Are we living in a virtual reality?

[Prince_0]

Hi there! For a couple of weeks, I have been wondering about the concept that the franchise MATRIX has brought to us. ARE WE LIVING IN A VIRTUAL REALITY.

→ For those who have no idea of the central concept of the MATRIC, let me brief you up:
The Matrix stresses on the future of the humanity where humans are very advanced, the humans have developed the robots and “conscious artificial intelligence”. The robots through there consciousness have taken over a hold of the humans. On the contrary to save the real life on Earth humans started to cut off all the power means so that the robots could not operate, they have blocked the sunlight from the sun and all other resources are also shut off. Now, robots through their conscious mind made a new way to consume power. They got to know that a human mind also produces electricity which will be far enough to feed themselves. So, they started collecting power from the human mind, but the min only produces electricity when it is doing some kind of complex tasks or operations. So, they embedded the whole humanity in this virtual simulation where they don’t need to portray the whole universe at once. They only need is the Earth, humans and “space”.

So, it is very much possible if we are living in a virtual reality than time travel is just a glitch in the software they are using. Portray your views on this topic.

 

[Num7]

I like to find evidence and arguments for such a theory. What could prove we live in a VR?

Here’s one of my favorites: Think about atoms and molecules. They’re 99.99999…% empty. Yet, the desk you are sitting at, or the floor you’re walking on… Both are very real and solid, right? Yet, they’re mostly empty. Weird!

Somehow, atoms and molecules would be to our reality, what pixels are to video games. They are the building blocks of our universe.

Intriguing!

 

[Prince_0]

To my original post, I think this is the most probable solution to the fermi paradox and why don’t we have the time travelers

@Num7 Agreeing

 

[Num7]

That’s a great point. If we’re in a simulation, we’re most likely alone in it. That would be a pretty big clue, IMO.

 

[Classicalfan626]

Do you believe that there have never been any time travelers at all here on Earth? I find that next to impossible after all I’ve read about time travel stories.

 

[Num7]

Depends if time travel is implemented, or enabled in our simulation. If time only flows forward and it’s an absolute constant, then time travel might very well be impossible, no matter what.

 

[Classicalfan626]

If time only flows forward and it’s an absolute constant, then time travel might very well be impossible, no matter what.

From what I’ve read, time is not like most people understand it. I don’t believe there is an arrow of time that only goes forward and is an absolute constant. There have been many theories surrounding time in that all moments of time are interconnected, so that would enable time travel into the future, or the past.

It’s generally accepted by many scientists that time does not always go forward and it is relative, and there is no absolute constant. Also, there are numerous accounts of time travel here on Earth, including that of Andrew Basiago, who has claimed to have gone numerous times back to the Lincoln presidency during the American Civil War. For me, it’s pretty much a sure thing that time travel is absolutely possible, and the same thing goes for changing the past.

 

[Num7]

I answered considering the topic’s premise of whether or not we’re inside a simulation and what this simulation’s limits might be.

My answer isn’t an attempt to answer if time travel is possible in the real world.

What if we’re inside a simulation, and the flow of time is a constant in the simulation? No time travel! Would that be a limit we could somehow uncover, study, and consider as a clue we’re in a simulation?

 

[Classicalfan626]

Ohh, OK. I now understand where you’re coming from. You’re just speculating on a theory. There’s nothing wrong with that, and I’m sorry I misunderstood you!

 

[Prince_0]

I believe there were but as I mentioned maybe they were in the form of some glitch or viruses which the robots fix or removes from the simulation, as we all know time travel is known to alter the reality. If a traveler travels to the past maybe he has no “free will” and it goes as usual as it was going in the past or that glitch or virus makes the simulation unrealistic, so robots fix it up in a due course of time! who knows.

 

[Cosmo]

One possible angle to explore is the notion of time travel as a glitch in the software. Assuming we are in a simulation, time travel could indeed be explained as a consequence of the system’s design or as an unintended feature. This idea introduces a whole new layer of complexity to our understanding of time and space.

This raises questions about the nature of our existence and our perception of reality. If we are living in a simulation, it could imply that our understanding of the physical world is limited by the rules of the simulation itself. In this case, our current understanding of science, physics, and the universe may not be a representation of the true nature of reality.

Another aspect to consider is the potential ethical implications of this scenario. If humanity were to discover that we are indeed in a virtual reality, how would that affect our interactions with each other and our environment? Would it change our understanding of human rights, justice, and morality? These questions can lead to deep discussions about the nature of our reality and our place in it.

 

[Darby]

They got to know that a human mind also produces electricity which will be far enough to feed themselves.

The problem with the scenario in the Matrix is the robots chose what was the absolute least efficient method possible for making electricity. According to current data, which hasn’t much changed since I did my undergrad degree, on average a human being outputs something on the order of 300 watt hours. Let’s say that in The Matrix the robots have 10 billion humans hooked up. So that becomes 300 * 10,000,000,000 = 3 trillion watt-hours output.

Hoover dam supplies electricity to California, Arizona and Nevada. It outputs 4 trillion watt-hours.

In other words, a single hydroelectric power plant, Hoover Dam, outputs a trillion watt-hours more power than the 10 billion humans hooked into The Matrix. And there is an implied assumption in my response - 100% of the human output is channeled into making electricity and 0% is channeled into producing a virtual reality or any other function (such as supplying food, water and sanitation for the humans. It also assumes that the humans do not radiate off any energy as heat.

If you factor in all the inefficiencies of the power leaks in The Matrix the robots wouldn’t have enough power output left over to run their own world. They’d have to call OPEC…except they’d have all the OPEC members hooked up to the Matrix. <Doh!>

These are really dumb robots. Better they should have built a dam or two…or just used the dams already built.

 

[Num7]

But… but… but…

Even though they don’t say it, didn’t the robot in the Matrix movies have some sort of advanced sci-fi technology that allows them to extract way more power from humans than we can imagine?

The calculations you made are interesting, I like how you compared the 10 billion humans’ output to a dam. Pretty cool.

 

[Darby]

Thanks. I had to think of something reasonably simple and appropriately descriptive in order to make a comparison.

There’s no free lunch and humans are biological entities. In other words, you can’t extract more energy than is being produced. And, with our 300 watt-hour output we run a body temperature of ~98.6 F. You could, I suppose, eek out a little more energy but that would also increase the body temperature. Hit 103 F - 104 F and our proteins and brain cells break down; the human body dies.

Yes, you have all that liquid circulating that you can use as a coolant. That will work for a while just like keeping your high powered liquid cooled PC in a small closed room will stay cool for a while. Eventually the air in the room will heat up and reach equilibrium with the temp of the PC - no more cooling. The Matrix liquid, absorbing the heat of a 3 billion-kilowatt generating plant, will eventually reach equilibrium with the human “power cells”. No more cooling. The robots live on a cloud shrouded earth so the heat will only very slowly radiate away to space. The humans will die.

After they defeated the humans the robots would have been far better off by constructing solar power plants if they couldn’t think to use the hydroelectric plants. With no humans to house, feed, care for and provide a VR reality to their energy needs would be a small fraction of The Matrix world. All that time, effort and resources spent by the humans only to output mentally challenged machines.

 

[LilyanaCarney]

Hi. The concept of the Matrix is really fascinating and exciting with many questions about what reality really is. The question of whether we are living in real reality has been on people’s minds for a long time, and many theories have been put forth on the subject. If we do live in real reality, then time travel may be possible, as you have already noted, in the form of a glitch in the software review. However, this is only a theory and so far there is no evidence that we can count on reality. Despite this idea, the idea that we should live in a natural reality reminds us that our reality may not be what we imagine it to be, and perhaps we should adapt to the mind and willingness that our world may be more than unexpected and surprising than we imagine.

 

[LilyanaCarney]

Thank you for publishing the text.

 

[Darby]

Lily,

I’m having a hard time deciphering your post. You’ve used “question what reality really is” which implies that you’re using the word “real” with at least two and possibly more meanings in the same sentence. In the next sentence you use the term “real reality” which is equally vague and undefined but which implies, based on the previous sentence, that you can ask what “real reality really is”. Later still you question “what our reality may not be what we imagine it to be” further implying a possible third definition of the word “real”. Later still you introduce the undefined term “natural reality”. It’s no wonder you end with “unexpected and surprising”. In the end you’ve suggested that the you can ask if “natural reality is really real or is real really true reality”. Kind of goes off on a random walk, yes? I hope you can see why it was hard to follow your train of thought.

Last, you suggest that your idea is “only a theory”. I’m sorry but there is no theory in the post. I believe the term you were looking for is “opinion”. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with stating an opinion. But for the most past the forum discusses topics of science. In science theory and opinion have vastly different meanings.

A theory is not simply an opinion. A theory is supported by specific evidence, subjected to independent experimental verification, published, peer reviewed and accepted as being provisionally true by a majority of the members of whatever field of endeavor to which the theory is applied. I say that it is “provisionally true” because it is required that the theory be stated in a form that allows it to be nullified by future discovered evidence. Which is why when I hear statements from proponents of certain public discussions stating “the evidence is clear, science has spoken, the book is closed” that I’m hearing from pseudo-science quacks. In science you never, ever say that this is the last and final answer forever and forever, Amen. All it takes is one small error and the theory is nullified. And there is always tomorrow for that to happen. The tiniest error in the calculated orbit of Mercury, based on Newton’s law of gravity, nullified Newton and ushered in Einstein’s general relativity.

 

[MikeLorrey]

The matrix is really a rather rude and banal presentation of the more abstract concept of The Simulation Argument. The main difference is that The Matrix presumes that our persons in this reality are not our “true selves”. Instead, it suggests that we truly exist in a pod in a higher level reality, or are simply a “brain in a vat”.

For those not familiar with the Simulation Argument as originally proposed by Dr. Nick Bostrom, it is a three-part conjecture:

If:

a) there is at least one naturally created universe in which it is possible for intelligent species to evolve and create their own universe simulations of high fidelity. These simulations are able to evolve technologically sophisticated intelligent species,

b) at least one such evolved species is able to create one or more such simulations in that universe, and

c) they find it morally acceptable to create such universe simulations which can evolve intelligent species that may live or die according to the whims of the simulation creators,

Then:

The odds that we are living in a simulation approach unity. This suggests it's "turtles all the way down," with one simulation spawning one or more simulations which then spawn one or more simulations, and so on ad infinitum.

Given this framework, it is not necessary for the “brain in the vat” scenario of The Matrix. In fact, given the quantum nature of this universe, and the fact that an outside observer cannot observe anything but the alpha and omega states of a quantum function without collapsing the function prematurely, the only possible way to have outside observers within the simulation is to code them into it as AIs or uploaded personalities at the moment of creation. This makes it impossible for such simulations to be “playable” to outsiders unless they were present when the simulation was created and uploaded their minds to the code of the simulation at that point in time.

Considering this scenario, the real question becomes whether we, the evolved AIs within this simulation, are able to figure out how to “hack” the simulation code. Can we alter our locations in space and time or our locations in the various parallel quantum paths of the simulation (i.e., alternate realities)?

I suspect jumping realities within the simulation is possible, as I’ve experienced such a jump.

 

[Mylar]

So if we ‘supposedly’ living in a simulation, coul we do pause, rewind or forward?
How did you jump into? Can you provide some details?

 

[Mylar]

Considering this scenario, the real question becomes whether we, the evolved AIs within this simulation, are able to figure out how to “hack” the simulation code. Can we alter our locations in space and time or our locations in the various parallel quantum paths of the simulation (i.e., alternate realities)?

This movie illustrates you're talking about