtual minds? Let's dive deeper into this rabbit hole and decide if this actually makes sense.
But before we do so, we should be clear about what type of simulation we're talking about here. Let's avoid the idea that the entire universe is simulated, right down to every atom, electron, or vibrating quantum field.
[...] For science-- he [Bostrum] proposes that an advanced civilization may want to run simulations of its own history to study the behavior of the types of minds that lived that history. He calls these ancestor simulations. Let's look at the numbers.
[...] It's been estimated that the entire operation of a single brain could be simulated with somewhere between 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion binary operations for every second of time that the brain experiences.
[...] A full ancestor simulation would simulate all humans that ever lived, going back, say, 50,000 years. It's estimated that around 100 billion people have lived and died.
An average 30 year lifespan gives each of them a billion seconds.And each of those seconds requires 10 to the power of 14 to 10 to the power of 17 operations. Multiply those numbers together, and you get 10 to the 34 to 10 to the 37 binary operations to simulate all of human history. [...] You can mess with any of those numbers and still remain within those few factors of 10.
[...] So how long would that take to compute for a super advanced civilization? Well, Bostrom uses Robert Bradbury's estimate-- that a computer the size of a large planet, a so-called Jupiter brain, would be capable of performing 10 to the power of 42 operations per second.
In other words, it will be capable of simulating the entire mental lives of all humans in history a million times over every single second.
Just one such computer would generate an insanely large number of lifelong mental experiences that are indistinguishable from the type of mental experience that you and I are having right now.
That's true, even if you scale back, say, to a computer the size of the moon, or if you assume several more orders of magnitude in the computing power needed to run the simulation.
Bostrom claims the following, which he calls the simulation argument. If ancestor simulations are something that even some civilizations end up creating-- so if they advance far enough, and decide it's a good idea-- then most of the self-aware minds that ever come into existence will be simulated ones.
[...] Copernican reasoning with a dash of the anthropic principle tells us that we should be the most typical, the most common type of observer, that could possibly be having our current experience.
So if the virtual minds of an ancestor simulation are vastly more common than the minds of the original living creatures that made the simulation, and if the simulated experience is completely consistent with our own experience, then it's more likely that we are those more typical observers.
I should note that Bostrom is on record as placing the odds at less than 50% that we're a simulation. Why? Because he thinks it just as likely that either all civilizations die out before being able to make vast scale ancestor simulations, or essentially no super advanced civilizations choose to make them.
[...] The hypothesis is unfalsifiable. Bostrom himself points out that, upon being found out by one of its resident minds, the simulation can be instantly edited or rewound.
In fact, this editability is a necessity. These simulations can only cover a tiny fraction of the universe. So they are prone to inconsistencies.
It's far more computationally economical to edit out the discovery of these inconsistencies than it is to simulate enough of the universe so that inconsistencies don't happen...
INTRO: The idea that our reality is a simulation is not as far-fetched as you may think. Many philosophers, scientists and tech-billionaires are seriously considering not just the possibility but the high probability that our civilization may be a program being run by another, more advanced alien civilization.
VIDEO EXCERPTS (Matt O'Dowd): As our video games become more and more lifelike, it's becoming clear that at some point, perhaps soon, our simulations will be indistinguishable from reality.
If that's true, how do we know it didn't already happen? Could we be in a simulation now?
Before I get into details, I want to share with you a conversation I recently had about this idea with my colleague at the Hayden Planetarium in New York City. In fact, with its director Neil deGrasse Tyson, along with comedian Eugene Mirman, as part of Neil's "StarTalk" radio show.
[...] But the numbers game, OK? So the idea that if you need to produce one universe capable of producing universe simulations. And that's all you need.
And if that universe produces billions of universe simulations, then any universe that you happen to find yourself in-- is more likely to be one of them-- Than the one universe that started it all.
[...] It can't simulate the whole universe, because to simulate a universe perfectly, you need a computer the size of a universe.
[...] under certain assumptions, virtual minds should vastly outnumber real minds in our universe. If so, shouldn't we be virtual minds? Let's dive deeper into this rabbit hole and decide if this actually makes sense.
But before we do so, we should be clear about what type of simulation we're talking about here. Let's avoid the idea that the entire universe is simulated, right down to every atom, electron, or vibrating quantum field.
[...] For science-- he [Bostrum] proposes that an advanced civilization may want to run simulations of its own history to study the behavior of the types of minds that lived that history. He calls these ancestor simulations. Let's look at the numbers.
[...] It's been estimated that the entire operation of a single brain could be simulated with somewhere between 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion binary operations for every second of time that the brain experiences.
[...] A full ancestor simulation would simulate all humans that ever lived, going back, say, 50,000 years. It's estimated that around 100 billion people have lived and died.
An average 30 year lifespan gives each of them a billion seconds.And each of those seconds requires 10 to the power of 14 to 10 to the power of 17 operations. Multiply those numbers together, and you get 10 to the 34 to 10 to the 37 binary operations to simulate all of human history. [...] You can mess with any of those numbers and still remain within those few factors of 10.
[...] So how long would that take to compute for a super advanced civilization? Well, Bostrom uses Robert Bradbury's estimate-- that a computer the size of a large planet, a so-called Jupiter brain, would be capable of performing 10 to the power of 42 operations per second.
In other words, it will be capable of simulating the entire mental lives of all humans in history a million times over every single second.
Just one such computer would generate an insanely large number of lifelong mental experiences that are indistinguishable from the type of mental experience that you and I are having right now.
That's true, even if you scale back, say, to a computer the size of the moon, or if you assume several more orders of magnitude in the computing power needed to run the simulation.
Bostrom claims the following, which he calls the simulation argument. If ancestor simulations are something that even some civilizations end up creating-- so if they advance far enough, and decide it's a good idea-- then most of the self-aware minds that ever come into existence will be simulated ones.
[...] Copernican reasoning with a dash of the anthropic principle tells us that we should be the most typical, the most common type of observer, that could possibly be having our current experience.
So if the virtual minds of an ancestor simulation are vastly more common than the minds of the original living creatures that made the simulation, and if the simulated experience is completely consistent with our own experience, then it's more likely that we are those more typical observers.
I should note that Bostrom is on record as placing the odds at less than 50% that we're a simulation. Why? Because he thinks it just as likely that either all civilizations die out before being able to make vast scale ancestor simulations, or essentially no super advanced civilizations choose to make them.
[...] The hypothesis is unfalsifiable. Bostrom himself points out that, upon being found out by one of its resident minds, the simulation can be instantly edited or rewound.
In fact, this editability is a necessity. These simulations can only cover a tiny fraction of the universe. So they are prone to inconsistencies.
It's far more computationally economical to edit out the discovery of these inconsistencies than it is to simulate enough of the universe so that inconsistencies don't happen...
