The Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom argues in a modern theory on the same theme that the world we live in is merely a computer simulation, and therefore nothing is real. Here we will take a closer look at the so-called simulation argument .
The theory is based on statistical probability , and is based on the assumption that computer technology will continue to evolve. Bostrom believes that technological developments in areas such as artificial intelligence in the future could lead to computer simulations that are so real that the simulations themselves think they are for real.
We are far from the technological possibilities today, but who knows what we are able to about 1000, 100,000 or millions of years. Bostrom see three different future scenarios:
The first is that the human species die out before we developed the ability to simulate human consciousness. Everything is fine, no simulation will take place.
The second option means that the technology can be developed, but that it is of such moral or legal reasons will never be tried. This scenario looks Bostrom himself as the least likely, since a technique that would be interesting to mankind. But it is after all a possibility.
The third option means that the technology will be developed and actually used. The number of simulated worlds will probably be large, had you not been tempted by running a simulation running on your computer and see how “the people” are developed and ponder life’s mysteries?
Which of the above options do you see as most likely? Have you answered option three , you have also just “proved” that we all find ourselves in such a simulation. For what would be the likelihood that precisely we belong to the real world, when there may be thousands, if not millions of simulated worlds? Statistically, it is almost non-existent, so we have to be a simulering.Kanske each simulation in turn developed so far as to create their own simulations, and that it therefore can be multiple levels of reality. Perhaps this is the meaning of life, you might meet those of us who survived the “right” of a “Welcome to Level 2” after we died. Maybe God is just a teenager in front of his computer.
Some researchers argue in fact that we are not further away than a few decades from being able to simulate conscious life. But to simulate an entire world would of course require huge capacity, but perhaps not as much as we first imagine. Instead of simulating the world in detail, you only need to simulate it going to perceive. Other galaxies and planets need not be simulated in greater detail than the bright spots seen from Earth, and the microscopic world need only be simulated in detail when someone sees it.
Simulation hypothesis and Holographic principle are two important ideas discuses around the Fermi paradox.