Tag Archives: simulation hypothesis

the universe is quite obviously a simulation

The universe is probably not a simulation on a silicone-based digital computer of the type humans have been able to conceive of and invent so far. But it seems useful to think of the universe, with its crystal clear gravitational, thermodynamic, and quantum operating rules (are these different things or one thing – they almost certainly are one thing, but don’t ask me to explain this, and don’t even ask Hawking or Einstein because they made some progress but weren’t able to fully explain these things), as some sort of operating system. Then all the events and information flows that take place within this operating system, including your and my consciousness and our seeming free choices, are enabled by and constrained by these rules. So that sounds like a simulation to me.

This is author Claire Evans describing a similar concept:

While writing about technology, I developed an interest in biotechnology, and in biology more generally. Right now there’s this intersection between computing and biology emerging simultaneously across disciplines. There are people creating artificial intelligence from the top-down, using traditional machine-learning methods, but there are also people working towards generating life from code from the bottom-up, using evolutionary methods. There are synthetic biologists programming cells like code, roboticists working with living matter, and researchers drawing inspiration from living systems—swarms of fish, flocks of birds, slime molds, or seedling roots—to imagine new computing architectures. Even traditional biologists are increasingly using terms like “computation” and “information processing” to talk about phenomena they observe in nature… 

I think we can learn a lot from trying to model natural systems. It’s only by attempting it that we realize how staggeringly complex even the simplest life forms are, and how completely bonkers it is that a single process could have brought us from a single cell to all the diversity of life on Earth. We’ll never be smart enough to create an algorithm with that kind of open-ended generative power, although it’s precisely its evolutionary creativity that brought us intelligence to begin with. For me, the ongoing life force that resists entropy—whatever it is that organizes living systems and makes them capable of complex emergent behaviors—is the most mystical thing. Thinking about it is as close as I get to religious feeling. It’s at the center of everything. 

I’m fascinated by the fact that every living thing processes information, or computes, in a sense. Living things are each perfect computers that only do one thing—run themselves—and even the simplest ones are so complex they’re impossible to model fully. There’s a really interesting open-source project going on right now to create a computational model of a microscopic roundworm with only a thousand cells. Even that is considered an ambitious, long-term goal. Like, maybe someday we can build a faithful model of a worm in the computerAnd that’s just one organism! And life is about relationships, the dynamic interactions between organisms. So the best we can do is sample here and there. Because ecologies are so complex, and because they operate at different scales simultaneously, and across time, the only way to get any understanding is to create a number of different models and see where they might overlap. That’s where the truth is, if it exists. 

I’m trying to model a fairly simple one-dimensional system of soil, water, plants (really just one plant) and the atmosphere at the moment. Even this is a significant feat for my Windows 11 “gaming laptop”, and it’s a pretty simplified representation of the complexity that really exists even in a flower pot (worms, for example, are not represented but in real life they can make a big difference in how water flows through soil. You don’t need Einstein or Hawking to explain these particular wormholes, although Einstein’s son Hans Albert actually made some discoveries in the area of soil and sediment – you could even say he was “ground breaking” – sorry). Ultimately though, it is governed by energy potentials, which comes back to gravity and thermodynamics. And I have come to understand the universe just a little bit better as I play with this model and look at model output and some data together.

Philip K. Dick, Prophet of the Happy Ending

My “summer of parallel universes” reading theme is about to come to an end. Which doesn’t mean I have to stop reading about parallel universes, it just means the meteorological, astronomical, and social season known as summer is coming to an end. I have made a significant dent on the last Dark Tower book, which is known as…The Dark Tower. I might actually finish it by Labor Day, but that doesn’t matter. Anyway, this speech reminded me that Philip K. Dick had a lot to say on the subject. Not only does he have a lot to say, he at least claims to believe it or at least consider it more than just a fictional plot line. Finally, he has gathered it into something almost approaching a coherent religion, and not only that but a unifying theory of religions, complete with a (quite rosy) end times scenario.

It’s very hard to pick an excerpt that captures the essence of the speech. The whole thing really is worth a read. But here is one unsatisfactory choice:

“We in the field [of science fiction writers], of course, know this idea as the ‘alternate universe’ theme. …Let us say, just for fun, that [such alternate universes] DO exist. Then, if they do, how are they linked to each other, if in fact they are (or would be) linked? If you drew a map of them, showing their locations, what would the map look like? For instance (and I think this is a very important question), are they absolutely separate one from another, or do they overlap? Because if they overlap, then such problems as ‘Where do they exist?’ and ‘How do you get from one to the next’ admit to a possible solution. I am saying, simply, if they do indeed exist, and if they do indeed overlap, then we may in some literal, very real sense inhabit several of them to various degrees at any given time. And although we all see one another as living humans walking about and talking and acting, some of us may inhabit relatively greater amounts of, say, Universe One than the other people do; and some of us may inhabit relatively greater amounts of Universe Two, Track Two, instead, and so on. It may not merely be that our subjective impressions of the world differ, but there may be an overlapping, a superimposition, of a number of worlds so that objectively, not subjectively, our worlds may differ. Our perceptions differ as a result of this… It may be that some of these superimposed worlds are passing out of existence, along the lateral time line I spoke of, and some are in the process of moving toward greater, rather than lesser, actualization. These processes would occur simultaneously and not at all in linear time. The kind of process we are talking about here is a transformation, a kind of metamorphosis, invisibly achieved. But very real. And very important…

Christ was saying over and over again that there really are many objective realms, somehow related, and somehow bridgeable by living – not dead- men, and that the most wondrous of these worlds was a just kingdom in which either He himself or God himself or both of them ruled. And he did not merely speak of a variety of ways of subjectively viewing one world; the Kingdom was and is an actual different place, at the opposite end of continua starting with slavery and utter pain. It was his mission to teach his disciples the secret of crossing along the orthogonal path. He did not merely report what lay there; he taught the method of getting there. But, the secret was lost, the Roman authority crushed it. And so we do not have it. But perhaps we can refind it, since we know that such a secret exists…

“This problem-solving by means of reprogramming variables along the linear time axis of our universe, thereby generating branched-off lateral worlds – I have the impression that the metaphor of the chessboard is especially useful in evaluating how this all can be – in fact must be. Across from the Programmer-Reprogrammer sits a counterentity, whom Joseph Campbell calls the Dark Counterplayer. …The Programmer-Reprogrammer is not making his moves of improvement against inert matter; he is dealing with a cunning opponent. Let us say that on the game board – our universe in space-time – the Dark Counterplayer makes a move; he sets up a reality situation. Being the Dark player, the outcome of his desires constitutes what we experience as evil: nongrowth, the power of the lie, death and the decay of forms, the prison of immutable cause and effect. …The printout which we undergo as historic events, passes through stages of a dialectical interaction, thesis and antithesis, as the forces of the two players mingle. Evidently some syntheses fall to the dark counterplayer.

Philip K. Dick, 1977

To me, this religion actually seems logically coherent with the world I am experiencing right now. Which doesn’t mean I believe it, but I would rate it as more probable than a number of others, and if I were currently shopping for a religion I might add it to my cart but not hit the check out button just yet.

September 2020 in Review

Most frightening and/or depressing story:

  • The Covid recession in the U.S. is pretty bad and may be settling in for the long term. Demand for the capital goods we normally export (airplanes, weapons, airplanes that unleash weapons, etc.) is down, demand for oil and cars is down, and the service industry is on life support. Unpaid bills and debts are mounting, and eventually creditors will have to come to terms with this (nobody feels sorry for “creditors”, but what this could mean is we get a full-blown financial panic to go along with the recession in the real economy.

Most hopeful story:

  • The Senate Democrats’ Special Committee on the Climate Crisis had the courage to take aim at campaign finance corruption as a central reason for why the world is in its current mess. I hate to be partisan, folks, but right now our government is divided into responsible adults and children. The responsible adults who authored this report are the potential leaders who can lead us forward.

Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both:

  • If the universe is a simulation, and you wanted to crash it on purpose, you could try to create a lot of nested simulations of universes within universes until your overload whatever the operating system is. Just hope it’s backed up.

if the universe is a simulation, can it crash?

Hopefully, if the universe is a simulation, it is a stable one. And if it crashes, whatever intelligent entity is out there can call his or her IT guy, spin it up again, fast forward to where it left off, and we won’t know the difference. If it is a simulation, do we really want to know? This article in Scientific American says that if we really want to know, one way to test whether it is a simulation is to try to crash it on purpose. So how would you do that? One way is to build our own simulated universes, then let them build their own simulated universes, and so on. At some point, the hardware of our universe should not be able to run all those universes. So to get to this point, we need to keep working on building way faster computers.