Back Back

Are We A Simulation?




In my last post I listed five off-the-cuff reasons that might help explain why aliens haven't made formal contact (in the event they're visiting us in the flesh--or its alien equivalent).  But there's another possibility that begs consideration: That our universe is a simulation with finite boundaries.  Maybe we have yet to achieve contact with aliens because the universe we observe is a computational artifact and there are no aliens … except, possibly, for the ones responsible for the simulation in the first place.
 
It's a lavishly paranoid idea, but not without a perverse philosophical appeal.  Achieving mainstream popularity in 1998 when "The Matrix" hit theaters, the concept isn't as new as it might seem.  Science fiction author Philip K. Dick pioneered the sort of solipsistic dream-or-reality fiction that would later find renewed urgency in the cyberpunk novels of the 1980s.  The idea's staying power is arguably due to the fact that there doesn't seem to be a convincing technical reason why our world (if not the Cosmos itself) couldn't be an incredibly rich software program operating according to set parameters (which we might interpret as physical laws and constants such as Einsteinian relativity and the counterintuitive domain of quantum uncertainty).

Novelists and philosophers alike have devised myriad reasons why an advanced intelligence might create a simulated world.  Arbitrarily capable scientists might want to tinker with physics, recreating the "real" world while incorporating experimental content: an endeavor to which our own scientific community aspires, often aided by advanced computational models.  Or maybe we're an anthropological experiment set loose in an agar of code; somewhere, overseers could be watching our plight with keen interest.

Metaphysicians typically refute the idea that consciousness can be reproduced through purely mechanical means, in which case the argument for our existing within a simulation (with or without simulated aliens) can be summarily forgotten.  But if self-awareness is indeed epiphenomenal--the inevitable outcome of physical processes within the brain--then the possibilities become effectively endless.  For example, we may not only be a simulation, but a simulation within a simulation.  Or, more demeaning yet, a simulation within a simulation within a simulation.

If so, the question of whether or not we're alone in the Cosmos is faced with some unexpected variables, none so vexing as our potential inability to determine whether there really is an "out there" or if we're merely staring at the bars of a cosmic jail cell.

Mac Tonnies

7 Comments:

Read Comment Posted by Bruce Duensing



The meat in this matter is that energy is information and the biochemical
processes simulate reality by processing this information to produce a visualized replication of what our sensory "devices" interact with. We do not experience "reality" directly, rather "sense objects." Anyone who is in the field of neurobiology will tell you this. We are a field of experiential information, that translates and processes....essentially energy in a coherent self referential manner. No sci-fi required.
Read Comment Posted by Bruce Duensing



The meat in this matter is that energy is information and the biochemical
processes simulate reality by processing this information to produce a visualized replication of what our sensory "devices" interact with. We do not experience "reality" directly, rather "sense objects." Anyone who is in the field of neurobiology will tell you this. We are a field of experiential information, that translates and processes....essentially energy in a coherent self referential manner. No sci-fi required.
Read Comment Posted by 0uterj0in



Simulation is no less likely than the extraterrestial hypothesis. If the "programmers suck" then we should expect to see bugs => instances where reality does not behave as we expect it to. For example, objects that seem to defy the laws of physics.
Read Comment Posted by contrarian



Are we a simulation? In a word, no. This just makes no sense to me.

If, on the other hand, we are, then all I can say is that the "programmers" suck.

If ufos are in any way representative of non-human intelligence, they control the agenda. "They" choose their modes of contact, and choose to be elusive. There will never be a solid answer to the ufo phenomenon until the ones behind it decide to make overt, formal undeniable contact. And they don't, for whatever reason.

It's sort of like being an ant, as a child draws a stick across our "trail"--we know something is going on, but we have no idea what it is. After all, relatively speaking, we're the ants.
Read Comment Posted by kim martin



I liked your first thought, the reasons maybe why aliens have aluded us.
I was waiting for you to list one that I have been thinking about for the past 5 years now and I am surprised that I have yet to read it yet.
All of your reasons listed, really captured my attention because I thought about that question myself and still do. Your list is very good in my opinion, for what its worth.
I have been thinking about this one thought now for 5 years and would apprieciate your opinion very much.
Here is my latest thought about that question: "why allude us"?

Beings had to leave their planet due to it no longer being livable.
These beings had spotted earth years before along with other livable planets in the universe.
They created us.
Since they communicate telepathicly....we have misinterpreted it into different forms of Religion. These different ways that we try to understand have changed greatly over the evolutionary stages of mankind.
i.e., Our ancient ancesters believed in many gods. many gods became One God.
the word for a creature that looks human but glows and has wings?
we all call it an angel without a thought about it. just understood by all.
My reason agrees with one of yours that the reason is .... we arent ready to hear the trueth about how we came to be and from "who".
sincerely,
k.

Read Comment Posted by 0uterj0in



Thanks for posting this Mac! This happens to be my personal hobby-horse; I feel it has potential as a grand unified theory of the paranormal. Rich you're right that proof is a special problem for this theory. But it's worth thinking about at least as much as ETH and cryptoterrestials because it's at least as likely as ETH/CTH. As much as we need to look for proof, we must also explore the available "explanation space" in search of theories that fit the facts we already have.
Read Comment Posted by Rich Reynolds



Mac,

Your conjecture, found elsewhere also -- UFO Iconoclast(s) -- is interesting but without a way to prove it; that is, there is no scientific methodology (yet) that can't substantiate what you suggest.

Your idea, found in SciFi stories years ago and even scientific journals nowadays, as you note, needs a mathematical construct or scientific theorem (non-mathematical if possible) to bring substance to what you propose.

The possibility of your "hypothesis" is palpable but where's the beef?

Leave a Comment

Name:
Email:
Comment:
Validate:
    <- Enter Validation Code
 

Back Back

 

 

 

 

 

Home | About Us | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy & Security | Site Map | Login
Last modified: February 25, 2008  © morefocus group, inc.