Swedish Philosopher Nick Bostromssimulation argumentsays we might be living in a computer-generated reality.
Perhaps its a bit more nuanced than that though.
Maybe hes only half-wrong or half-right, depending on your philosophical view.
What if weareliving in a simulation, but theres no computer (in the traditional sense) running it?
Heres the wackiest, most improbable theory I could cobble together from the weirdest papers Ive ever covered.
I call it: Simulation Argument: Live and Unplugged.
It’s free, every week, in your inbox.
Unless they cant, dont want to, or humanity gets snuffed out before they get the chance.
As many people havepointed out, theres no way todothe sciencewhen it comes to simulation hypothesis.
Were constrained by physical rules, whether we understand them or not.
Except, of course, inquantum mechanics.
There, all the classical physics rules we spent millennia coming up with make almost no sense.
But the heart of quantum mechanics involvesthis very principal.
We use rules such as mathematics and the scientific method to determine whats really real.
So why are the rules different for people and stars than they are for singularities and wormholes?
Wormholes, for example, could, in theory, allow objects to take shortcuts through physical spaces.
And who knows whats actually on the other side of a black hole?
Humans, as a system, are actually incredibly connected.
Were notonMars, but we know whats going on almost as if we were.
And, whats even more impressive, we can transfer that information across iterations.
Its already been done.
They can look forward and develop something new.
In AI terms, were essentially training new models based on the output from old models.
And that makes humanity itself a neural web link.
We know that subatomic particles, in what we call the quantum realm, react differentlywhen observed.
Thats a feature of the universe that seems incredibly significant for anything that might be considered an observer.
Thats where the multiverse comes in.
We like to think of ourselves as characters in a computer simulation when we contemplate Bostroms theory.
But what if were more like cameras?
If our job is to observe, its unlikely were the entities the universe-as-a-neural-connection outputs to.
Most importantly: a naturally occurring, self-feeding, neural connection doesnt require a computer at all.
In fact, neural networks almost never involve what we usually think of as computers.
Wrap up this nonsense!
And, if you like wacky, youll love my theory.
Each universe in this multiverse is a single layer designed to sift through data and produce a specific output.
Within each of these layers are infinite or near-infinite systems that comprise networks within the data pipe.
Information travels between the multiverses layers through natural mechanisms.
Seems about as likely as us all living in a computer right?
My guess: theres nobody on the receiving end, just a rubber hose connecting output to input.
