Author - Vladimir Lagovsky
The brain is not a generator of consciousness. It's just an interface
The more intricate, wider, deeper and more ramified the Internet becomes, the more its virtual world begins to resemble the one that surrounds us. At least it is expanding exactly like the Universe. The edges are no longer visible. Therefore, it is probably no coincidence that it is on the Internet that ideas spread by someone Jim Elvidge- scientist, specialist digital technologies, quantum physics and the author of a book with the loud title “The Universe - Solved”. He truly believes that he has unraveled the essence of the universe. I guessed that the Universe is a product of computer simulation. Some kind of simulation. And it is based on information and data. From them, according to Elvidge, our consciousness is woven, which is not born in the brain. The brain is not even a repository of consciousness, but just an interface through which we integrate into the simulation, process information and exchange data with some kind of universal server. Souls also go there - also information, forming a segment that was previously called the afterlife.
Death, in Elvidge's mind, is not scary at all. After all, it is just the end of the simulation. Or even its temporary interruption, accompanied by the movement of the soul - that is, the information packet - to the server.
The scientist believes in reincarnation, explaining it by the transfer of information accumulated by one “simulator” to another. He believes in intuition and clairvoyance, the phenomenon of which, in his opinion, is based on access to the universal server - the ability to “download” from it certain requested information. Like from the Internet.
There is no matter - only emptiness
Jim Elvidge assures us that the objects around us only seem real. But in reality they are not there - just emptiness. There is only information that objects exist - information that we receive through the brain and senses.
“Matter is an objective reality given to us in sensations,” says a well-known definition. But sensations can be simulated, the scientist objects. Therefore, it is possible to simulate objective reality, and, ultimately, matter.
An object only becomes “real” when someone is observing it, Elvidge believes. And he adds thoughtfully: “Further research in the field elementary particles will lead to the understanding that behind everything that surrounds us, there is a certain code, similar to the binary code of a computer program... The theory of digital reality can serve universal key to the “theory of everything,” which scientists have been searching for for a long time.”
INSTEAD OF COMMENT: Fiction, but very scientific
Elvidge's ideas are, of course, attractive with their analogies. But they are by no means original. It differs from numerous previous ones only in more modern terms. And before, many hinted at the existence of a universal server, but called it differently - the energy-information field of the Universe. And there they placed both the afterlife and all the accumulated information - about any event and even about the future. But it’s impossible to prove that this is so, neither then nor now. After all, all arguments are nothing more than words, unsupported fantasies. Although not only Elvidge is “fantasizing,” but also other quite serious scientists.
A computer the size of the universe
For example, Seth Lloyd from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology long ago asked himself the question: what is the maximum size of a computer? He answered it himself. Like, it is obvious that the largest and most powerful device will be one in which all the particles in the Universe will be involved. And there are protons, neutrons, electrons and other little things, according to the scientist’s calculations, about 10 to the 90th power. And if these particles had been involved since the Big Bang, they would have already performed 10 to the 120th power of logical operations. This is so much that it is impossible to even imagine. For comparison: all computers during their existence have performed less than 10 to the 30th power of operations. And all information about a person with his numerous individual quirks is recorded in approximately 10 to the 25th power of bits.
And then Lloyd - much earlier than Elvidge - thought: what if the Universe is already someone’s computer? Then everything inside it, including us, is part of the computational process. Or his product... So, there must be a Programmer somewhere.
You cannot do without the Creator - even prominent scientists think so.
Lloyd suggests that we do exist in reality. Just like the world around us. We exist thanks to the universal computer, which was programmed to create complex structures, including living beings. A computer program, by the way, does not have to be very long.
We are holograms
Experiments that may reveal whether our world is a hologram or not have been launched by one of the discoverers of dark energy. Craig Hogan, director of the Center for Quantum Astrophysics at Fermilab (Fermilab's Center for Particle Astrophysics). The scientist imagines the Universe as a sphere, the surface of which is covered with tiny pixels. Each represents a unit of information - a bit. And what is inside is a hologram created by them. intends to find in the fabric of time space the elements that form a holographic “picture”.
According to the wave theory of reality by physicist David Bohm and neurosurgeon Karla Pribram, the brain also works on holographic principles.
A three-dimensional image of an object appears in space, for example, if a laser illuminates an image on a plane.
This is how our brain constructs a picture of the surrounding world under the influence of some external radiation,” explains Pribram, also implying the existence of a computer program implemented in the universe. She, in fact, determines what and where to “illuminate”.
Our world may be just a hologram. Scientists are trying to prove this.
By the way, by accepting the holographic essence of the Universe, it would be possible to resolve the paradox observed experimentally: elementary particles are capable of instantly exchanging information at any distance - even millions of light years. That is, contrary to Einstein, to carry out interactions at superluminal speeds, overcoming the time barrier. This ceases to be a miracle in the world - a hologram. After all, each section contains information about the whole - about the entire Universe.
And assuming that the Universe is a product of computer simulation, we can explain the various strange things that happen in it. For example, UFO. Or mysterious radio signals coming from nowhere. These are just glitches in the program.
CONCLUSION: God lives in another Universe
Logic dictates: if a certain Creator does exist, then it is hardly worth looking for him in our Universe. He can’t be inside the hologram he created?! Or programs?! Therefore, there are many universes. Many modern physicists, by the way, have no doubt about this.
US and German physicists Silas Bean, Zohra Davoudi and Martin Savage have proposed an experimental way to test a philosophical idea known as the simulation hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, there is a possibility that we live inside a huge computer model, which was launched by some posthumans to study their own past. Despite, let's be honest, its dubious natural scientific value, the work of Bean, Davoudi and Savage deserves detailed coverage: there is quantum chromodynamics, and philosophy, and in general - it is not every day that physicists offer to test ideas inspired by the film "The Matrix".
Nick Bostrom and his simulation
In 2003, the famous Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom published in Philosophical Quarterly work under the almost fantastic title “Are we all living in a computer simulation?” It should be noted that Bostrom is not some outcast living on the outskirts modern philosophy. This is one of the most important figures of transhumanism of our time, co-founder of the World Association of Transhumanists (established in 1998, now renamed “Humanity Plus”). He is the winner of many prestigious awards, and his works on the anthropic principle have been translated into more than 100 languages.
Transhumanism- a worldview based on understanding the achievements and prospects of science, recognizing the possibility and necessity of fundamental changes in man himself with the help of advanced technologies. The goal of these changes is the elimination of suffering, aging, death, as well as strengthening the physical, mental and psychological capabilities of people.
Anthropic principle- a principle formulated in the form of the formula “We see the Universe like this, because only in such a Universe could an observer, a person, arise.”
Theory of everything- a hypothetical physical and mathematical theory that describes all known fundamental interactions (strong, weak, electromagnetic and gravitational)
Before moving on to the formulation of Bostrom’s main result, let’s get acquainted with some concepts (based on the critical work of Danila Medvedev “Are we living in Nick Bostrom’s speculation?”). Posthuman civilization (consisting of posthumans) is understood as “a civilization of the descendants of man who have changed to such an extent that they can no longer be considered human.” The main difference between this civilization and the modern one will be the incredible computing capabilities that it will have. A simulation is a program that simulates the consciousness of one or more people, perhaps even all of humanity. A historical simulation is, accordingly, a simulation of a historical process in which many simulated individuals take part.
In his work, Bostrom adheres to the concept according to which consciousness depends on intelligence (computing power), the structure of individual parts, the logical relationship between them and much more, but does not depend at all on the carrier, that is, biological tissue - the human brain. This means that consciousness can also be realized in the form of a set of electrical impulses in some computer. Considering that the speech in work in progress about simulations created by posthumans, people simulated inside the simulation (Bostrom calls them a civilization more low level compared to the civilization that launched the simulation) have consciousness. For them, the model will seem like reality.
To assess the theoretical feasibility of conducting this kind of simulation in principle, Bostrom conducts several assessments. Thus, to the roughest approximation, the computing power of the human brain is limited to about 10 17 operations per second. In this case, the amount of information received by a person is about 10 8 bits per second. Based on this, Bostrom concludes that simulating the entire history of mankind would require about 10 33 - 10 36 operations (assuming 50 years per person and estimating the total number of all people who have existed on the planet to date at 100 billion people).
If we talk about modeling the entire Universe from the time of the Big Bang to the present, and not just the history of mankind, then physicist Seth Lloyd from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology published in 2002 Physical Review Letters, in which he provided calculations of the required capacities. It turned out that this would require a machine with 10 90 bits of memory, which would have to perform 10 120 logical operations.
Humanity Plus emblem
These numbers (both Bostrom's and Lloyd's) seem simply incredible. However, in 2000, the same Lloyd published another remarkable work - he tried to calculate the maximum power of a computer weighing 1 kilogram and volume of one cubic decimeter, based on considerations of quantum mechanics. He succeeded (pdf) - it turns out that this amount of matter can perform about 10 50 operations per second. Therefore, based on the power of such an extreme computer, the simulation Bostrom talks about does not seem too fantastic. Lloyd even estimated the time it would take to achieve such power - provided that the power of computers continues to grow according to Moore's law (which, of course, is completely doubtful: some scientists predict that the law will be 75 years away). So, this time was only 250 years.
However, let's return to Bostrom. Based on the above assessments, the Swedish philosopher not only concluded that simulation is possible, but also made a paradoxical conclusion. Bostrom states that at least one of the following three statements is true (called Bostrom's trilemma):
- Humanity will die out without becoming a post-civilization;
- Humanity will develop into a post-civilization, which for some reason will not be interested in modeling the past;
- We're almost certainly living in a computer simulation
It follows from this that if we are optimists and do not believe in the extinction of humanity and, in addition, are convinced of the curiosity of our descendants, then point three is fulfilled: we are most likely living in a computer simulation. By the way, Bostrom’s work generally has many paradoxical conclusions - for example, about the likelihood of modeling people without consciousness, that is, the existence of a world in which only a few are endowed with consciousness, and the rest are “shadow zombies” (as the philosopher himself calls them ). The philosopher also talks interestingly about the ethical aspects of simulation, as well as the fact that most simulations must end someday, which means that with a probability of almost equal to one, - we live in a world that must end its existence (more details about these arguments can be found in the partial Russian translation of the article).
Despite their popularity, Bostrom's conclusions have repeatedly been the target of criticism. In particular, opponents point out gaps in the philosopher’s argumentation, as well as a large number of There are hidden assumptions in his reasoning about a number of fundamental issues - for example, the nature of consciousness and the potential ability of simulated individuals to become self-aware. In general, there is no clear answer to the question “Do we live in the Matrix?” one cannot expect anything from philosophers (as well as other, no less “simple” questions: what is consciousness, what is reality, etc.). So let's move on to physics.
Physicists and their approach
Bostrom does not hide the fact that his work was inspired by, among other things, science fiction films. Among them, of course, is “The Matrix” (the idea of simulation) and “13th Floor” (the idea of nested simulations)
Some time ago, a preprint of the work of physicists from the USA and Germany Silas Bean, Zohra Davoudi and Martin Savage appeared on the website arXiv.org. These scientists decided to play the game proposed by Bostrom. They asked themselves this question: if the entire Universe is computer simulation, is it possible to find evidence of this by physical methods? To do this, they tried to imagine how the physics of the simulated world would differ from the physics of the real world.
They took quantum chromodynamics, perhaps the most advanced physical theory currently existing, as a possible modeling tool. As for the modeling itself, they assumed that posthumans would carry it out on a spatial grid with some fairly small spatial step. It is clear that both assumptions are quite controversial: firstly, posthumans would probably prefer to use a theory of everything (which, undoubtedly, would already be at their disposal) for the simulation. Secondly, the numerical methods of posthumans should differ from ours in about the same way as a nuclear reactor differs from a stone ax. However, without these assumptions, the work of physicists would be generally impossible.
Here, by the way, it is appropriate to note that modeling processes occurring in a fixed region of space is a fairly actively developing area of computational physics. So far, of course, the progress has been small: physicists are able to simulate a piece of the world with a diameter of no more than a few (from 2.5 to 5.8) femtometers (1 femtometer is equal to 10 -15 meters) with a step b = 0.1 femtometer. Nevertheless, models of this kind are of great theoretical interest. For example, they can help in calculating what happens under conditions that are unattainable in modern accelerators. Or, for example, with the help of modeling it will be possible to obtain some predictions of the properties of the vacuum and compare them with experimental data - and this, perhaps, will give physicists ideas regarding the mentioned theory of everything.
To begin, Bean, Davoudi, and Savage assessed the capabilities of the simulations. It turned out that for a fixed step of 0.1 femtometer, the size of the simulated region grows exponentially (that is, the same as the computing power of computers in Moore's law) - this is the result of extrapolation of data over the almost 20-year history of this field of research. It turns out that modeling a cubic meter of matter based on the laws of quantum chromodynamics with a step b = 0.1 femtometer should be expected in about 140 years (the indicator grows by about an order of magnitude every 10 years). Considering that the diameter of the visible Universe is about 10 27 meters, if regular growth is maintained (which, as noted above, is unlikely), the simulation of the required volume can be achieved in 140 + 270 = 410 years (but this is only for a fixed parameter b). However, the scientists themselves do not provide such figures, limiting themselves to the next 140 years.
Then scientists tried to evaluate the possible limitations on the physics of such a model and discovered, frankly, interesting things. They found that in the simulated universe there should be a cutoff in the spectrum of cosmic rays at certain energies. In theory, there really is such a cliff - this is the Greisen - Zatsepin - Kuzmin limit, which is 50 exaelectronvolts. It is due to the fact that high-energy particles must interact with photons of background microwave radiation and, as a result, lose energy. Here, however, two difficulties arise. First, for this limit to be an artifact of the computer model, its spatial step must be 11 orders of magnitude smaller than b = 0.1 femtometer. Secondly, the presence of the Greisen - Zatsepin - Kuzmin limit has not yet been proven in practice. There are many contradictory results in this direction. So, according to one of them, there really is a cliff. According to others, particles with energy exceeding this limit reach the Earth’s surface, and they arrive from rather dark regions of space (that is, they are not a product of the activity of active galactic nuclei closest to us).
However, scientists have another way to check - the distribution of high-energy cosmic rays should be anisotropic (that is, unequal in different spatial directions). This is due to the assumption that the calculations are carried out on a cubic grid - this is exactly what the grid should be, according to physicists, for reasons of isotropy of space-time. At the same time, physicists do not discuss the possibility of detecting anisotropy of radiation. It is not even clear what kind of instruments are needed for such research - are already existing instruments (the Fermi space observatory, for example) sufficient? In general, there is no clear answer to the question “Do we live in the Matrix?” One cannot expect anything from physicists either.
Finally
Of course, the reader may feel disappointed at this point. Like, how can it be: I read and read, but the answer to main question"Are we living in the Matrix?" never received it. This, however, was expected, and here's why. For philosophy, the simulation hypothesis is just one of many versions of existence. If these versions compete with each other, it is only in the minds of their supporters and opponents, that is, they are objects of faith that do not pretend to be objective.
As for physicists, a very interesting one recently appeared: American professor from the University of Louisiana Rhett Allain analyzed the physical component of the game Bad Piggies from the company Rovio, which created Angry Birds. He did this precisely in order to determine the possible diameter of the green pigs from the game, if they existed in reality (the diameter, by the way, turned out to be 96 centimeters). So, the work of Silas Bean, Zohra Davoudi and Martin Savage is the same kind of exercise, only with slightly more complex objects and confusing mathematics. In general, this is nothing more than entertaining gymnastics for the mind - but, like any gymnastics, it is useful. Thanks to it, the reader now knows Bostrom's trilemma and the size of a hard drive on which information about the entire Universe can be recorded. This is interesting.
According to many experts, in about 50-100 years, the computing capabilities of computers will increase millions of times. Thanks to this, we will be able to create virtual worlds so realistic that their characters will actually gain sentience, but will not know that they are living in a simulation.
Some scientists have even put forward the idea that, hypothetically, we could all be heroes of a computer game.
The hypothesis about the virtuality of our world was first widely presented in 2003 by philosopher Nick Bostrom. He suggested that if there are many sufficiently advanced civilizations, they tend to create simulations of the Universe or parts of it, and we are likely to live in one of them.
Nick BostromIn the summer of 2016, Elon Musk said that there is only one chance in a billion that our reality is not fake. That is, in fact, he is 100% sure that we live in a matrix (we already made a separate video about this a few months ago).
Elon MuskWell, today we will try to find evidence that our world is really just a simulation. Go!
Video games
In order to understand the essence of the first proof, we need to go from afar, namely, from how video games work.
Grand Theft Auto V
For example, playing GTA V, being on one of the streets of the city of this game, you can see how cars are driving along the road, people are walking along the sidewalk and, in general, life is in full swing.
When you turn the corner and cross the street, you see the same thing.
Because of this, an illusion is created that the same thing is now happening on other streets of this city. But that's not true.
In fact, nothing is happening in other areas at this moment. Until you appear there, these streets will be empty, even the textures will not be loaded there. But as soon as you get there, unbeknownst to you, the same pedestrians, cars, animals, etc. will instantly appear there.
So, all video games work on this principle. This is done in order to optimize the load on the hardware of your computer. That is, when you look forward in the game, the computer focuses the image in front of your eyes as much as possible. At the same time, textures and objects behind you that you are not looking at are greatly simplified or disappear altogether.
This allows you to lighten the load on your gaming platform, delivering the most beautiful graphics.
Now let's try everything in the same GTA V look at the city from above. Everything in front of us becomes clear in full view.
We can see cars driving along numerous streets at the same time. The question is how the power game console Is it enough to calculate such a number of cars? And the whole trick is that very simplified physics turns on for cars in the distance.
For example, if we fire a rocket at those cars, the explosion won’t even cause them to fly apart in different directions.
But as soon as we get closer to one of the streets, the physics of the cars will immediately become more complicated, and they will finally begin to react to explosions.
Sid Meier's Civilization V
Now let's look at the game Civilization V.
If I suddenly move the camera to the other end of the map, we can see how the location quickly loads before our eyes, although it should have done this a couple of moments before we looked at it.
But the thing is that Civilizations V the game engine is imperfect, which is why we may notice such delays. The location seems to understand that they have begun to observe it and quickly becomes externally what the developers intended it to be. It turns out that the observer influences the game world even with his simple observation.
So, as I said, video games will always work according to this principle. Even many years from now, when computers are so powerful that they can simultaneously calculate all large objects in a virtual big city, there will still be some small details left, for example, insects or microbes, which will be loaded only when the observer, i.e. the player, looks at them. And all for the sake of optimization! This was an important introduction.
Now let's move on to the first proof of the matrix theory.
Double slit experiment
Let's get acquainted with quantum mechanics, and more precisely with the double-slit experiment. This is the most famous experiment in the history of physics. It was repeated more than any other experiment because it had stunning results, and all the scientists wanted to get them personally. It was this experiment that turned all physics on its head and inspired many scientists to study quantum mechanics.
Particulate matter
To understand this experiment, we first have to look at how the particles behave.
If we fire at a shield with a slot with small hard balls, then on the screen against which they hit we will see one stripe.
If we add another slot and fire at the shield, then we will naturally see two stripes on the screen.
Waves
Now let's see how the waves behave in this case.
The waves passed through the slot and spread, hitting the screen with the greatest force strictly along the line of the slot.
A bright stripe on the screen shows the force of the impact. It is similar to the stripe in the first experiment with hard balls.
But! When we add a second slit, something different happens. If the top of one wave meets the top of another, then they cancel each other out, and on the screen we will see an interference pattern of many stripes.
The point where the two tops of the waves intersect gives the highest impact force, and we see bright stripes, but where the waves cancel each other out, there is nothing.
Thus, if we pass solid balls through two slits, we see two stripes.
But with waves we see an interference pattern of many stripes.
So far everything is clear.
Elementary particles
Now let's look at quanta. A photon is a very small particle of light. If we pass photons through one slit, we will see one stripe on the screen, as in the case of solid balls.
But if we pass photons through two slits, we expect to see two stripes. But no!
In some mystical way, an interference pattern of many stripes appears on the screen.
How so? We released photons - small particles of light - expecting to see two stripes, but instead we see many stripes, as is the case with waves. This is impossible!
Later, scientists found out that the same strange behavior is shown not only by photons, but also by electrons, protons and various atoms. Physicists have puzzled over this mystery for a long time.
They thought: maybe these little balls are hitting each other, which is why they are repelled in different directions and therefore create an interference pattern of many stripes?
Then physicists began to shoot one microparticle one after another, so that there was not the slightest chance of their interaction. And here the scientists experienced cognitive dissonance: soon an interference pattern appeared on the screen again, violating all the laws of physics.
How so? How can elementary particles create patterns like waves? After all, they were released one at a time! Nobody understood this.
Logically, it turned out that the particle seemed to split in two, pass through both slits and hit itself. Just some kind of nonsense!
Physicists were completely baffled by this. They decided to look at which slit the particle actually passed through. They placed a measuring device near one of the slits and released an electron.
But there is more mysticism in quantum mechanics than scientists could imagine. When they began observing, the particles again behaved like small balls and produced an image of two stripes rather than an interference pattern of many stripes.
That is, the very fact of measuring or observing which slit the electron passed through revealed that it passed through one slit, and not through two. Electron decided to behave differently, as if he knew he was being watched. The observer destroyed the wave function of the particle just by the fact of his observation! Does this remind you of anything?
Yes, it all looks a lot like work. game engine. It seems that our Universe is running on some kind of computer, the power of which is not enough to accurately calculate the movement of each individual microparticle in space, so it does this according to a simplified model in the form of a probability wave. And it begins to make more accurate calculations only when a specific particle begins to be observed, so as not to break the illusion of the reality of its world for the observer. This technique lightens the load on the computer’s hardware – just like in video games!
But the problem is that 100 years ago, when scientists were trying to explain the anomalous results of the double-slit experiment, there were no video games, and therefore physicists did not think of putting forward the hypothesis that we live in virtual reality.
Interpretations of quantum mechanics
Instead, many other theories have been put forward. The most famous of them was invented in 1927 in the city of Copenhagen.
Copenhagen interpretation
Scientists Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg suggested that elementary particles are both waves and particles at the same time.
Niels Bohr and Werner HeisenbergSo, in order to measure an electron, that is, to carry out observations on it, it must be struck against quanta measuring instrument. And it is precisely because of this impact that the wave functions of the electron “collapse”, and it becomes only a particle. Thus, the observer himself does not influence the particle with his observation - only the quanta of the measuring device influence.
Since this explanation of quantum mechanics was formulated in the city of Copenhagen, it was called the Copenhagen interpretation.
It's funny, but if this interpretation is correct, then it still does not disprove the matrix hypothesis, since it can be adjusted to this explanation.
For example, a photon program can propagate through a network as a wave, and then restart when a node is overloaded, becoming a particle. This explains both quantum waves and the collapse of the wave function.
Many-Worlds Interpretation
After the Copenhagen interpretation, the second most popular explanation for the reasons for the strange behavior of microparticles in the double-slit experiment was the Many-Worlds interpretation.
Its essence lies in the fact that perhaps there are, as it were, parallel universes, in each of which the same laws of nature apply.
And that with each act of measuring a quantum object, the observer seems to split into several versions. Each of these versions “sees” its own measurement result and acts in accordance with it in its own universe.
What a strange explanation!
Which of these interpretations to believe in more is up to you to decide.
For example, a survey of scientists conducted in 1997 at a symposium under the auspices of UMBC(University of Maryland, Baltimore County) showed that most physicists do not believe either the Copenhagen or many-worlds interpretation. The votes were distributed as follows:
- 13 people voted for the Copenhagen interpretation;
- 8 – for Many Worlds;
- some scientists - for other, less popular interpretations;
- 18 physicists opposed all proposed interpretations at that time.
Until now, the debate about the correct interpretation of quantum mechanics continues around the world. It is conducted between university scientists, at conferences and even in bars and cafes.
Meanwhile, in 2006, technological developments made it possible for the first time to conduct an even more sophisticated version of the double-slit experiment.
It's called a delayed choice experiment.
Delayed choice experiment
In a simplified version, the essence of the experiment is something like this: microparticles are still passed through a barrier with two holes. However, this time physicists were able to make observations when the particles had already passed through the holes, but had not yet hit the projection screen.
Imagine that you are standing in front of a screen with your eyes closed, and microparticles pass through the holes in the form of waves, but at the last second before they hit the screen, you decide to open your eyes. And then something amazing happened.
At this point, the electrons become particles, just as they were when fired from the electron gun.
The electrons behave as if they had gone back in time, as if they had not passed through two holes, but only through one, as if they had never exhibited the properties of a wave. I can't wrap my head around this!
Universe, space, time, speed of light
The next hint that we live in a matrix may be the fact that our Universe has a maximum speed, although it is not clear why.
Thanks to Einstein, we all know that nothing can travel faster than photons in a vacuum. The speed of light is a constant.
The fact is that our world is structured in such a strange way that the faster an object moves, the more its time slows down. This has been proven by numerous experimental tests.
Reaching a speed of 300 thousand km/s, time stops altogether. Speaking in simple language if you had spaceship, capable of accelerating to 300 thousand km/s, and you would decide to fly on it to a distant galaxy, which is located at a distance of 3 billion light years from us, then you would fly there in an instant, because during the flight time on the ship would have stopped completely, and at that moment 3 billion years would have passed on Earth.
So, photons of light move at a speed of 300 thousand km/s, and therefore their time is at zero, and therefore it is simply impossible to accelerate even faster. After all, to increase speed, you need to slow down time even more, and it’s already at zero. So the question arises: why is our Universe structured in such a way that speed slows down time? Why are space and time interconnected? This is very, very strange for the real world, but quite understandable for the virtual one.
If we live in a matrix, then the speed of light is a product of information processing, therefore, our world is updated at a certain speed.
The supercomputer's processor is updated 10 quadrillion times per second.
And our Universe is updating a trillion times faster, but the principles are basically the same.
Well, time slows down as speed increases, because a virtual reality depends on virtual time, where each processing cycle is one “tick”.
Many gamers know that when the computer freezes due to lag, the game time also slows down. In the same way, time in our world slows down with increasing speed or near massive objects, which indicates the virtuality of the Universe in which we live.
In a ship flying at great speed, all processing cycles of its system are suspended in order to save money. In any case, this can be allowed.
Quantum entanglement
The Uncertainty Principle
Imagine a microparticle flying in space, for example, a photon of light. During flight, the photon, so to speak, rotates up or down, i.e. it has a spin.
Although in reality photons do not rotate, for ease of understanding this comparison fits here.
So, when all the physicists on the planet were puzzling over the reasons for such mystical results of the double-slit experiment, scientists came to the conclusion that, most likely, before a microparticle is observed, it does not even have a specific spin.
That is, until we look at the photon, it flies and at the same time cannot decide which direction it should spin, being in a superposition of uncertainty. As if it is too difficult for Mother Nature to accurately calculate the rotation of each individual elementary particle in space.
That’s why this is all done according to simplified diagram, and only after an observer looks at the particle does it become more physically complex and its rotation finally begins to be calculated in one of two directions.
The ability to transmit information faster than the speed of light
So - then everything turned out to be even more incredible. When Einstein was thinking about the theory of quantum mechanics, he proposed a very interesting experiment, which, in his opinion, should have shown the error or incompleteness of the Copenhagen interpretation.
Albert EinsteinThe essence of the experiment is this. If a cesium atom emits two photons in different directions, then their state becomes interconnected due to the law of conservation of momentum. This is called quantum entanglement.
To make it easier to understand, let’s explain it this way: if one of the entangled photons rotates from top to bottom, then the second photon must rotate from bottom to top, i.e. the opposite side. Otherwise it can not be.
You and I already know that scientists assumed that before making an observation, the photon cannot decide in which direction it should spin. It turned out that this happens even if it is entangled with another photon and their rotation must go in opposite directions.
It turns out that by measuring one of the entangled photons and finding out which way it is spinning, we will automatically make the second photon spin in the opposite direction, although we did not even observe it. Moreover, the second photon is obliged to instantly take on its spin, no matter how far it is from the first photon on which we carried out the measurement.
It turned out that even if entangled photons are separated from each other to different ends of the Universe and an observation is carried out on one of them, the second photon will receive information about this quadrillion times faster speed light and instantly change its spin to the opposite one. Just unbelieveble!
This violated the laws of physics. After all, as far as we know, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Then how does the second photon know so quickly that the first one has been measured? How does information reach him so quickly? Something doesn't add up...
That is why Einstein did not agree with the explanation of quantum mechanics, saying that instantaneous communication between microparticles in physical reality is simply impossible. He assumed that, most likely, when entangled photons fly out of an atom, they already contain information about who will rotate in which direction when they are observed. That is, photons are programmed to rotate in a certain direction even before measurement. Then it turned out that having carried out a measurement on one particle, we did not influence the other in any way, but only recognized its spin.
But there is much more mysticism in quantum mechanics than Einstein imagined. 17 years after he died with a sense of rightness, it turned out that this genius was sorely mistaken.
Irish physicist John Bell did something impossible.
John BellHe came up with one incredibly ingenious and very complex experiment that would prove or disprove the theory that elementary particles are pre-packaged with information about which direction they will need to spin when they are observed.
The results of the experiment were astonishing: they showed clearly and clearly that before observation, a particle really has no idea which way it should spin, even if it is in an entangled state with another particle. Only strictly after measurement does the photon randomly choose its spin. It turns out that entangled elementary particles can very easily transfer information to each other much faster than the speed of light!
Physicists were completely stunned by this. No one could understand how this was even possible. Quantum mechanics has even more mysteries than before.
Practical measurement of the speed of information transfer between elementary particles
In 2008, a group of Swiss researchers from the University of Geneva set out to find out how quickly a second entangled particle learns that a measurement has been taken on the first?
They spaced two entangled photons at a distance of 18 km from each other, measured one particle and began to record how fast the second one responded.
Scientists had technology that would allow them to notice a delay of 100 thousand times the speed of light.
But no delays were identified. This meant that entangled photons were able to communicate with each other at least 100 thousand times faster than the speed of light, and most likely, instantly!
Simulation theory
But while Einstein was wrong about entangled photons, he may have been right about one thing: that instantaneous communication in the physical world is impossible.
Well, in the real physical world, it may indeed be impossible. Except Einstein didn't imagine that we were probably living in a digital virtual reality.
And it is precisely in this that the instantaneous connection is very easily explained.
In this view, when two photons become entangled, their programs are combined to jointly drive the two points. If one program is responsible for the top spin, and another is responsible for the bottom spin, combining them will be responsible for both pixels, wherever they are.
At the moment of measuring one entangled particle, its program randomly selects one of its spins, and the program of the second entangled particle reacts to this accordingly.
This remapping code ignores distances because the processor doesn't have to go to a pixel to ask it to flip, even if the screen is as big as the Universe itself!
For many years there has been a persistent expression that no one understands quantum mechanics. However, if we assume that our world is virtual, then everything becomes very clear.
To describe the world of elementary particles and their interactions, scientists resort to quantum mechanics, and to study the macroworld, i.e. large objects, they use General theory Einstein's relativity. But nature somehow united these two worlds, which means there must be a theory that would be equally suitable for describing the subatomic world and the world largest bodies in the Universe. And the simulation hypothesis copes with this perfectly!
It can also easily explain the riddle big bang, curvature of space, tunnel effect, dark energy, dark matter and much more.
Recently, some minds have been saying that the theory of simulation, even if confirmed, will not change anything.
However, it is very difficult to agree with this statement, since official confirmation can greatly spur deeper research in this direction, thanks to which we may be able to find new shortcomings of our world, i.e. conventions, and they can already be used to create new technologies.
For example, if quantum effects are caused precisely by the fact that we live in a simulation, then the creation of such things as quantum computers or quantum cryptography can be called using the conventions of our world. Therefore, the theory of simulation, if confirmed, can change a lot...
Be that as it may, every year scientists find more and more indirect hints that we live in the matrix. And if this continues at the same pace, then in 30 years the theory of the virtuality of our world will become as official in the world of science as the theory of evolution.
Perhaps soon schools will tell students that they do not live in the real world. Although knowing that you are just a complex program with feelings, self-awareness is a little demotivating.
However, Elon Musk, on the contrary, believes that this is precisely motivating, since this simulation hypothesis solves the Fermi paradox and shows that intelligent civilizations are able to avoid self-destruction and technologically reach the point of creating their own virtual worlds. Therefore, for Musk, life in the matrix is a pleasant utopia, and he really wants it to be true.
Surely you have thought that the surrounding reality is somewhat similar to computer game. There is no clear evidence yet that our reality is virtual, nor is there any evidence to the contrary. However, some oddities in the structure of our world speak “FOR” this, at first glance, absurd idea.
In 2003, Elon Musk made a disconcerting statement: we are inside a computer simulation. A compelling argument, in his opinion, is that 30 years ago game graphics were at the lowest primitive level, but now they are almost indistinguishable from reality, and in 100 years humanity will have the opportunity to simulate the universe. What if some supercivilization has already programmed our universe and many others, and in these artificial worlds it has become possible to create their own virtual simulations, and so on countless times. Then it turns out that there are billions of simulated worlds, but there is only one real reality, and the chance of ending up in this one true reality is one in a billion. Conclusion - we live in a computer simulation.
But let's move away from these abstract discussions and turn to the facts of life. What reasonable arguments are there in favor of the structure of the world as a matrix?
1. Exact sciences dominate our universe. This suggests that our world can be described using a digital code.
2. Ideal conditions for the origin and existence of life. Distance to the sun (comfortable) temperature regime), the size and mass of the Earth (suitable gravitational force), and many other parameters seem to be specially created for this.
3. Most of the light and sound spectrum is not accessible to humans. Perhaps it is there that something is hidden that we should not see or hear (some extra details, conventional wiring or some kind of garbage, everything that could lead to the idea that the world is unreal).
4. Religion. Perhaps this faith in the creator is innate in our program, or this feeling that “he exists” is present to us on an intuitive level.
5. Opponents of the concept of digital simulation argue that the artificial world must be designed with colossal accuracy and detail, which is our reality, but this is impossible. But how do we know what reality really is like? Perhaps it is many times more complicated than ours. In addition, all the diversity of the world may not be worked out in detail, in those places where the player will never go (deep space), or where he does not look into this moment(observer effect in a microcosm), which reduces the load on computer power.
6. Why are we alone in the universe? There is nothing observed to indicate the existence of intelligent life in space. Maybe he's just a picture?
What will happen if humanity comes close to the solution? Nothing will change for us: we will not be able to leave the simulation, because we are just lines of program code and our reality is what the senses transmit to the brain. You can only turn us off.
Ecology of consciousness. Life: In this discussion about whether our world is real or fictional, another important argument is practically not heard...
You've probably heard it before: our world may be a sophisticated computer simulation that makes it feel like we're living in a real universe. Elon Musk recently raised this topic. And he may very well be right. But in this discussion about whether our world is real or fictional, another important argument is practically not heard: it doesn't matter at all.
But first, let's figure out why the world can be a simulation. Similar ideas were put forward by the ancient Greeks - what we can call computer simulation, they considered, for example, dreams. And the first thing you need to understand is our perception of reality does not equal reality itself. Reality is simply a collection of electrical impulses interpreted by our brain. We perceive the world indirectly and not in the most perfect way. If we could see the world as it is, there would be no optical illusions, no color blindness, or all sorts of tricks to mislead the brain.
Moreover, we perceive only a simplified version of this sensory information. Seeing the world as it is requires too much processing power, so our brains simplify it. It constantly looks for patterns in the world and correlates them with our perception. Therefore, what we call reality is only the brain's attempt to process incoming data from the senses.
And if our perception depends on this simplified flow of information, it does not matter what its source is - the physical world or a computer simulation that throws the same information at us. But is it possible to create such a powerful simulation? Let's look at the universe from a physicist's point of view.
Fundamental Laws
WITH physical point vision, The world is based on four fundamental interactions:
- strong,
- weak,
- electromagnetic,
- gravitational.
They control the behavior of all particles in the known universe. It is quite easy to calculate the action of these forces and simulate the simplest interactions, and to some extent we are already doing this. But the more particles interacting with each other are added to this picture, the more difficult it is to model. However, this is a question of computing power.
Right now we don't have enough computing power to simulate the entire universe. Physicists might even say that such a simulation is impossible - not because it is too difficult, but because the computer simulating the universe would be larger than the entire universe. And this is obviously an impossible task. However, there is a flaw in this logic: simulating the entire universe and creating the feeling that you live in a certain universe are not the same thing.
Many computer problems would be impossible to solve if our brains weren't so easily tricked. For example, we watch a movie or video on the Internet, which is transmitted with a delay and in fragments, but we perceive it all as one sequential stream. The logic is simple: you need to reduce the detail to a level at which the optimal compromise between quality and complexity is achieved and at which the brain stops making distinctions.
There are a lot of tricks to reduce the need for computing power when simulating the universe. The most obvious thing: do not process or show what no one is looking at. Another technique is to make it seem as if the universe is huge and infinite, when in fact it is not. This technique is used in many video games: by reducing the detail when depicting “distant” objects, we save a lot of effort and generate objects only when the player actually detects them. For example, in the game No Man's Sky, a huge virtual universe is generated on the fly as the player explores it.
Finally, fundamental physical principles can be introduced that make it extremely difficult or impossible to reach any other planet, meaning those experiencing the simulation are locked into their own world (speed of light, ever-expanding universe - yup, yup).
If you combine these approaches with some mathematical techniques (like fractal geometry), you can create a pretty decent simulation of the universe that relies on the heuristic principles of our brain. This universe seems endless, but it's just a trick.
However, this in itself does not prove that - as Musk and other proponents of this idea say - We are highly likely to live in a virtual world.
What is the argument?
Simulation and mathematics
The simulation argument was developed by Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom. It is based on several premises, which - with a certain interpretation - allow us to conclude that our universe is most likely a simulation. It's quite simple:
1. It is quite possible to simulate the Universe (see above).
2. Every civilization either dies out (pessimistic view) before it acquires the ability to simulate the universe, or loses interest in simulation, or continues to develop, reaches a technological level that allows creating such simulations - and does so. It's only a matter of time. (Will we do the same? But what about...)
3. Having reached this level, civilization creates many different simulations. (Everyone wants to have their own universe.)
4. When a simulation reaches a certain level, it begins to create its own simulations (and so on).
If you analyze all this automatically, you will have to conclude that the likelihood of living in the real world is extremely low - there are too many potential simulations. From this point of view, it is more likely that our world is a level 20 simulation rather than the original universe.
The first time I heard this argument, I was somewhat afraid. But here's the good news: it doesn't matter.
"Reality" is just a word
We have already discussed that our perception of reality is very different from reality itself. Let's assume for a moment that our universe really is a computer simulation. This gives rise to the following logical chain:
1. If the universe is just a model, it is a combination of bits and bytes, simply put, information.
2. If the universe is information, then you are information, and I am information.
3. If we are all information, then our bodies are just the embodiment of this information, a kind of avatar. The information is not tied to a specific object. It can be copied, transformed, changed as you wish (you only need appropriate programming techniques).
4. Any society capable of creating a world simulation is also capable of giving your "personal" information a new avatar (since it requires less knowledge than a universe simulation).
In other words, the information that defines you is not tied to your body. Philosophers and theologians have long debated the duality of body and soul (mind, personality, etc.). So this concept is probably familiar to you.
Thus, reality is information, and we are information. A simulation is a part of the reality it simulates, and everything we simulate is also reality from the point of view of those we simulate. This means that reality is what we experience. There are quite popular theories that claim that every object we see is a projection of information from the other end of the universe or even from another universe.
That is, if you experience something, perceive it, it is “real”. And the simulated universe is just as real as the universe running the simulation, since reality is determined by the content of the information - not by where that information is stored. published