Physicists have devised a new experiment to test if the universe is a computer. A philosophical thought experiment has long held that it is more likely than not that we're living inside a machine.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/11/physicists-may-have-evide_n_1957777.html
Martin Savage at the University of Washington has devised a definite way this hypothesis can be tested.
Martin Savage's idea is predicated on the fact that high-energy cosmic rays could not travel along the edges of a computer generated numerical lattice in any conceivable digital computer model, but would travel diagonally, and neither would they interact evenly in all directions the way true cosmic rays would be expected to do. To test the hypothesis however, we need far more computing power than is currently available. See http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.1847
Everything is possible unless proven wrong. I guess you are talking about the holographic universe principle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle
I have some reservations about universe in a computer, but no doubt we are living inside a machine. We are formed by the machine, we are guided by it, as well as punished and awarded. This machine is called society (or civilization, if you wish).
Eric, No, I believe he is not referring to the holographic principle, but actually Nick Bostrom's "Simulation argument" which is based on the thoughts of Baudrillard. Currently, there are a few theories floating around to see if we could test this by comparing computer simulated universes which all have some "signature" with our own universe, provided we find the same type of signature, which I suppose, from what little I've read, is a sort of lattice structure.
However, my thoughts on this type of experiment are that any civilization with a computational power fast enough to do simulations on the level we would experience if we ourselves were a simulation, would also have an invariant Lagrangian to describe all the forces of the universe in order to do the simulation, and that such a 'theory of everything' would change the signature found in the computer simulation, and thus, if there are negative results, the implications would be negligible, and that we should expect negative results, even if we live in such a simulation.
Here is the author of the simulation argument talking about it on video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnl6nY8YKHs
As to the posibility that we are living in a computer simulation, I mean a digital computer simulation, I doubt it is probable at all, on the grounds of computer science. Why do I doubt it? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice%27s_theorem) Any non trivial property of a partially recursive function is undecidable. If we were part of a digital computer simulation, all of our functionality, our thinking included, would be algorithmic. Now, I am going to write two algorithms:
integer firstAlgorithm(integer n){
If n is less than zero return undefined;
if n is equal to zero return 1;
print return n times firstAlgorithm(n-1);
}
integer secondAlgorithm(integer n){
if n is less than zero return undefined;
if n is equal to zero or n is equal to one return 1;
return secondAlgorithm(n-1)+secondAlgorithm(n-2);
}
Can we tell which algorithm computes the function n! and which one computes the Fibonacci numbers? I can, I guess we all can. How will it be possible for us to answer that question if we were agents in a digital computer simulation? Our thinking would be algorithmic and, as a consequence, subject to Rice's theorem limitations. There is no doubt that a digital computer can be simulated by a Turing machine, even a parallel machine can be simulated by a Turing machine.
Of course there is always the argument that a technologicaly advanced civilization might have non digital computers and there is a theorem relative to that: any neural network with real weights (real means continuous weights not IEEE floating point) can compute any function recursive or no and a variety of other results with which I am not that familiar ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_computer ).
Coincidentally, I just uploaded two articles that are very relevant to your question, they are: Lifting the Material Veil: An Essay on the Definition of Infrarealism and Mass-Energy Equivalence: An Infophysics Monograph. The Essay defines a consensual belief-system and the monograph is the first in a series to support it.
Vladimir Dusevich,
The two articles I referred to in my previous post define and discuss a universe simulation such as that posed in the question at hand. It didn't occur to me that referring to them would be considered spam, even if they were mine. That was my first post at RG. Perhaps i don't understand the rules yet. My apologies to all, if I caused any inconvenience.
J. Nunes, Eric Inman:
Be it Holographic principle or Simulation argument, the thing is, looking at the vast nature and in the ways that it behaves, and in the ways that the processes are co-related and established for functioning a specified job, tells you that there is some computer-like simulation coded being held. It still needs lots of mathematical bases for it to stand on correct platform.
I believe there is observable evidence that we are in some form of constructed simulation. Most of the evidence appears as we approach the boundaries of our reality: Speed of light limitation, quantum effects, non-local effects, special relativity, mass-energy equivalence, etc. All of these effects can be related to a numerically constructed (from discrete signals) reality. Again, in fear of being accused of spamming, I invite you all to read my two papers on the subject. I may be wrong, but I believe the evidence I present there, is very compelling.
We are talking about a possibility. And sometimes possibility do turn to certainty.
As long as we don't know about the certainty about a fact, there is no harm
thinking what's thought-provoking.
Martin Savage at the University of Washington has devised a definite way this hypothesis can be tested.
Martin Savage's idea is predicated on the fact that high-energy cosmic rays could not travel along the edges of a computer generated numerical lattice in any conceivable digital computer model, but would travel diagonally, and neither would they interact evenly in all directions the way true cosmic rays would be expected to do. To test the hypothesis however, we need far more computing power than is currently available. See http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.1847
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physics