Physicists testing to see if universe is a computer simulation
In 2003, University of Oxford philosophy professor Nick Bostrom published a paper, “The Simulation Argument,” which argued that, “we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation.” Now, a team at Cornell University says it has come up with a viable method for testing whether we’re all just a series of numbers in some ancient civilization’s computer game. …
So how, precisely, can we test whether we exist? Put simply, researchers are building their own simulated models, using a technique called lattice quantum chromodynamics. And while those models are currently able to produce models only slightly larger than the nucleus of an atom, University of Washington physics professor Martin Savage says the same principles used in creating those simulations can be applied on a larger scale. …
To translate, if energy signatures in our simulations match those in the universe at large, there’s a good chance we, too, exist within a simulation.









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
DeathtotheSwiss? Some screen names should be banned.
SC.Charlie on December 14, 2012 at 11:40 AM
So, if the entire Universe is a computer simulation, how long before some teenage stoner/hacker figures out how to hack the system? Big neon sign flashing across the entire universe… All your bases are belong to us…
SWalker on December 14, 2012 at 11:41 AM
People with waaaayyyyy too much time on their hands. Please tell me that no taxpayer’s money is going into this!
Blaise on December 14, 2012 at 11:44 AM
Wasn’t there a short SciFi story from back in the 60′s that suggested that there were worlds within worlds. I seem to remember that while we were looking at micro-organisms in a microscope we were being observed in a microscope.
chemman on December 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM
It’s okay. Barry is negotiating up a cheat code for infinite money.
Gingotts on December 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM
Don’t worry about it. It’s on DttS’s tab.
justltl on December 14, 2012 at 12:03 PM
Next up: testing whether the universe is a cute fluffy bunny. A BIG fluffy bunny with pink eyes and a wiggly nose…
mojo on December 14, 2012 at 12:17 PM
I am reminded of the line from one of Douglas Adams’s hitchhiker novels: “There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”
joe_doufu on December 14, 2012 at 12:38 PM
Right. I think Yahoo!™ formulated the question wrong. It’s our mode of existence that’s to be determined.
Olo_Burrows on December 28, 2012 at 4:05 AM
I should have said: It’s our current mode of existence that’s to be determined.
This article evokes for me Arthur Clarke’s short story “The Nine Billion Names of God.” Perhaps discovering the universe’s true nature would fulfill our purpose here–in which case the claim that so much appears designed to fail at the end of the Mesoamerican Long Count might actually make sense!
Olo_Burrows on December 29, 2012 at 3:58 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2