Could we be living in a digital simulation?
James Gates, a theoretical physicist researching super string theory, has come across computer code (Block Linear Self Dual Error Correcting Code), embedded in the fabric of our universe.
Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom postulated a simulation theory in 2003. His compelling idea involves post-humans running an ancestral simulation... us.
Our new understanding of the improbability of life occurring by accidental means, coupled with advances in quantum mechanics, have made simulation theory a very attractive option.
I don't know what made you personally click the simulation option, but here is one possible theory regarding the developer of (and the reason behind), our simulation.
This theory involves a super intellect, a developer that exists outside our time and space. This developer decided to build entities to share 'Reality 2.0' with.
One option would be to code what computer gamers call NPCs (Non Player Characters). Essentially robots, NPCs interact with the game according to set algorithms. While this has the advantage of being very ordered and predictable, it would also be somewhat boring. (Think of the difference between spending time conversing with a child's talking doll versus a child, or playing with a robot dog versus a Labrador Retriever.)
Another option would be to create players not confined to an algorithmic response. This is a dangerous option, due to the risk of them running amok and attempting to destroy Reality 2.0 and the other participants. This would force the developer to remove those that ran amok. This would have the effect of some players following the programmer's rules only as a means of self preservation (out of fear, not trust). The programmer, looking to operate 2.0 on a positive response basis only, likely felt that this was not an option.
In order to deal with this issue, the programmer created a simulation called Reality 1.0 (as a subset of 2.0). Giving his players carbon-based avatars, he dropped them into the simulation first. The programmer coded them with a moral algorithm, but gave them the free will to override it. In giving them free will, he imbued them with actual intelligence and consciousness. The programmer provided an operating manual, written in terms that would be understandable throughout the entire period of the simulation. He also entered the simulation himself (as a relatable carbon-based avatar), to explain the purpose of the game and facilitate a doorway to 2.0. As the player's technologies increased, they would become either more aware and appreciative of the beauty and intricacy of the simulation or they would decide that their own technologies rendered the developer obsolete.
Although the developer coded Reality 1.0 as a fully playable simulation in itself, its actual purpose was to allow the player to determine their suitability to Reality 2.0. By offering opt-in access to 2.0, the developer could allow the players to exercise their own free will. If they trusted the developer with their lives, they could progress to 2.0 when their 1.0 simulation time expired. (That trust would include them leaving their 1.0 expiration date in the hands of the programmer, in case you think you've spotted a short cut.) Once they left their carbon-based avatar behind, their character would be brought out of simulation and into reality.
Players who did not trust or wish to know the developer would not be forced to participate in 2.0. This way, all the denizens inducted would be present of their own free will. Understanding the benign intentions of the developer, they would realize the honour of the invitation they accepted. This appreciation would have the effect of ensuring the ongoing, vibrant, harmonious viability of Reality 2.0.
Sound plausible? Any thoughts on who the Developer might be?
I think I'll stick with nick's theoryGod as the developer?
Sorry if this sounds like a Matrix movie rip off, but this hypothesis solves a lot of scientific issues. There is a following in the scientific community for this theory, but of course the jury is still out on who is running the simulation.
As mentioned above, Nick Bostrom postulated that it was our ancestors, post-humans with some tremendous computing power at their disposal. This seems possible, given the progression of technology that we've witnessed. However, is it necessarily the best answer?
Would it not seem even more likely that someone like God would have the technology to keep all these plates spinning at once? Even if the universe is only rendered when we're looking at it, there are a lot of us looking at it right now.
What do you think? Has it always been just us, or is there someone else?