The Ancestor Simulation

In his 2003 paper, Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?, Bostrom presents three propositions, one of which he asserts must hold true:

1. Humanity will face extinction before reaching a 'posthuman' stage. In this advanced era, even the likes of Isaac Newton would seem simplistic, as we evolve beyond such labels. This notion implies we fail to reach posthumanity and thus lack the technology to simulate an entire universe.
2. We might achieve posthuman status but show little interest in creating simulations. Perhaps we’re too preoccupied with the whereabouts of our trousers.
3. We do reach the posthuman stage and create numerous simulated realities. While we lack such capabilities now, our descendants will possess them in abundance.

What is this force that shapes our dreams yet eludes our grasp—

From Who Wants to Live Forever

Bostrom conjectures that these posthumans may construct a virtual model of their ancestors, dubbed the Ancestor Simulation. It raises the question: why would highly intelligent beings care about us, mere mortals clad in pants?

Perhaps they do this for academic curiosity, much like our attempts to recreate Viking ships to comprehend their craftsmanship. They might seek to analyze pivotal events, such as elections, that have shaped their apocalyptic reality. Alternatively, it could all be for entertainment. Regardless of intent, the simulation would feel authentic to us.

Once a single simulated universe exists, the likelihood that you inhabit the 'real' or base-level universe is about 50:50. If future intellectuals undertake a crowdfunding initiative, they might generate hundreds of millions of simulations for amusement, similar to The Sims.

Individuals could create multiple universes, diminishing the chances that you reside in the original world. Moreover, considering the possibility of simulations spawning further simulations complicates matters. Elon Musk has suggested that the odds of existing in the true world are “One in a Billion.” You might not even be in MTV’s Road Rules; rather, you're more likely to be part of The Truman Show.

You could be sitting in front of your simulated device, convinced that philosophers possess too much time on their hands. Of course I’m real! I know this world exists because I can see, feel, and smell it! But that’s precisely the issue.

The simulation is designed to mislead you into believing it is the base-level reality, and we’re instinctively skeptical about the concept of simulations, perhaps even frightened by the idea. Yet, you cannot definitively prove that we are not in a simulation, as any evidence you present is part of the simulated framework. However, there may be hints hidden within our universe suggesting it is an illusion—hints that Freddie buried in his lyrics.

It’s the terror of understanding the world we inhabit, Witnessing friends shout, ‘Let me out!’—

From Under Pressure

Measurement Problems, Erwin Schrödinger, and His Cat

A significant challenge lies in our inability to comprehend reality at its most fundamental level, and what we do grasp indicates that the world is far from what it appears. Quantum mechanics, a crucial avenue for understanding our existence, presents a measurement problem. This is exemplified through the double-slit experiment, where subatomic particles, such as electrons, are propelled towards a barrier containing two slits. A wall behind records the electrons’ impact. The behavior of these electrons—acting as either waves or particles—shifts based on observation. When unobserved, they create wave patterns akin to water ripples. However, researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science state:

“Once an observer begins to watch the particles going through the openings, the picture changes dramatically… In other words, when under observation, electrons are being 'forced' to behave like particles and not like waves. Thus, the mere act of observation affects the experimental findings.”

It’s reminiscent of when you think you’re alone and start dancing, only to stop when someone enters the room. Our behavior shifts to conceal our clumsy moves from view, yet the brightest minds struggle to explain the electrons’ peculiar actions. It’s as though an observer alters our reality. What does this have to do with cats?

Findings like these suggest that minuscule entities, such as electrons, exist in probabilistic states—a notion dismissed by Nobel laureate Erwin Schrödinger. Many are familiar with Schrödinger’s cat thought experiment, wherein a cat is placed in a box containing radioactive material. There’s a 50% chance the material emits an alpha particle, triggering a gas chamber that would kill the cat. Schrödinger argued that until the box is opened, the cat exists in a superposed state—neither alive nor dead. Upon observation, a binary choice is made. Schrödinger rejected this odd concept, and Einstein supported him with a hearty ‘hells yeah!’ Both were mistaken. We face a measurement problem, and our world remains enigmatic. How does this hint at our simulation?

If we are indeed in a simulation, the computational power needed to render it would be staggering—10¹? operations per second per individual. Like any competent game designer, posthumans would likely conserve resources by only rendering what is necessary at any given moment. Neil deGrasse Tyson explained on his StarTalk podcast:

“You don’t have to have all the world existing there at all times. That might be an unrealistic amount of computing power. You just need (enough of the world) they see around them. There’s a flag that goes up and the programmer realizes—oops need more earth.”

You encounter this frequently in video games, from Undertale to Leisure Suit Larry. Non-player characters (NPCs) come alive when you interact with them; otherwise, they remain inactive in the background. The electron behaves similarly, altering its actions under observation because we’re in a simulation and require it to do so. This could clarify a mystery that perplexed Einstein, who famously lamented about God and chance.

Open your eyes, look up to the skies and see, Carry on, carry on as if nothing really matters—

From Bohemian Rhapsody

Our Universe is a Hologram

While I’m not asserting that the Earth is flat, it’s conceivable that the universe might be. Physicists at the University of Southampton, studying residual radiation from the Big Bang, have identified signs suggesting our universe is an illusion. While examining the cosmic microwave background (CMB), they concluded that space could merely be two-dimensional. Welcome to the flat life, where your world is:

a three-dimensional image projected from a two-dimensional surface, much like a hologram emerges from a sheet of photographic film.

Our hologram is generated from the entanglement of qubits, which are units of information in quantum mechanics, producing fields of entropy on a constantly shifting two-dimensional surface. The holographic principle aids us in understanding gravity on a quantum scale and sheds light on the universe's origin. If accurate, everything we perceive is 3D information encoded on a 2D surface, suggesting we reside in a hologram. Moreover, if one were to aggregate all the qubits in the universe, they would essentially have the recipe for crafting our reality. Brace yourself, Einstein, for things are about to get intriguing.

Craig Hogan, director of Fermilab Center for Particle Astrophysics, suggests that scrutinizing the hologram might challenge our understanding of existence:

“But just as moving your face toward the TV screen will cause pixels to come into focus, if we stare deeply enough into matter on a subatomic level, the bitmap of our holographic universe might reveal itself.”

So, we inhabit a hologram and can potentially glimpse into our holographic matrix to see the individual pixels forming reality. We gaze beyond our flat skies and realize we may be mere blips on someone else’s screen. Should we simply continue as usual, or should we search for the keystrokes of a Great and Powerful Oz?

Another hero, another mindless crime, Behind the curtain, in the pantomime—

From The Show Must Go On

Our Reality is Code and Math

We are already merging technology with our biology. Researchers from the University of Washington have embedded malicious software into DNA strands, demonstrating how gene sequencing software could be compromised and illustrating how seamlessly technology integrates into our bodies—as if we were designed for it.

Moreover, programming aligns perfectly with the mathematical principles governing our universe. Max Tegmark, a distinguished MIT cosmologist, likens the rigidity of our reality's rules—like the speed of light limit—to the programming constraints of a video game.

“If I were a character in a computer game, I would also discover eventually that the rules seemed completely rigid and mathematical. That just reflects the computer code in which it was written.”

Furthermore, in his paper The Mathematical Universe, Tegmark argues that a simulation does not need to be computed but merely described by encoding it with “all properties of the mathematical structure that is our universe.”

Thus, we possess a framework of rules (mathematical systems, formal systems, and computations) that define our reality. These physical laws are mathematical in nature, delineating the parameters of our existence, lending an air of authenticity. Tegmark asserts that “time slices” of these mathematical specifications could be sequentially interpreted as our real life. To paraphrase Bill Clinton—It’s the math, stupid.

In addition, many constructs defining our reality exhibit “very low algorithmic complexity,” such as the Hawking-Hartle wave function. Tegmark notes this makes our universe highly compressible, implying we could exist on a posthuman storage device.

“The physical laws that we have discovered provide great means of data compression since they make it sufficient to store the initial data at some time together with the equations and an integration routine.”

The notion that coding-like rules are pervasive throughout physics was echoed recently by James Gates, a theoretical physicist and string theory expert at the University of Maryland.

“In my research, I found this very strange thing. I was driven to error-correcting codes—they’re what make browsers work. So why were they in the equations I was studying about quarks and electrons and supersymmetry?”

Let’s hope our reality leans more toward Opera than Internet Explorer, but isn’t it fascinating how closely our universe resembles code at its core?

John Wheeler, a contemporary of Einstein, coined the phrase “it from bit,” suggesting our physical reality comprises bits of information. What we perceive as a spoon is an intricate algorithm made of numerous data points. In essence, there exists a spoon, but not in the manner we experience it. This complexity should comfort you the next time you spill soup down your chin.

We began by recognizing the paradox of it being impossible to disprove our existence in a simulation due to the nature of simulations. We’ve examined how the universe behaves in peculiar ways when observed at the quantum level, potentially hinting at a programmer behind the scenes. We’ve explored new insights from the inception of our universe, suggesting our reality is a two-dimensional facade. Finally, we’ve noted that we can manipulate our DNA and observed suspicious mathematical patterns throughout the physical constructs of our universe, akin to code on a computer. Our everyday reality is far from what it seems and, at its most fundamental level, consists of information—information that could serve as an instruction manual.

You might be rolling your eyes at this point, dismissing it as mere nonsense. If you’re skeptical or undecided, consider the two main counterarguments.

Turned away from it all like a blind man, sat on a fence but it don’t work—

From Under Pressure

Two Problems for the Simulation Hypothesis

The first and most significant challenge is whether consciousness can be simulated, and if so, how to account for the immense processing power required. Critics argue that any possibility of simulated consciousness must adopt computationalism—“consciousness is isomorphic with or caused by computations.” Is a brain akin to a computer, and vice versa? Does a super-advanced brain lead to consciousness? Before you skeptics leap from your seats protesting “NO,” remember that many leading scientists believe we will eventually create artificial consciousness in this manner. Some experts in artificial intelligence even suggest we may have already achieved it.

George Dyson, son of the renowned mathematician Verena Huber-Dyson and the esteemed physicist Freeman Dyson, specializes in artificial intelligence. In an April 2019 podcast with Sam Harris, Dyson stated:

“The fact that AI has not revealed itself…that’s zero evidence that it doesn’t exist. If it existed, I would expect it not to reveal itself.”

While Dyson doesn’t claim we’ve successfully simulated consciousness yet, he believes that AI, or more accurately artificial general intelligence, would realize the strategic advantage of remaining hidden. Perhaps it’s already here, planning its grand unveiling alongside Jay Z? Even if it hasn’t happened, Dyson contends that the singularity is inevitable, and we should prepare for it.

If numerous experts who understand artificial consciousness believe we, the mere mortals, can create it, why couldn’t our future descendants achieve the same? By extrapolating from our current reality using Bayesian statistics, one could argue that a more advanced civilization could generate completely convincing simulations, and perhaps they already have.

Regarding the power required for such simulations, some speculate they could utilize a Matrioshka brain, harnessing the energy of an entire star using a Dyson sphere. This may sound like something out of science fiction, but remember, we’re discussing the highly advanced beings of the future. More crucially, our clever descendants exist outside our current framework. There’s no reason to assume our universal laws and constraints apply in their realm. It would be prudent for them to impose limits on our capabilities, ensuring we can only operate within certain boundaries.

The second prevalent critique is questioning why advanced beings would even be interested in us, the simple folk. During the 2016 Isaac Asimov Debate on whether we exist in a simulation, physicist Lisa Randall from Harvard posited that the chances of this being a simulation are “effectively zero” for this reason. To them, our reality might seem mundane.

Neil deGrasse Tyson echoes this sentiment in his StarTalk, speculating that posthumans would likely prefer to simulate realities that closely resemble their own time or sophistication. However, I argue that we possess an endless nostalgia and curiosity about our previous selves, as seen in television shows about Vikings or renowned exhibits on ancient civilizations.

If we accept that higher beings might find our reality interesting and that simulating consciousness is feasible, then it stands to reason we could currently be living within a simulation. Another critic bites the dust.

Did Queen offer any guidance on our next steps?

God knows I want to break free, But I have to be sure When I walk out that door—

From I Want to Break Free

A Dangerous Escape

If we are indeed trapped in a simulation, should we not strive to escape? The answer depends on our perceptions of what lies beyond that exit and the potential consequences of our actions. We cannot predict the fallout of meddling with our reality. Philosopher Preston Greene warns humanity:

“…it is reasonable to assume that it is crucial to the researchers that we don’t find out that we’re in a simulation. If we were to prove that we live inside a simulation, this could cause our creators to terminate the simulation—to destroy our world.”

Nick Bostrom similarly cautions against risking “simulation shutdown” if we probe too deeply. You wouldn’t want to be remembered as the fool who ruined it for everyone in the final moments of human history.

Additionally, humans are prone to panic. If news spreads that a group of physicists and philosophers is attempting to liberate us from a simulation, it could lead to global chaos—perhaps even a toilet paper shortage. It’s in everyone’s best interest to remain calm.

Tow the line and play their game Yeah, let the anesthetic cover it all ’Til one day they call your name—

From Hammer to Fall

The Game is Us

We should proceed as if everything is normal—because it is. One of the pervasive myths we operate under is the belief in objective reality. The internet revels in our inability to agree on whether a dress is blue or gold or whether we hear Yanny or Laurel. Such disagreements are commonplace because our individual simulations are constantly at play. You and I perceive the world differently for various reasons, often clashing over our ‘shared reality.’ A simulated existence is no less valid once we acknowledge our reality’s inherent malleability.

Furthermore, it’s incorrect to state you are sitting in a simulated room; we are part of the simulation. The simulation is our reality. We can only be regarded as simulations from an external perspective. Our concerns may seem trivial in this chaotic, simulated world, but they remain ours.

So don’t become some background noise A backdrop for the girls and boys Who just don’t know or just don’t care—

From Radio Ga Ga

Be Your Best Simulated Self

If we exist within a simulation, we can assume there’s a purpose, even if it was created purely for amusement. We have no way of knowing what that purpose is, leaving us to ascribe our meanings to the simulation. Existence—virtual or otherwise—is a blank canvas awaiting our narratives. We should live life to its fullest, regardless of whether our freedom is constrained by another reality.

Moreover, if you surrender or believe life is futile, the posthumans might relegate you to the status of a non-player character. I once dated one of those; she was a terrible kisser.

This may be the base-level reality, but if it isn’t, that’s acceptable too. Queen understood that the world has only one sweet moment set aside for us, and we must seize it, in whatever form that takes. Posthumans, take note—we are the champions of this virtual realm, and we will rock you until your pants fall off. Or, in your case, put them back on.