Let's know the truth.
If you, me and every person and thing in the cosmos were actually characters in some giant computer game, we would not necessarily know it.
Are we living in a simulation? This idea was hypothesized by Philosopher Nick Bostrom in a paper in 2003 simply titled, Are you living in a computer simulation?
Because their computers would be so powerful, they could run a great many such simulations.
And there are other reasons to think we might be virtual. For instance, the more we learn about the universe, the more it appears to be based on mathematical laws.
If it turns out we really are living in a version of “The Matrix,” though—so what? “Maybe we’re in a simulation, maybe we’re not, but if we are, hey, it’s not so bad,” Chalmers said. “My advice is to go out and do really interesting things,” Tegmark said, “so the simulators don’t shut you down.”
There are some evidence
1. The first suggestion often proposed is inspired by The Matrix: Look for glitches.
Real universes don’t have glitches, but computers can have them,” Greene explains. “But I say to that… if it’s a really good simulation it should be able to rewind, erase the memory of the glitch, fix it, and then the simulated beings have no memory of it ever happening.
2. Evidence
The last piece of evidence the show puts forth is the observation of mass power shortages could be an indication of a simulation. Why? bill-nye-questions-if-we-live-in-a-matrix
Physicists Say We Definitely Aren't Living in a Computer Simulation.
A recent study by theoretical physicists from Oxford University in the U.K., which was published in the journal Scientific Advances just last week, definitively confirms that life and reality aren’t products of a computer simulation. The researchers, led by Zohar Ringel and Dmitry Kovrizhi, arrived at this conclusion by observing a novel link between gravitational anomalies and computational complexity.
Proponents of a simulated universe theory like Musk and popular astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson often point to the increasingly-complex capabilities of today’s computer systems as proof that reality can be emulated. In a simulated universe, which was made popular by British philosopher Nicholas Bostrom in 2003, it’s very likely that some advanced future civilization developed equally-advanced computer simulations of past civilizations — past here referring to our present, obviously — in one giant virtual reality experience. Supposedly, these advanced computer models run in a fashion like today’s computer games, many of which produce an interactive simulation of ancient civilizations. But according to the new research, creating such a large simulated universe is practically impossible. The simple reason: there’s not enough particles in the known universe that could sustain the computing power necessary for a simulation of this scale.
They discovered that the complexity of the simulation increased exponentially with the number of particles being simulated. If the complexity grew linearly with the number of particles being simulated, then doubling the number of particles would mean doubling the computing power required. If, however, the complexity grows on an exponential scale – where the amount of computing power has to double every time a single particle is added – then the task quickly becomes impossible. The researchers calculated that just storing information about a couple of hundred electrons would require a computer memory that would physically require more atoms than exist in the universe. The researchers note that there are a number of other known quantum interactions for which predictive algorithms have not yet been found. They suggest that for some of these they may in fact never be found.
Source:- cosmos magazine, America scientist,big think.
