How to test if we’re living in a computer simulation

#1
C C Offline
https://theconversation.com/how-to-test-...ion-194929

EXCERPTS (Melvin M. Vopson): Physicists have long struggled to explain why the universe started out with conditions suitable for life to evolve. [...] A common answer is that we live in an infinite multiverse of universes, so we shouldn’t be surprised that at least one universe has turned out as ours. But another is that our universe is a computer simulation, with someone (perhaps an advanced alien species) fine-tuning the conditions.

The latter option is supported by a branch of science called information physics, which suggests that space-time and matter are not fundamental phenomena. Instead, the physical reality is fundamentally made up of bits of information, from which our experience of space-time emerges...

This leads to the extraordinary possibility that our entire universe might in fact be a computer simulation. The idea is not that new...

[...] There is some evidence suggesting that our physical reality could be a simulated virtual reality rather than an objective world that exists independently of the observer.

Any virtual reality world will be based on information processing. That means everything is ultimately digitised or pixelated down to a minimum size that cannot be subdivided further: bits. This appears to mimic our reality according to the theory of quantum mechanics, which rules the world of atoms and particles. It states there is a smallest, discrete unit of energy, length and time. Similarly, elementary particles, which make up all the visible matter in the universe, are the smallest units of matter. To put it simply, our world is pixelated.

The laws of physics that govern everything in the universe also resemble computer code lines that a simulation would follow in the execution of the program. Moreover, mathematical equations, numbers and geometric patterns are present everywhere – the world appears to be entirely mathematical.

Another curiosity in physics supporting the simulation hypothesis is the maximum speed limit in our universe, which is the speed of light. In a virtual reality, this limit would correspond to the speed limit of the processor, or the processing power limit. We know that an overloaded processor slows down computer processing in a simulation. Similarly, Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity shows that time slows in the vicinity of a black hole.

Perhaps the most supportive evidence of the simulation hypothesis comes from quantum mechanics. This suggest nature isn’t “real”: particles in determined states, such as specific locations, don’t seem to exist unless you actually observe or measure them. Instead, they are in a mix of different states simultaneously. Similarly, virtual reality needs an observer or programmer for things to happen.

Quantum “entanglement” also allows two particles to be spookily connected so that if you manipulate one, you automatically and immediately also manipulate the other, no matter how far apart they are – with the effect being seemingly faster than the speed of light, which should be impossible.

This could, however, also be explained by the fact that within a virtual reality code, all “locations” (points) should be roughly equally far from a central processor. So while we may think two particles are millions of light years apart, they wouldn’t be if they were created in a simulation.

Assuming that the universe is indeed a simulation, then what sort of experiments could we deploy from within the simulation to prove this? (MORE - missing details)
Reply
#2
Kornee Offline
Quote:
"A common answer is that we live in an infinite multiverse of universes, so we shouldn’t be surprised that at least one universe has turned out as ours."

As covered elsewhere, 'infinite multiverse' as per 'eternal inflation' scheme, as a branching tree notion, runs up against that there must have been an original trunk (this 'tree' had no roots).
So an absolute, extremely fined-tuned beginning has to be dealt with.

Quote:
"...But another is that our universe is a computer simulation, with someone (perhaps an advanced alien species) fine-tuning the conditions...."

Which only invites the recursive question 'Where did the fine-tuning allowing existence of the posited 'real' alien species simulators come from?'

Quote:
"...The latter option is supported by a branch of science called information physics, which suggests that space-time and matter are not fundamental phenomena. Instead, the physical reality is fundamentally made up of bits of information, from which our experience of space-time emerges."

Another vacuous notion. What is the 'fundamental information' made of? Information 'all by itself'? Software is nothing without hardware to operate on.
There can be no such thing as pure information. Stuff, its arrangement and interactions, and the rules that govern such are necessarily a package deal ab initio.
Reply
#3
Zinjanthropos Offline
Thought for sure I’d see this in that article :

From conversation.com

Quote: Scientists believe that in the very hot and dense state shortly after the Big Bang, there must have been processes that gave preference to matter over antimatter. This created a small surplus of matter, and as the universe cooled, all the antimatter was destroyed, or annihilated, by an equal amount of matter, leaving a tiny surplus of matter. And it is this surplus that makes up everything we see in the universe today.

Exactly what processes caused the surplus is unclear, and physicists have been on the lookout for decades.

I wouldn’t know the first thing about creating a pixelated simulation but when creating one, can you install the set of parameters to your liking? IOW, be a simulation of something that could or might never happen, or be somewhat like a cartoon(make believe). Doesn’t necessarily have to simulate what/will/should happen or have to follow known laws of physics?

Is the mere fact that humans can create simulations put the thought in our heads that if we can do it on a small scale then what’s to stop a higher power on a larger scale? Are we not at the stage of thinking simulations within simulations, and how far down the road do we go with that? Infinity?
Reply
#4
Kornee Offline
Just like with the notional multiverse having to have a finite beginning, so with any notion of 'Russian dolls' simulations regression.
At some base level it HAS to 'get real'. Simplest option - we are not in a simulation.

There is a pro-simulation school of thought that does have some appeal. Supernatural phenomena, including UFO visitations, might 'naturally' fit with playfulness of The Master Programmer(s):
https://www.scientificexploration.org/fo...paranormal
Reply
#5
Zinjanthropos Offline
(Nov 26, 2022 01:06 PM)Kornee Wrote: Just like with the notional multiverse having to have a finite beginning, so with any notion of 'Russian dolls' simulations regression.
At some base level it HAS to 'get real'. Simplest option - we are not in a simulation.

There is a pro-simulation school of thought that does have some appeal. Supernatural phenomena, including UFO visitations, might 'naturally' fit with playfulness of The Master Programmer(s):
https://www.scientificexploration.org/fo...paranormal

Musing…..

Didn’t you know Korn? Those UFOs are actually the machinery used to create the simulation. We can’t get near, can’t communicate, can’t emulate but we can see them. They’re all over the place. Our simulator uses them to create and maintain our universe or at least what we observe. Unfortunately our simulator can’t seem to hide them and so they leave us to ponder. Wherever we go, the moon, Mars or anywhere there’s machinery that keeps us in the moment. The UFOs are the only things that are real in all we observe. Only they defy our laws of physics.

Why? Haven’t a clue. Maybe if I really believe Sasquatch is in my backyard then it’ll suddenly appear.

Another thing you might not know is that the simulator exists on the other side of the light speed barrier. It can observe us frame by frame or to it’s liking. But it can’t watch us all day long so we’re on our own between periodic checking in times. Big Grin
Reply
#6
Kornee Offline
(Nov 26, 2022 01:41 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: Musing…..

Didn’t you know Korn? Those UFOs are actually the machinery used to create the simulation. We can’t get near, can’t communicate, can’t emulate but we can see them. They’re all over the place. Our simulator uses them to create and maintain our universe or at least what we observe. Unfortunately our simulator can’t seem to hide them and so they leave us to ponder. Wherever we go, the moon, Mars or anywhere there’s machinery that keeps us in the moment. The UFOs are the only things that are real in all we observe. Only they defy our laws of physics.

Why? Haven’t a clue. Maybe if I really believe Sasquatch is in my backyard then it’ll suddenly appear.

Another thing you might not know is that the simulator exists on the other side of the light speed barrier. It can observe us frame by frame or to it’s liking. But it can’t watch us all day long so we’re on our own between periodic checking in times. Big Grin
Radical thinking there Zinja. If the UFOs allow it, you might get to write up a thesis. But only if 'they' like to be revealed!

Of course you might not get the time. Time flies. Don't get that saying wrong. Nothing to do with 'time passing too quick'.
You do know that if we were to Mortein all the flies in the world, time would come to a screeching halt? Be thankful for time flies.

Now there's a mix and match thought - UFOs and time flies battling it out for reality control. Awesome prospect! Cool
Reply
#7
stryder Offline
Some of the problem is the perception of the semanitics.

For instance parallel universes and "multiverses" usually implies a number of subsiquent universes of differing scenarios all playing out at the same time, implying they are all unique and seperate. However that reasoning is fine for Science Fiction however it's likely not how it's meant in regards to our universe.

What is more likely is is probably more string theory.

Imagine creating a long string out of subiquent strings of all the same length (parallels) and then creating a ball out of the string (Multiverse). What you are left with is a single "Universal" ball, where all those parallels overlap and entwine (combine) to create our single observable reality. While people might enjoy the rationality from Scifi that it would be great to create alternatives, it would be likely cause longterm problems as tugging on a thread could cause an entire unravelling of the perception of a singular universe as reality (as well as other side effects not written on any label).

As for the different "Where/When did the universe come from?" the answer is "somewhere in the middle" (not implied to the ball of string mentioned above).
Reply
Reply
#9
confused2 Offline
Left to myself I'd look at random numbers. They're hard to calculate because however you did it would leave a signature in the distribution. But.. quantum 'stuff' really is (supposed to be) random so unless they're using quantum stuff to simulate quantum stuff I think we should be able to can catch them out. But why would they use quantum stuff to simulate quantum stuff? Much more economical to miss out the simulation step and give us the real thing to play with. Surely more fun to set up a few constants like the speed of light, the maximum size of rats .. light the fuse and see what happens. Possibly a competitive thing to see who can make the biggest universe, fastest, slowest, biggest rats and so on.
Reply
#10
Zinjanthropos Offline
Maybe once sophisticated quantum computers are developed we can ask one what it’s like to be turned off, turned on or turned off then on. Could it tell us whether or not it is a simulation?

Quantum computers should be able to perform multiple simulations, would it eventually have a eureka moment?
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Coevolution of particle physics & computing + Female pioneer of computer simulation C C 0 272 Oct 1, 2021 03:43 PM
Last Post: C C
  Teaching AI to see depth in photographs & paintings + Wildfire simulation heats up C C 0 275 Aug 12, 2021 12:51 AM
Last Post: C C
  Universe Is Not a Simulation, but We Can Now Simulate It C C 0 405 Jun 18, 2018 03:08 AM
Last Post: C C
  Researchers claim we are NOT living in a simulation C C 1 747 Oct 3, 2017 05:26 PM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos
  Living inside a massive computer program + Consciousness is an inference process C C 3 1,012 May 28, 2017 04:21 PM
Last Post: C C
  Round 2 - 'Elon Musk Is Wrong: We Aren't Living in a Simulation' C C 2 1,167 Jun 30, 2016 04:53 AM
Last Post: C C
  Improved simulation of neurons elte 1 883 Mar 6, 2016 06:44 PM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)