Mathematical proof debunks the idea that the universe is a computer simulation
Their findings, published in the Journal of Holography Applications in Physics, go beyond simply suggesting that we’re not living in a simulated world like The Matrix. They prove something far more profound: the universe is built on a type of understanding that exists beyond the reach of any algorithm.
It would be interesting to see someone with the background to understand the arguments involved in the paper give it a good review.
That said, I’ve never brought the simulation hypothesis on the simple grounds of compute resources. Part of the argument tends to be the idea of an infinite recursion of simulations, making the possible number of simulations infinite. This has one minor issue, where are all those simulations running? If the top level (call it U0 for Universe 0) is running a simulation (U1) and that simulation decides to run its own simulation (U2), where is U2 running? While the naive answer is U1, this cannot actually be true. U1 doesn’t actually exist, everything it it doing is actually being run up in U0. Therefore, for U1 to think it’s running U2, U0 needs to simulate U2 and pipe the results into U1. And this logic continues for every sub-simulation run. They must all be simulated by U0. And while U0 may have vast resources dedicated to their simulation, they do not have infinite resources and would have to limit the number of sub-simulation which could be run.
Very simple fix for that perceived contradiction: A simulation doesn’t need to simulate everything. All it needs to simulate is the inputs and outputs perceived by a single human being, the observer, me.
For me it would be indistinguishable if the universe I am living in is real, if it’s a simulation or if it doesn’t exist at all and instead only the things I can perceive are simulated.
Simulating the perception of a single human being should be in the reach of our current calculation power.
That’s a flawed interpretation as well that I’ll allow someone smarter than me to explain because I’m a big dumb.
It’s simply not possible for such a simulation to exist.
Not to mention we haven’t crashed once. That’s the fattest proof.
“In order to bake an apple pie from scratch, you first have to create the universe”
If you don’t create the universe, then you aren’t really making an apple pie from scratch. In the same way, what you’re referring to doesn’t simulate the universe - not in the way that it is simulated in the simulacrum hypothesis.
In the simulacrum hypothesis, the entire universe is simulated. You exist entirely inside the simulation rather than being merely plugged into it, and so do I and so does every other consciousness that exists.
I think you might be confusing something. The simulation hypothesis is rooted in the concept of the Boltzmann Braun, which is exactly what I described: A simulation of reality as in “the perceptions of a being is simulated” not “all of reality is simulated”.
I haven’t heard a single time so far by anyone seriously into that topic that a simulation would need to simulate reality to a perfect degree. That wouldn’t even really make any sense, neither from the argument, nor from the words. A simulation is always an abstraction, and since you bring up the world “simulacrum”, a simulacrum is something that by definition lacks the detail and sophistication of the original. A plastic apple is a simulacrum of a real apple, and in no way does a plastic apple replicate the cell structure or the biological details of a real apple. It’s just something that from a distance looks vaguely like the real thing.
And that’s what all forms of simulation hypothesis are based around: simulate everything necessary for the conciousness living in the simulation to believe it lives in reality.
In fact, humans have a mechanism that does just that built right into their brains: dreams. While dreaming your brain doesn’t accurately simulate reality down to the atom-level. All it does is simulate enough of your perception to make you believe you are experiencing what is happening in the dream.
technocrit