Slashdot Mirror


Physicists Devise Test For Whether the Universe Is a Simulation

olsmeister writes "Ever wonder if the universe is really a simulation? Well, physicists do too. Recently, a group of physicists have devised a way that could conceivably figure out one way or the other whether that is the case. There is a paper describing their work on arXiv. Some other physicists propose that the universe is actually a giant hologram with all the action actually occurring on a two-dimensional boundary region."

6 of 529 comments (clear)

  1. Half a test. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "we assume that our universe is an early numerical simulation with unimproved Wilson fermion discretization and investigate potentially-observable consequences."

    If I read that right, they mean that their analysis can only conclude either that the universe is a simulation, or that it is either not a simulation or a simulation too accurate to tell via their method. It can't actually prove that the universe is *not* a simulation.

    Looks like no need for elaborate and expensive equipment though - just a way to measure the energy of cosmic rays - so why not give it a try?

  2. Philosophy vs. Physics by catchblue22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think we really are skirting the boundary between physics and philosophy. I suppose the fact that actual experiments are being proposed pushes the holographic universe idea and the simulation idea towards being actual physics. However, I still have categorizing the holographic universe hypothesis as real physics. By real physics, I mean experimental physics, where we base our ideas about the physical world on what we actually observe.

    --
    This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
  3. Re:I hate those types of physicists by Teckla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They never pass the joint around :(

    Ha, like any other physicists are any more sane!

    Current popular thinking among physicists is that the universe itself does not know the exact location and momentum of fundamental matter.

    The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics tells us that the universe has a true random component. No, not pseudo-random. True random.

    The many-words interpretation of quantum mechanics tells us there are obscene numbers of universes that exist, because the universe creates perfect copies of itself every time a quantum decision is made, except for the quantum decision itself being different in each copy. And those universes split, and those do, and those do...

    Various tests tell us photons are waves. No, particles. No, both! And electrons too! And more!

    Go read up on quantum entanglement if you have not yet believed in enough impossible things before breakfast yet.

    Chuckle at the simulation argument all you want, but it's just as sane and likely as these other crazy, wild things. No, scratch that. The simulation argument is far more sane.

    Physicists aren't smoking dope...they're all tripping on LSD!

  4. Re:Deception by catchblue22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What if the "simulation" is simply programmed to deceive this test? Then what do you do?

    If no test is possible, then it is not physics but only philosophy.

    Scientists perform experiments that are constrained by the laws of nature.

    Philosophers perform experiments that are constrained by the laws of logic.

    --
    This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
  5. Re:Deception by Xtifr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's a difference between "programmed to deceive this test" and "programmed to deceive all tests". This is a test for a particular type of simulation, and will verify or falsify whether we're in that type, but other types, which may or may not have occurred to us, may or may not have other tests that can be performed. So failure to detect a simulation here will not only not prove we're not in a simulation, but will not prove that the hypothesis is unscientific.

    On the other hand, success at proving we're in a simulation would certainly be a fascinating result! :)

  6. Re:I hate those types of physicists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't tell if you're joking or not. If not, how about you go and learn a little about some of these topics. With the exception of many-worlds, physicists believe them because a lot of theoretical and experimental work has been done to support these ideas.