Living in a simulation?
Elon Musk's belief that we are living in a simulation is something I've seen pop up a lot in the past few weeks. And I really hadn't spent much time thinking about it or drawing conclusions. Partly, because those who write about it tend to liken it to the Matrix. After reading into it... well, it is really nothing like the Matrix at all. And, it seems more probable than a lot of beliefs held by others which we are perfectly willing to accept.
The Matrix does indeed include a simulated world. But, that is also where the similarities end. In the Matrix, we had "real" bodies which were being harvested for energy. This is an important difference. It means that there is (basically) a single simulation. Yes, they talk about other attempts to simulate a world for humans, but the implication is that those failures were terminated.
What is different about what Musk believes is that there may not actually be (and probably isn't) some "real" world we are a part of.
Let's run this down. We (as a species) simulate all sorts of things. Models of the universe, spread of disease, entire video game worlds, and so on. And, we're getting closer and closer to simulating human intelligence. I'm not saying we're days away from it. I'm saying, we are consistently getting closer. As long as we are always making progress towards it, it means that at some point in time we will be able to simulate a living world. If that is possible, then once that point is reached, we could run any number of simulated universes. Furthermore, within each universe, they could create such simulations as well, so long as they were inhabited with entities with human like intelligence.
The potential is LITERALLY infinite.
If you can accept that, then you must also accept that we might simply be part of such a simulation ourselves.
Back to other less likely beliefs. That we aren't the only "intelligent" beings in the universe. The universe is finite, even if mind bogglingly large. There IS a limit to the number of planets. Furthermore, most scientists postulate that at some point cosmic radiation will kill everything. So, there is ALSO a time limit on the universe. This is why there are finitely many chances at intelligent life. And yet, there are MANY who believe or are even "sure" that there is other intelligent life out there. And these people include geniuses like Steven Hawking and others of similar reputability.
Oddly, living in a simulation doesn't garner the same credibility. But, as stated, the potential is, by contrast, infinite. If, we can reach that point in tech, we will have proved it possible. And, even if we never do, it still doesn't mean we aren't. Simulations are often imperfect. We could be in a simulation which cut some corners and it accommodate simulating a being smart enough to produce such a complex simulation. But, lets ignore that case. At present, it certainly seems like we will attain something comparable at some point in time.
The other interesting thing is that the premise can actually help explain some things. Quantum physics for instance describes some particles which are affected by being observed. This always bugged me. How would a particle know it is being observed? We, ourselves, are just a particular arrangement of particles. Much of science is fine with the notion that human brains are merely machines beyond our current ability to model, but they nonetheless follow well defined rules. In other words, to all matter around us, we should be no different than any configuration of those same particles. Whether those particles have the ability to observe or not.
Science has certainly not explain WHY observing such particles has any impact. But, if this is a simulation, it is very easy to make sense of such a thing. A simulation would have no need to deal with something unless it is something observed by an agent of the simulation. The simulation doesn't need to determine the state of matter unless something the simulation is measuring is actually able to perceive that matter.
Beyond that... the only explanation is religious. Another theory for why observing some matter affects their state is because there is something special about us. Something more than just the matter we are composed of. Something like a soul.
HOLY SHIT! Nahh just kidding. The point is, even traditional religions are generally afforded more credibility than what I see regarding this theory. And that is sad to me. Not only does the notion of being able to create such a complex simulation seem like something attainable in the near future, and thus validates the possibility. It also offers rational explanations to many scientific problems.
And, if there can be infinitely many simulations, the odds that we are in the "base" reality truly are staggeringly low.
I guess the bit I don't understand is Musk's plan to "break us out". What would that even mean? In my final year at Carleton University, I wrote a program with artificially intelligent "robots" that tried to "learn" their way from the start to the finish of a world populated with other robots. If those robots attained something resembling consciousness, and learned they were part of my simulation, there is nothing to break out of. They don't exist outside of that simulation. Remember, this is probably the biggest key differentiator between this and something like the Matrix.
I don't know where I stand on this yet. Just that I certainly view it as more probable than some things many already readily accept and far less crazy than many paint it to be.
The Matrix does indeed include a simulated world. But, that is also where the similarities end. In the Matrix, we had "real" bodies which were being harvested for energy. This is an important difference. It means that there is (basically) a single simulation. Yes, they talk about other attempts to simulate a world for humans, but the implication is that those failures were terminated.
What is different about what Musk believes is that there may not actually be (and probably isn't) some "real" world we are a part of.
Let's run this down. We (as a species) simulate all sorts of things. Models of the universe, spread of disease, entire video game worlds, and so on. And, we're getting closer and closer to simulating human intelligence. I'm not saying we're days away from it. I'm saying, we are consistently getting closer. As long as we are always making progress towards it, it means that at some point in time we will be able to simulate a living world. If that is possible, then once that point is reached, we could run any number of simulated universes. Furthermore, within each universe, they could create such simulations as well, so long as they were inhabited with entities with human like intelligence.
The potential is LITERALLY infinite.
If you can accept that, then you must also accept that we might simply be part of such a simulation ourselves.
Back to other less likely beliefs. That we aren't the only "intelligent" beings in the universe. The universe is finite, even if mind bogglingly large. There IS a limit to the number of planets. Furthermore, most scientists postulate that at some point cosmic radiation will kill everything. So, there is ALSO a time limit on the universe. This is why there are finitely many chances at intelligent life. And yet, there are MANY who believe or are even "sure" that there is other intelligent life out there. And these people include geniuses like Steven Hawking and others of similar reputability.
Oddly, living in a simulation doesn't garner the same credibility. But, as stated, the potential is, by contrast, infinite. If, we can reach that point in tech, we will have proved it possible. And, even if we never do, it still doesn't mean we aren't. Simulations are often imperfect. We could be in a simulation which cut some corners and it accommodate simulating a being smart enough to produce such a complex simulation. But, lets ignore that case. At present, it certainly seems like we will attain something comparable at some point in time.
The other interesting thing is that the premise can actually help explain some things. Quantum physics for instance describes some particles which are affected by being observed. This always bugged me. How would a particle know it is being observed? We, ourselves, are just a particular arrangement of particles. Much of science is fine with the notion that human brains are merely machines beyond our current ability to model, but they nonetheless follow well defined rules. In other words, to all matter around us, we should be no different than any configuration of those same particles. Whether those particles have the ability to observe or not.
Science has certainly not explain WHY observing such particles has any impact. But, if this is a simulation, it is very easy to make sense of such a thing. A simulation would have no need to deal with something unless it is something observed by an agent of the simulation. The simulation doesn't need to determine the state of matter unless something the simulation is measuring is actually able to perceive that matter.
Beyond that... the only explanation is religious. Another theory for why observing some matter affects their state is because there is something special about us. Something more than just the matter we are composed of. Something like a soul.
HOLY SHIT! Nahh just kidding. The point is, even traditional religions are generally afforded more credibility than what I see regarding this theory. And that is sad to me. Not only does the notion of being able to create such a complex simulation seem like something attainable in the near future, and thus validates the possibility. It also offers rational explanations to many scientific problems.
And, if there can be infinitely many simulations, the odds that we are in the "base" reality truly are staggeringly low.
I guess the bit I don't understand is Musk's plan to "break us out". What would that even mean? In my final year at Carleton University, I wrote a program with artificially intelligent "robots" that tried to "learn" their way from the start to the finish of a world populated with other robots. If those robots attained something resembling consciousness, and learned they were part of my simulation, there is nothing to break out of. They don't exist outside of that simulation. Remember, this is probably the biggest key differentiator between this and something like the Matrix.
I don't know where I stand on this yet. Just that I certainly view it as more probable than some things many already readily accept and far less crazy than many paint it to be.
Comments
Post a Comment