Is the universe just a computer simulation?
…Right now, physicists are capable of simulating the entirety of one infinitesimally small part of the universe. They need a supercomputer to do it, and the simulation is only of an area a few femtometers across, which is really freakin’ small. But, the simulation is of everything: particles, energy, space, time, the lot. This means that, fundamentally, the simulation cannot be distinguished from the real thing: if you measure the simulation, you’d get all the same results as if you were measuring a piece of real space the same size.
Now remember, this is stuff we can already do. And it’s not hard to imagine that, in the future as computers get faster and more powerful, the amount of universe that we can simulate will get a little bigger. If we can upgrade from a femtometer simulation to a micrometer simulation, say, an area of fake universe large enough to simulate a single cell. If (or when) we do that, the behavior of that cell and any measurements we make on it would be completely indistinguishable from that of a real cell. If they aren’t, then the simulation needs more work, but there’s no reason why (with enough computing power) this wouldn’t be possible. …
Now, we have to assume that if our universe is a simulation, it’s a pretty darn good one, and if those pixels are out there, they’re going to be awfully small. While the pixels might be smaller than we can see directly, we might be able to figure out if they’re there by measuring high-energy cosmic rays, which exist in smaller and smaller regions of space as their energy increases. If the universe isn’t a simulation, cosmic rays should be able to have as much energy as they want, while if the universe is a simulation, the cosmic rays would be limited in energy to the size of the simulation’s pixels, and there’d be a cut-off point.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Awesome.
KMC1 on October 14, 2012 at 2:58 AM
The wit that came up with version starring Barry ‘n Biden gets an F-
Dack Thrombosis on October 14, 2012 at 2:59 AM
Just great…….now I have to worry about the “blue screen of death” and pray they don’t spill coffee on the keyboard!!
dddave on October 14, 2012 at 3:36 AM
Yes. And it runs on Windows, which is why everything is so f*cked up.
The Rogue Tomato on October 14, 2012 at 4:00 AM
Wayyyyy to many bad SF novels.
talking_mouse on October 14, 2012 at 4:38 AM
It must be written in C++ – we’re scroomed.
Who is John Galt on October 14, 2012 at 4:43 AM
*ctrlaltdelete* *ctrlaltdelete* *ctrlaltdelete*
Well…….sh!t.
DStreete on October 14, 2012 at 4:58 AM
The article makes the assumption that the ‘real’ universe is truly continuous and not discrete which itself would require a proof.
Annar on October 14, 2012 at 5:31 AM
Sounds like someone just got a brand new prescription for “medical” marijuana.
Odysseus on October 14, 2012 at 6:55 AM
So their simulation is just a simulation within a simulation within in a…..
albill on October 14, 2012 at 7:29 AM
Somebody is mixing up reality and Matrix movie night.
Spliff Menendez on October 14, 2012 at 7:36 AM
This explains the 404 error that is my life…
JetBoy on October 14, 2012 at 7:52 AM
Physicists: often wrong, never in doubt.
Xavier on October 14, 2012 at 7:58 AM
I aready pointing out this whole “like a computer program” so many times when explaining how intelligent design actually has been (not intentionally) tested.
DethMetalCookieMonst on October 14, 2012 at 8:22 AM
If so, then Obama is our ‘Blaster Worm’.
Or, better yet, ‘MyDoom’.
mrt721 on October 14, 2012 at 8:22 AM
The progressives think of everything to push the agenda. The group-think concept is the backbone of having absurdity be believed as it being reality. Science can provide for you all that you need to understand that there is no God, but the higher beings out there are still yet to be defined, as in: “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”
ericdijon on October 14, 2012 at 8:26 AM
We have a long wait.
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on October 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM
oops, 10^45 years for the half life, typo….
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on October 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM
This is why you shouldn’t pray in T-SQL.
Fezzik on October 14, 2012 at 9:13 AM
So it’s gotten so dire for the liberals that now they want to deny the existence of reality altogether?
Sign of the Dollar on October 14, 2012 at 9:26 AM
The answer is still 42.
BigGator5 on October 14, 2012 at 9:42 AM
True.
Our creator is Mary Fernworthy, a freckle-faced and somewhat dull-witted fifth grader.
We are currently taped to her parents’ multidimensional refrigerator.
justltl on October 14, 2012 at 9:51 AM
In fact, in about an hour, I’ll be at church, worshipping her.
justltl on October 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM
And this was how “climate science” was born.
A femtometer is one quadrillionth of a meter. And they jumped from something like that, to the entire universe being a simulation and start building on that scenario.
It’s ludicrous.
This is the exact methodology used on “climate science”. They make huge assumptions based on tiny measurements.
ButterflyDragon on October 14, 2012 at 10:06 AM
It took scientists this long to come up with this? Heck, Douglas Adams had this figured out decades ago…
Shump on October 14, 2012 at 10:10 AM
The half life of a proton is uncertain, because no one has ever observed one decay. Not one. They don’t wait until 10^45 years have passed and suddenly half of them decay. The universe is 1.38^10 years old, so with a half life of 10^45, one eighth of all protons would have decayed already.
They should be falling apart all around us, but they don’t.
RINOs are people too on October 14, 2012 at 10:47 AM
So, if we are a computer simulation… Who wants to piss off the designer and not follow his biblical instructions? A simulated hell awaits you.
astonerii on October 14, 2012 at 10:50 AM
James Hogan came up with something similar, in his Entoverse novel. Read the prologue to Mission To Minerva, towards the bottom.
Bigfoot on October 14, 2012 at 11:00 AM
It’s simulations all the way down.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on October 14, 2012 at 11:09 AM
I’ll add another plug for The Thirteenth Floor. It’s a solid, thoughtful, and enjoyable movie with a good story that was unfairly overshadowed by The Matrix‘s techno-beat-slow-motion-kung-fu-OOH-LOOK-SHINYFLASHYGUNSBANGBANGKABOOM in the minds of the honey boo boo masses.
Worth the hour & a half of your time for a decent story. I’m pretty sure it’s on Netflix.
Harpazo on October 14, 2012 at 11:31 AM
Heaven forbid that we are actually some version of the Sims. If we are, is this the beta-test?
Because I’ve got complaints… lots of complaints… about the software.
And if its a deity made thing, then where, oh where, is the suggestion box? Not this prayer stuff, but the actual place you can leave suggestions to the all-knowing, all-seeing, all-capable who made such a miserable place?
The only thing worse than this being software with an designer, or a deity, is that this really IS a massive version of the Sims… run by the equivalent of an adolescent teenager. This is production code. And we have someone with ADHD running the show.
ajacksonian on October 14, 2012 at 11:34 AM
So say we all! (Or, should that be, simply, “RETURN”)
Noocyte on October 14, 2012 at 12:46 PM
Er … is 1.38^10 greater than 10^45?
OldEnglish on October 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2