| Revision as of 15:26, 8 May 2023 editRandy Kryn (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users286,384 edits →In fiction, architecture, and celebrity takes: 'the'← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:49, 8 May 2023 edit undoCarchasm (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users27,692 edits merge to Simulation hypothesis after successful merge proposalTag: New redirectNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{merge to|Simulation hypothesis|discuss=Talk:Simulation hypothesis#Merge Simulated reality|date=April 2023}} | |||
| {{short description|Hypothesis that reality could be simulated}} | |||
| {{distinguish|Virtual reality|Augmented reality}} | |||
| {{Philosophy sidebar|expanded=Branches}} | |||
| The '''simulation theory''' is the ] that ] could be simulated—for example by ] ]—to a degree indistinguishable from "true" reality.<ref name="SA-20221122">{{cite news |last=Vopson |first=Melvin M.|title=Expert Proposes a Method For Telling if We All Live in a Computer Program |url=https://www.sciencealert.com/expert-proposes-a-method-for-telling-if-we-all-live-in-a-computer-program |date=22 November 2022 |work=] |accessdate=22 November 2022 }}</ref> It could contain ] ] that may or may not know that they live inside a simulation. This is quite different from the current, technologically achievable concept of ], which is easily distinguished from the ] of actuality. Simulated reality, by contrast, would be hard or impossible to separate from "true" reality. There has been much debate over this topic, ranging from philosophical discourse to practical applications in ]. | |||
| ==Arguments== | |||
| ===Simulation argument=== | |||
| {{Main|Simulation hypothesis}} | |||
| A version of the simulation hypothesis was first theorized as a part of a philosophical argument on the part of ], and later by ].<ref name="frc.ri.cmu.edu2">{{Cite web |last=Moravec |first=Hans |year=1998 |url=http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/project.archive/general.articles/1998/SimConEx.98.html |title=Simulation, Consciousness, Existence}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |first=Charles |last=Platt |url=https://www.wired.com/1995/10/moravec/ |url-status=live |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/19991011101907/http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.10/moravec_pr.html |archivedate=1999-10-11 |title=Superhumanism |date=October 1995 |volume=3 |issue=10 |magazine=]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Moravec |first=Hans |url=http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/project.archive/general.articles/1992/CyberPigs.html |title=Pigs in Cyberspace |year=1992}}</ref> The philosopher ] developed an expanded argument examining the probability of our reality being a simulation.<ref name="bostrom2003">{{cite journal |author=Bostrom, Nick |journal=Philosophical Quarterly |date=2003 |volume=53 |issue=211 |pages=243–255 |url=http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html |title=Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?|doi=10.1111/1467-9213.00309 }}</ref> His argument states that at least one of the following statements is very likely to be true: | |||
| # Human civilization or a comparable civilization is unlikely to reach a level of ] capable of producing simulated realities or such simulations are physically impossible to construct.<ref name="bostrom2003"/> | |||
| # A comparable civilization reaching aforementioned technological status will likely not produce a significant number of simulated realities (one that might push the probable existence of digital entities beyond the probable number of "real" entities in a Universe) for any of a number of reasons, such as diversion of computational processing power for other tasks, ethical considerations of holding entities captive in simulated realities, etc.<ref name="bostrom2003"/> | |||
| # Any entities with our general set of experiences are almost certainly living in a simulation.<ref name="bostrom2003"/> | |||
| # We are living in a reality in which post-humans have not developed yet and we are actually living in reality.<ref name="bostrom2003"/> | |||
| # We will have no way of knowing that we live in a simulation because we will never reach the technological capacity to realize the marks of a simulated reality.<ref>{{Cite web|title=What is Simulation Theory and Why Does it Matter?|url=https://builtin.com/hardware/simulation-theory|website=Built In |date=July 22, 2022 |first=Mike |last=Thomas |language=en |access-date=2020-12-05}}</ref> | |||
| Bostrom's argument rests on the premises that given sufficiently advanced technology, it is possible to represent the populated surface of the Earth without recourse to ]; that the ] experienced by a ] are comparable or equivalent to those of a naturally occurring human consciousness, and that one or more levels of simulation within simulations would be feasible given only a modest expenditure of computational resources in the real world.<ref name="bostrom2003"/> | |||
| First, if one assumes that humans will not be destroyed nor destroy themselves before developing such a technology, and that human descendants will have no overriding legal restrictions or moral compunctions against simulating ]s or their own historical biosphere, then, Bostrom argues it would be unreasonable to count ourselves among the small minority of genuine organisms who, sooner or later, will be vastly outnumbered by artificial simulations.<ref name="bostrom2003"/> | |||
| ], it is not impossible to tell whether we are living in a simulation. For example, Bostrom suggests that a window could ''pop up'' saying: "You are living in a simulation. Click here for more information." However, imperfections in a simulated environment might be difficult for the native inhabitants to identify and for purposes of authenticity, even the simulated memory of a blatant revelation might be purged programmatically. Nonetheless, should any evidence come to light, either for or against the skeptical hypothesis, it would radically alter the aforementioned probability.<ref name="bostrom2003"/> | |||
| ===Computationalism=== | |||
| {{Main|Computationalism|Mathematical universe hypothesis}} | |||
| ] is a ] theory stating that ] is a form of ]. It is relevant to the ] in that it illustrates how a simulation could contain conscious subjects, as required by a "]" simulation. For example, it is well known that physical systems can be simulated to some degree of accuracy. If computationalism is correct and if there is no ] in generating ] or cognition, it would establish the theoretical possibility of a simulated reality. Nevertheless, the relationship between cognition and phenomenal ] of consciousness is ]. It is possible that ] requires a ] that a computer cannot provide and that simulated people, while behaving appropriately, would be ]s. This would undermine ]'s simulation argument; we cannot be a simulated consciousness, if consciousness, as we know it, cannot be simulated. The skeptical hypothesis remains intact, however, and we could still be ]s, existing as conscious beings within a simulated environment, even if consciousness cannot be simulated. It has been suggested that whereas virtual reality would enable a participant to experience only three senses (sight, sound and optionally smell), simulated reality would enable all five (including taste and touch).{{citation needed|date=August 2017}} | |||
| Some theorists<ref></ref><ref></ref> have argued that if the "consciousness-is-computation" version of ] and ] (or radical ])<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Hut|first1=P.|last2=Alford|first2=M.|last3=Tegmark|first3=M.|year=2006|title=On Math, Matter and Mind|journal=Foundations of Physics|volume=36|issue=6|pages=765–794|arxiv=physics/0510188|bibcode=2006FoPh...36..765H|doi=10.1007/s10701-006-9048-x|s2cid=17559900}}</ref> are true then consciousnesses is computation, which in principle is ] and thus admits of simulation. This argument states that a "]" or ] would contain every algorithm, including those that implement consciousness. ] has explored the simulation hypothesis and has argued for a kind of mathematical Platonism according to which every object (including, for example, a stone) can be regarded as implementing every possible computation.<ref name="frc.ri.cmu.edu2"/> | |||
| ===Dreaming=== | |||
| {{Further|Dream argument}} | |||
| A ] could be considered a type of simulation capable of fooling someone who is asleep. As a result, the "dream hypothesis" cannot be ruled out, although it has been argued that ] and considerations of ] rule against it.<ref>"There is no logical impossibility in the supposition that the whole of life is a dream, in which we ourselves create all the objects that come before us. But although this is not logically impossible, there is no reason whatever to suppose that it is true; and it is, in fact, a less simple hypothesis, viewed as a means of accounting for the facts of our own life, than the common-sense hypothesis that there really are objects independent of us, whose action on us causes our sensations." ], ''The Problems of Philosophy''</ref> One of the first philosophers to question the distinction between reality and dreams was ], a Chinese philosopher of the 4th century BC. He phrased the problem as the well-known "]," which went as follows: | |||
| <blockquote>Once Zhuangzi dreamt he was a butterfly, a butterfly flitting and fluttering around, happy with himself and doing as he pleased. He didn't know he was Zhuangzi. Suddenly he woke up and there he was, solid and unmistakable Zhuangzi. But he didn't know if he was Zhuangzi who had dreamt he was a butterfly or a butterfly dreaming he was Zhuangzi. Between Zhuangzi and a butterfly there must be ''some'' distinction! This is called the Transformation of Things. (2, tr. Burton Watson 1968:49)</blockquote> | |||
| The philosophical underpinnings of this argument are also brought up by ], who was one of the first ] philosophers to do so. In ''Meditations on First Philosophy'', he states "... there are no certain indications by which we may clearly distinguish wakefulness from sleep",<ref name="Des">René Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy, from Descartes, The Philosophical Works of Descartes, trans. Elizabeth S. Haldane and G.R.T. Ross (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1911 – reprinted with corrections 1931), Volume I, 145-46.</ref> and goes on to conclude that "It is possible that I am dreaming right now and that all of my perceptions are false".<ref name="Des"/> | |||
| Chalmers (2003) discusses the dream hypothesis and notes that this comes in two distinct forms: | |||
| * that he is ''currently'' dreaming, in which case many of his beliefs about the world are incorrect; | |||
| * that he has ''always'' been dreaming, in which case the objects he perceives actually exist, albeit in his imagination.<ref>Chalmers, J., , Department of Philosophy, University of Arizona</ref> | |||
| Both the dream argument and the ] can be regarded as ]; however in raising these doubts, just as Descartes noted that his own thinking led him to be convinced of his own existence, the existence of the argument itself is testament to the possibility of its own truth. Another state of mind in which some argue an individual's perceptions have no physical basis in the real world is ], though psychosis may have a physical basis in the real world and explanations vary. | |||
| The dream hypothesis is also used to develop other philosophical concepts, such as Valberg's ]: what this world would be internal to if ''this'' were all a dream.<ref>{{cite book|last=Valberg|first=J.J.|title=Dream, Death, and the Self|year=2007|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=9780691128597|url=http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8416.html}}</ref> | |||
| In recent years of dream research, the argument of characterizing dreaming as a simulation has become widely accepted, as well as creating theories about the purpose and functions of dreaming. In fact, dream researcher Tore A. Nielsen wrote in his 2010 paper "Dream analysis and classification: The reality simulation perspective" that the idea that dreaming is a complex simulation of the world in consciousness during sleep may be a conception of dreaming and simulated reality that many dream researchers would have a hard time coming to accept. As well, dreams place us in this virtually simulated reality that places many characters and people in our lives in the dream. If dreaming was to be a simulated reality, the question arises whether that can be used to describe to social reality that the dream allows us to be in too.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The Avatars in the Machine: Dreaming as a Simulation of Social Reality |last1=Revonsuo |first1=A. |last2=Tuominen |first2=J. & |last3=Valli |first3=K. |year=2015 |url=https://d-nb.info/1123734135/34|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
| Lucid dreaming is characterized as an idea where the elements of dreaming and waking are combined to a point where the user knows they are dreaming, or waking perhaps.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Hobson|first=Allan|title=The Neurobiology of Consciousness: Lucid Dreaming Wakes Up|url=http://www.geekopolis.ca/psy120.3/hobson_lucid_dreaming.pdf |journal=International Journal of Dream Research |volume=2 |number=2 |year=2009 |url-status=live}}</ref> The idea of lucid dreaming also poses evidence to the dream argument, the idea that dreaming and being awake are indistinguishable, because one knows they are dreaming in a lucid dream. They control the characters in the dream and the plot of what is happening to them in the dream. Lucid dreams could be the reality that we all think is a dream which would then make our reality now the dream.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The Simulation Argument: Why Your Reality Isn't Real (Probably)|url=https://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/the-simulation-argument.html|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
| ===Existence of simulated reality unprovable in any concrete sense=== | |||
| Known as the idea of Nested Simulations: the existence of simulated reality is seen to be unprovable in any concrete sense as there is an ] problem with the argument: any evidence that is directly observed could be another simulation itself. | |||
| Even if we are a simulated reality, there is no way to be sure the beings running the simulation are not themselves a simulation and the operators of ''that'' simulation are not a simulation.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Simulation Argument: Some Explanations |first=Nick |last=Bostrom |year=2009 |url=http://www.simulation-argument.com/brueckner.pdf |quote=If each first-level ancestor-simulation run by the non-Sims requires more resources (because they contain within themselves additional second-level ancestor-simulations run by the Sims), the non-Sims might well respond by producing fewer first-level ancestor-simulations. Conversely, the cheaper it is for the non-Sims to run a simulation, the more simulations they may run. It is therefore unclear whether the total number of ancestor-simulations would be greater if Sims run ancestor-simulations than if they do not.}}</ref> | |||
| "{{vanchor|Recursive simulation}} involves a simulation or an entity in the simulation, creating another instance of the same simulation, running it and using its results" (Pooch and Sullivan 2000).<ref>{{cite book |first1=U.W. |last1=Pooch |first2=F.J. |last2=Sullivan |year=2000 |journal=Simulation Conference |volume=1 |pages=958 |edition=Winter |title=Recursive simulation to aid models of decisionmaking |isbn=978-0-7803-6579-7 |doi=10.1109/WSC.2000.899898|s2cid=15364401 }}</ref> | |||
| In August 2019, philosopher suggested that it may be best not to find out if we're living in a computer simulation since, if it were found to be true, such knowing may end the simulation.<ref name="NYT-201908102">{{cite news|last=Greene|first=Preston|date=10 August 2019|title=Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let's Not Find Out - Experimental findings will be either boring or extremely dangerous.|work=]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/opinion/sunday/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-lets-not-find-out.html|access-date=11 August 2019}}</ref> | |||
| Greene's suggestion is similar to ]' humorous idea presented in his 1979 novel '']'': that if anyone in the Universe should actually work out 'The Meaning of Life, the Universe and Everything', it would instantly disappear and be immediately replaced with something "even more complex and inexplicable". | |||
| ==In fiction, architecture, and celebrity takes== | |||
| Simulated reality in fiction has been looked at by many authors, game designers and film directors, most notably explored in the 1999 film '']'' and portrayed in the 2018 film ''].''<ref>{{Cite web|title=Ready Player One': VR Might Be A Reality Sooner Than Expected|url=https://www.inverse.com/article/42754-virtual-reality-ready-player-one|url-status=live |work=Inverse |first=Craig |last=Weightman |date=April 11, 2018}}</ref> | |||
| In 2012, a '']'' editorial article, referring to the ] of the ''Seven Houses for No One'' series,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Cardillo |first=Antonino |date=March 1, 2009 |title=Seven Houses for No One |url=https://www.antoninocardillo.com/works/for-no-one/ |url-status=live |access-date=June 15, 2022 |website=www.antoninocardillo.com |language=en}}</ref> prompted debates about simulated reality in ]: "The young Italian architect took advantage of the fact that fiction and reality can hardly be distinguished. Der Spiegel learned that Cardillo had sent pictures of supposedly built buildings to architecture magazines and made it appear that the houses had actually been built. But these only existed virtually."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Beyer |first=Susanne |date=July 2, 2012 |title=Hausmitteilung / Hochstapler: Römische Ruinen |url=https://www.spiegel.de/politik/titel-a-4bb54fd5-0002-0001-0000-000086653787 |journal=] |language=de |location=Hamburg |issue=27/2012 |pages=3, 121–123 |quote=Dass Fiktion und Realität kaum noch unterscheidbar sind, machte sich der junge italienische Architekt Antonino Cardillo zunutze. Der Spiegel erfuhr, dass Cardillo Bilder von angeblich gebauten Gebäuden an Architekturzeitschriften versandt und den Anschein erweckt hatte, die Häuser seien tatsächlich gebaut worden.}}</ref> | |||
| ], the CEO of ] and ], has had much to say about the concept that our reality is a simulation including: "The odds that we are in base reality is one in billions" which he said at a conference in 2016. Musk has also speculated that the odds of us living in a simulated reality or computer made by others is about a 99.9% chance at various other press conferences and events and on '']'' podcast.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Do We Live in a Simulation? Chances Are about 50–50|website=]|url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-live-in-a-simulation-chances-are-about-50-50/ |date=October 13, 2020 |first=Anil |last=Ananthaswamy |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| <!--Please maintain in alphabetical order--> | |||
| {{cols|colwidth=21em}} | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ], project to simulate the roundworm ''Caenorhabditis elegans'' | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ]s | |||
| {{colend}} | |||
| ===Major contributing thinkers=== | |||
| <!--Please maintain in alphabetical order--> | |||
| * ] (1596–1650) and his ], sometimes also called his 'Evil Genius'<ref name=MatrixChalmers>{{cite book |first=David |last=Chalmers |editor=C. Grau |year=2005 |title=Philosophers Explore the Matrix |chapter=The Matrix as Metaphysics |publisher= Oxford University Press |isbn=9780195181067 |lccn=2004059977 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yTQr0nxL-GIC&pg=PA158 |pages=157–158 |quote=Evil Genius Hypothesis: I have a disembodied mind and an evil genius is feeding me sensory inputs to give the appearance of an external world. This is René Descartes’s classical skeptical hypothesis... Dream Hypothesis: I am now and have always been dreaming. Descartes raised the question: how do you know that you are not currently dreaming? Morpheus raises a similar question: 'Have you ever had a dream, Neo, that you were so sure was real. What if you were unable to wake from that dream? How would you know the difference between the dream world and the real world?'... I think this case is analogous to the Evil Genius Hypothesis: it's just that the role of the “evil genius” is played by a part of my own cognitive system! If my dream-generating system simulates all of space-time, we have something like the original Matrix Hypothesis.}} </ref> | |||
| * ] (1685–1753) and his "immaterialism" (later referred to as ] by others){{citation needed|date=March 2013}} | |||
| ==References== | |||
| {{Reflist|30em}} | |||
| ==Bibliography== | |||
| * {{Cite book |last=Copleston |first=Frederick |author-link=Frederick_Copleston |title=A History of Philosophy, Volume I: Greece and Rome |orig-year=1946 |year=1993 |publisher=Image Books (Doubleday)|location=New York |isbn=978-0-385-46843-5 |chapter=XIX Theory of Knowledge |page=160 }} | |||
| * {{Cite book |last=Copleston |first=Frederick |author-link=Frederick_Copleston |title=A History of Philosophy, Volume IV: Modern Philosophy |orig-year=1960 |year=1994 |publisher=Image Books (Doubleday)|location=New York |isbn=978-0-385-47041-4 |chapter=II Descartes (I) |page=86 }} | |||
| * {{Cite book |last=Deutsch|first=David|author-link=David Deutsch |title=The Fabric of Reality |year=1997 |publisher=Penguin Science (Allen Lane)|location=London |isbn=978-0-14-014690-5|title-link=The Fabric of Reality}} | |||
| * {{Cite book |last=Lloyd |first=Seth |author-link=Seth_Lloyd |title=Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes On the Cosmos |year=2006 |publisher=Knopf |isbn=978-1-4000-4092-6 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/programmingunive00lloy }} | |||
| * {{Cite book |last=Tipler|first=Frank|author-link=Frank Tipler |title=The Physics of Immortality|year=1994|publisher=Doubleday|isbn=978-0-385-46799-5}} | |||
| * {{Cite book |last=Lem|first=Stanislaw|author-link=Stanislaw Lem |title=Summa Technologiae| year=1964 |isbn=978-3-518-37178-7}} | |||
| ==External links== | |||
| *{{cite journal | last=Grupp | first=Jeff | title=The Implantation Argument: Simulation Theory is Proof that God Exists | journal=Metaphysica | volume=22 | issue=2 | date=2021-09-01 | doi=10.1515/mp-2020-0014 | pages=189–221 | s2cid=237494519 |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/GRUTIA-2}} | |||
| {{BCI}} | |||
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Simulated Reality}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 15:49, 8 May 2023
Redirect to: