Back in 1999, many of us were swept off our feet by a movie called, The Matrix, which suggested the world we thought we lived in was nothing more than an elaborate computer simulation. For most of us it was a preposterous idea, but it made for a great movie. However, in recent years, more and more men of science are giving the idea some consideration.
Professor Nick Bostrom, a member of the Department of Philosophy at Oxford University, is a strong believer in this theory. And why shouldn’t he be? After all, he is a philosopher, which allows him to consider ideas the rest of us would consider to be insane. But let us not forget, Plato and Socrates were philosophers too. As such, science can spawn from thought just as easily as it can from dedicated research.
So, is life nothing more than a computerized simulation? If so, are we being led by the nose or do we exert free will? In a sense, that’s the purpose of this three-part series, to find that one tangible piece that might lead us all back to reality.
The Topic That Almost Never Was
As you might already know, we aren’t ones to shrink from controversial topics. And yet, this one fired up many arguments among our staff and made us wonder if this was a topic that was best left alone. It’s a theory none of us want to hear, and yet, that in itself is the foundation block that keeps us from throwing this preposterous ides in the trashcan, labeling it as the rubbish our minds tell us it really is.
Sitting behind your keyboard, you have the comfort of leaving this discussion at any time. However, you might want to consider following us along for a bit, all the while imposing your doubts as we did. We want you to be a skeptic, as what we are about to share, if true, is something we shouldn’t be easily given to accept.
And so, we will begin our journey down a path that, perhaps, we should never have ventured. But we are explorers by nature, and explorers must often go to strange and exotic lands.
It All Starts With A Strong Foundation
We should all know by now that simulations are nothing more than replicated models of the real world. And as computers grow more powerful, the simulations become more realistic. Already, we possess the technology to process data at a speed matching that of the human mind, and that processing power doubles every year. This allows for more realistic simulations that help us better understand – and enjoy – the realities we are modeling.
So, is life a simulation? The mind immediately shouts out no, but could this be a preconditioned response?
One of the most popular simulations is a game known as The Sims. For the few not familiar with this game, it allows a player to become a deity, as they build a world and populate it with interesting characters. The simulation is then set in motion and the deity offers disturbances – both subtle and catastrophic – to see how the simulated characters respond.
What would happen if one day all of the characters stopped what they were doing and stared back at the screen? What if they ceased to believe in the simulation? Well, the world would immediately stop, as all the participants refused to play any further. However, the rules of the world would still continue to function, which could bring horrible results upon the players.
How so? If a character in this world ceased to believe in trains and stood before one as it barreled down the tracks, that character would soon cease to exist. And if all characters in this world were given to such madness, cascading suicides would devolve society to the point where all of the characters terminated their existence. This, in effect, would end the simulation.
The simulation can only continue, so long as all of the characters continue to believe the world they live in is real.
Is Life Nothing More Than An Equation
Everything around us seems to work by way of a mathematical formula. Gravity is measured by a formula. Kinetic energy is measured by a formula. The speed of light is measured by a formula. And for most intents and purposes, these formulas work everywhere. Why is this so? If life is so full of chaos, then why should the fundamental laws be so rigidly designed?
The speed of light is a perfect example. Light has a maximum velocity, and nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. In a chaotic world, light could possibly be the fastest moving object, but it would move at random velocities. And yet, unless it passes through another object, it doesn’t.
Gravity is another mystery. We understand its effects so well that we were able to use it to send Voyager I and Voyager II on a pinball journey through our outer solar system. How could we be so exact? Shouldn’t chaos have made such a journey impossible?
And yet, what do we really know about light and gravity? Oh, we seem to understand the rules by which they operate, but do we really understand what it is that makes them work? Will we ever know enough to change the laws of physics? Perhaps not, as they would then stop being laws, and that in itself should be enough to make us wonder if life is a simulation. After all, we already stated that the simulation would cease to work if we formed disbelief.
Of The Very Large And The Very Small
Why is it that the same physics that works for everything larger than an atom, changes when we look at the subatomic world? Are we seeing the substrata upon which we walk? If so, then it makes sense we would not be able to manipulate this layer, as it would tear apart the very fabric upon which we exist.
To perceive how this would work, let’s go back to our simulation. For simplicity, we will have a lumberjack chopping wood. Now, so long as the lumberjack follows his programming and chops the wood the simulation continues. However, what if he turns his ax to the ground and starts chopping away at the dirt?
It’s not a response we planned for, but it does nothing to end the simulation. In fact, so long as he doesn’t turn the ax on himself he can continue to experiment with the ax, and we might enjoy watching the endless possibilities. This would be an argument for free will, which we will get into later. For now, we enjoy watching our character as he chops at everything in sight. However, something is about to go wrong.
One day, our lumberjack discovers a hole in the programming that allows him to chop at the code itself. Each strike of the ax disturbs the virtual world, threatening to destroy what we have created. Of course, we could easily prevent this scenario by locking the code so it can’t be changed. In doing so, we insure the simulation can never be ended accidentally by one of its players. However, the lumberjack will still notice that striking the ax at the code will be a far different experience than striking it at a tree.
The argument being made here is that the subatomic particles might exist at the coding layer, and while we can discover the existence of such particles, we should not be able to do anything to destroy them. And therein lies the Law of Conservation of Energy, which states that energy in a closed system cannot be created nor destroyed, but it can be transferred from one form to another; and the Law of Conservation of Mass, which states basically the same thing for mass; and the Law Of Conservation of Matter states the same for all matter. All of these laws seem to say that we can’t mess with the matrix around us, but we are free to do as we want with anything else.
Do We Truly Exist
No one wants to accept the simulation theory as we all fear what it means to our existence – it was never real. But does being a part of a simulation make us any less real? For that matter, does it deny us our own free will?
Well, here’s some good news. We are very real, and we definitely possess free will. However, that does nothing to dispel the fact that we might be unknowing participants in someone else’s game. Allow us to explain.
When we create programs to simulate our world we want to make them as real as possible. As such, we set the rules, drop in a few characters, and let them behave as they will. The less we control the characters, the more realistic the simulation becomes. This is why free will must exist for the simulation to appear real to the characters. As for our own reality, in the confines of our program we believe we exist and interact as if this were so. As such, our existence in our own virtual world is life as we currently define it.
Of course, at this point we have done little to convince you that your existence is part of a large simulation. All we have done is lay down some groundwork that stitches the quilt very loosely together. It’s nothing more than a distortion of facts – another way of looking at reality. Why take such a perilous journey and risk ridicule and disbelief? Where is the proof for such a theory?
Is there more that hasn’t yet been shared?
Ah … that’s the question you need to be asking yourself. For you see, this is not a single article, but rather, a three-part series. In fact, these are the originating arguments we had among ourselves as we debated this ludicrous theory. No, we weren’t ready to lend any belief to it yet, but a trip deeper down the rabbit hole made us begin to wonder if we had traveled a bit too far, and it is the beginning of this journey that we will investigate in Part II of this series.
You can stop here, and your beliefs of yourself and the world around you will remain intact. There will be questions, but you will retain enough belief in your own existence to push them aside. Or, you can continue with us down the rabbit hole. But we will warn you ahead of time … what we have to share next could cause a lot of discomfort, just as it has for us. So, do you want to continue chopping down trees, like the lumberjack in our simulation – or do you care to aim the ax in a different direction and see if its possible to chop away at what we consider to be reality.
Part II of this series is online! You will find it here: Is Life A Simulation: Part II
Related posts:
