The Why Files: Operation Podcast - 61: Evidence that Reality is a Simulation

Episode Date: June 26, 2022

PROOF THAT EVERYTHING - INCLUDING GOD - IS A SIMULATION   Is this reality? Well, we're experiencing ... something right now so maybe the better question is: *what* is reality?   Could everything we see, everything we experience, everything that exists in our entire universe -- be artificial?    Supporters of Simulation Theory believe that not only is it *possible* that we're living in a simulation; it's likely.  And the more we look for evidence, the more we find.   Philip K Dick believed deja vu was the simulation adjusting to new code. Many people experience The Mandela Effect, a or "false memory" shared by a large number of people.   But the biggest clues of Simulation Theory come from science. Specifically: quantum mechanics. The only way the Double-Slit Experiment makes sense is if we live in a program. Quantum Entanglement also defies logic. Only our program would have the ability to defy the laws of physics - and the concept of time.   Let's find out why. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thewhyfiles/support

If it's a flat or a squeal, a wobble or peel, your tread's worn down or you need a new wheel, wherever you go, you can get it from our Tread Experts. Toyo's open country family of tires will get you through tough weather in a variety of terrains. Until May 31st, save up to $100 in rebates on select Toyo tires. Find a Toyo Tread Experts dealer near you at treadexperts.ca slash locations. From tires to auto repair, we're always there at treadexperts.ca slash locations. From tires to auto repair, we're always there at treadexperts.ca. Hey, it's your buddy AJ from the Y-Files. And Hecklefish.

Right, and Hecklefish. We just wanted to tell you that if you want to start a podcast, Spotify makes it easy. It'd have to be easy for humans to understand it. Will you stop that? I'm just saying. Spotify for Podcasters lets you record and edit podcasts from your computer. I don't have a computer. Do you have a phone? Of course

I have a phone. I'm not a savage. Well, with Spotify, you can record podcasts from your phone, too. Spotify makes it easy to distribute your podcast to every platform and you can even earn money. I do need money. What do you need money for? You kidding? I'm getting killed on guppy support payments. These 3X wives are expensive. You don't want to support your kids? What are you need money for? You kidding? I'm getting killed on guppy support payments. These 3X wives are expensive.

You don't want to support your kids? What are you, my wife's lawyer now? Never mind. And I don't know if you noticed, but all Y-Files episodes are video, too. And there's a ton of other features, but you... But we can't be here all day. Will you settle down? I need you to hurry up with this stupid commercial.

I got a packed calendar today. I'm sorry about him. Anyway, check out Spotify for Podcasters. It's free, no catch, and a packed calendar today. I'm sorry about him. Anyway, check out Spotify for podcasters. It's free, no catch, and you can start today. Are we done? We're done, but you need to check your attitude. Excuse me, but I don't have all day to sit here and talk about Spotify.

This would go a lot faster if you would just let me get through it without... Is this reality? Well, we're experiencing something right now, so maybe the better question is, what is reality? Could everything we see, everything we experience, everything that exists in our entire universe be artificial? Supporters of simulation theory believe that not only is it possible that we're living in a simulation, it's likely. And the more we look for evidence, the more we find.

Let's find out why. The idea of the universe being a simulation is not a new one. Theories exist in ancient cultures around the world. Modern simulation theory comes from Nick Bostrom, a philosopher at Oxford who wrote an influential paper on the subject in 2003. Assuming that living in a simulation is possible, Bostrom presents the simulation Trilemma, which says one of the following must be true. One, we destroy ourselves before we're able to create a simulation. Two, we're able to create a simulation but choose not to. Or three, we are definitely in a simulation. Bostrom believes each of these is equally likely to be true.

Now, I don't think that's controversial. We use computer models to study the human population, predict the weather, for entertainment. We simulate everything. And when a civilization can create a realistic simulation, the most obvious one to create is that of its own early existence. Bostrom calls this an ancestral simulation.

And a civilization that can do this wouldn't just create one simulation, it would create many. And those simulated civilizations might create their own simulations of the universe and on and on like Russian nesting dolls of reality. Now you're a character in that world and you think you have free will and say,

I want to invent a computer. So you do. Hey, I want to create a world in my computer. And then that world creates a world in its computer. And then you have simulations all the way down. When Elon Musk was asked what he thought the chances were that our reality is the original base reality, the odds that we're in base reality is one in billions. Neil deGrasse Tyson is a little more conservative. He thinks the odds that we are in base reality versus a simulated reality is 50-50. A 50-50 chance that everything we experience is artificial, that's still pretty high. And even though we mostly hear what scientists think about

this, it's not scientific theory. Simulation theory isn't math, it's philosophy. It isn't physics, it's metaphysics. So what we need is hard evidence that we live in a simulation. And to find proof, all you have to do is look. Let's start at the beginning. There was no space or time. The contents of the entire universe were concentrated to the size of a tennis ball and had a temperature of a quadrillion degrees. Then suddenly, the Big Bang. Everything explodes outward faster than the speed of light. Then about 14 billion years later, we've got galaxies and planets and ice cream and K-pop.

Ice cream, killing, killing. Ice cream. I mean, I could do without the K-pop. Ice cream, killing, killing. Ice cream. Yeah, I could do without the K-pop. Me too. Okay, if before the Big Bang, there was no space and no time, what was there? What about the beginning of the universe

from the religious point of view? God created everything. Fine. Where was he before? What caused the Big Bang to happen in the first place? What made God decide to snap his fingers or wiggle his nose or whatever

he did to make everything happen? If you ask a physicist to explain what existed before the universe, they'll give you an answer about quantum foam, dark energy, or something just as bonkers as the Big Bang. Ask a theologian what existed before God created the universe, and you'll get an answer equally as confusing. But what does make sense is that the universe was just sitting there dormant. Then someone, somewhere decided to boot up a program. And in that program, our program, are all the laws of the universe. Electromagnetism and gravitational force are written into the program. The speed of light gets a value. There's code for Planck's constants of mass, speed, and time. Avogadro's number is in there, along with a bunch of other rules that govern the behavior of everything that exists.

All part of our program. Even consciousness itself is part of our simulation. If you've never heard of simulation theory, then this might sound far-fetched. But some of the world's most respected scientists, technologists, and philosophers believe that it is more likely than not that we are living in an artificial reality. So, how do we prove it? If we live in an artificial reality, it would make sense for there to be occasional glitches. Philip K. Dick is one of the most influential science fiction writers of all time. Movies based on his books include Blade Runner, Total Recall, Minority Report, The Adjustment Bureau, and plenty of

others. He believed there are many universes and sometimes those other realities bleed into ours. He claimed to have visions of this and even wrote stories like The Man in the High Castle based on these visions. That in fact, plural realities did exist superimposed onto one another by so many film transparencies. One way other realities blend into ours could be the Mandela effect. The Mandela effect is when a large number of people have memories of events that don't match reality. This is called the Mandela effect because millions of people specifically remember Nelson Mandela died in prison. He didn't. People remember his wife walking beside his casket in a funeral procession that was on television for two hours that day. This never happened. Or the Berenstain Bears,

which people insist were always called the Berenstain Bears. People remember the tycoon from Monopoly having a monocle that he never had. What was Darth Vader famous for saying? Luke, I am your father. Nope, he never said that. What? What about Stouffer's Stovetop Stuffing? Best part of Thanksgiving. No, it isn't, because there's no such product.

Stovetop is made by craft. Uh, no. The evil queen from Snow White who looked into her mirror and said, Mirror, mirror on the wall. Nope. Magic mirror on the wall. Who is the fairest one of all?

Uh, uh, my reality is shattered. People remember Febreze being spelled with two E's. People remember Jiffy Peanutbutter, but there's no such thing. And there are a lot more. A lot more. Personally, I don't have most of these false memories, but there are a few that get me.

The Flintstones. There are two T's in the Flintstones. I remember just one. And what about the Fruit of the Loom logo? I could swear it looks like this. But it doesn't. This is the actual logo. No cornucopia.

Corn you what now? Basket. Then just say basket for crying out loud. And at the end of Moonraker, a terrible but excellent James Bond movie, I remember Jaws' girlfriend is having braces. I mean, I specifically remember it. She didn't have braces. I just can't get my brain to accept it.

That's the Mandela effect. So why do millions of people distinctly remember different things? Glitch in a simulation. Yep. Philip K. Dick also felt when we experience deja vu, it's because something in our simulated universe changed and a new timeline branched off of the current one. We are living in a computer programmed reality and the only clue we have to it is when some variable is changed. Ever feel like you've lived a moment before? That's because according to Philip K. Dick and others, you have. Deja vu is

the simulation correcting itself with new information. But skeptics can easily dismiss these theories. The human mind is terribly unreliable. They don't accept this as evidence. But we're not done yet. We live in a huge universe. 200 billion trillion stars. And even if life is rare, you'd think there'd be some evidence of it somewhere.

This is Fermi's paradox. According to the Drake equation, there should be over a million technologically advanced civilizations just in our galaxy. And on average, the nearest one should be just a few hundred light years away. But there's nothing, at least not that we can see. So where is everybody? Are we really alone in the universe or does our program only focus on us? And what about the physical rules that are in place? Max Tegmark, a cosmologist at MIT, said the strict laws of physics point to the possibility of a simulation. Putting a cap on the speed of light sure is a good way to keep your sims from venturing out too far from home. Theoretical physicist James Gates thought simulation theory was crazy.

Then he started studying quarks and electrons. He found error-correcting code buried deep inside the equations used to describe string theory. So you're saying as you dig deeper, you find computer code writ in the fabric of the cosmos? Into the equations that we want to use to describe the cosmos, yes. Computer code? Computer code, strings of bits of ones and zeros. Dr. Gates has changed his mind about simulation theory. In 2017, a group of scientists at the University of Washington proved they can embed computer code into strands of DNA. Everything in nature is math. Look at the Fibonacci sequence.

You get the Fibonacci sequence by adding two previous numbers in the sequence together. So 1 plus 1 equals 2, 2 plus 1 equals 3, 3 plus 2 equals 5, 5 plus 3 equals 8, and so on forever. You get the golden ratio, also called phi, by dividing two consecutive Fibonacci numbers. So the number 89 is a Fibonacci number. The next number in the sequence after 89 is 144. 144 divided by 89 is the golden ratio. It's about 1.618. We see Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio everywhere. The number of petals on a flower is usually a Fibonacci number. Lilies have three petals, buttercups have five, chicory has 21, and a daisy has 34. And the spacing of each petal is arranged in a circle according to the golden ratio. As trees grow, the number of branches they form is a Fibonacci number.

And not just plants, animals too. The ratio of female to male honeybees in a colony is the golden ratio, 1.618. The human body conforms to the golden ratio too. Most of the body follows the numbers 1, 2, 3, and 5. One nose, two eyes, three limb segments, five fingers, five toes. The proportions of the body, like the length of your shoulder to your elbow, and from your elbow to your fingertips, that's the golden ratio. Even a DNA molecule measures 34 angstroms long by 21 angstroms wide. Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio.

From the spiral of seashells to the spiral of a galaxy and everything in between Fibonacci numbers are everywhere now some claim this is a coincidence that humans look for patterns in chaos because that's what we're programmed to do what we're programmed to do it isn't that interesting by trying to debunk simulation theory they actually end up proving it no matter what we study whether it's something the size of a galaxy or as small as an electron, everything in the universe seems to follow patterns and rules. In other words, a program. If it's a flat or a squeal, a wobble or peel,

your tread's worn down or you need a new wheel, wherever you go, you can get it from our tread experts. Toyo's open country family of tires will get you through tough weather in a variety of terrains. Until May 31st, save up to $100 in rebates on select Toyo tires. Find a Toyo Tread Experts dealer near you at treadexperts.ca

slash locations. From tires to auto repair, we're always there. Treadexperts.ca Everyone's got a pro. Need tires? I've got a pro. Car making a weird sound? I've got a pro. So who's that pro? The pros at Tread

Experts. From tires to auto repair, Tread Experts is always there. Helping you with Kumo tires you can trust. Until June 15th, receive up to $60 on a prepaid MasterCard when you purchase Kumo RoadVenture AT52 tires. Find your pro at your local TreadExperts. From tires to auto repair, we're always there.

TreadExperts.ca You searched for your informant who disappeared without a trace. You knew there were witnesses, but lips were sealed. You swept the city, driving closer to the truth. While curled up on the couch with your cat. There's more to imagine when you listen. Discover heart-pounding thrillers on Audible.

You sailed beyond the horizon, in search of an island scrubbed from every map. You battled krakens and navigated through storms. Your spade struck the lid of a long-lost treasure chest. While you cooked a lasagna. There's more to imagine when you listen. Discover best-selling adventure stories on Audible. To simulate an entire universe,

you'd obviously need more advanced technology than we have. But that doesn't mean we won't get there. Moore's law says that computing power doubles every 18 months. And this has held true for about 50 years. Now that is slowing down a little bit, but only because of physical limitations. Assuming we can learn to make microchips smaller, and there's no doubt that we will, it's predicted that artificial intelligence could surpass human intelligence within the next hundred years. As Elon Musk points out, when he was a kid, the world's most advanced video game was Pong, two rectangles on a screen. Forty years later, video game technology is barely distinguishable from reality. He said that six years ago.

And even in that short time, video game engines have become even more realistic. Look at this footage from Unreal Engine 5. When a world we can build feels as real as our own. What just happened? Imagine what games are going to look like in the next six years, or the next 60, or the next 6,000. But simulating an entire universe, how big of a computer will we need? Well, it's estimated that there are 10 to the power of 80 atoms in the universe. Let me put that on the screen just for fun.

Okay, that's a lot. If each particle needs 128 bits to calculate its position and momentum, you're at 10 to the power of 83 bits. And that's just for data storage. We also need computing power to track what each of those particles is doing. If we say two floating point operations per second, or two flops per particle, we're at 2 times 10 to the 80th power flops. There aren't even words for these numbers. And this is the computing power for just the stuff in the universe. What about human intelligence? The human brain can perform

100 trillion calculations per second, or 100 teraflops. Multiplied by billions of people, the numbers are ridiculous. To power all of this, the simulation would need access to multiple Dyson spheres, the megastructures that capture 100% of the energy of a star. Or the simulation would have to harness the energy from black holes. This is why famous physicists like Dr. Michio Kaku are not on board with simulation theory. He claims that simulating a universe is not scientifically possible. The only computer capable of simulating a universe is the universe itself. Now, at first glance, this makes sense, but with all due respect to Dr. Kaku,

that's not how simulations work. When you're playing a 3D video game, the entire game world isn't rendered. Instead, the game engine only calculates what the player can see and interact with at that specific moment. If we are living in a simulation, then it would make sense that the creators of the simulation

would use a similar technique. And wouldn't it be interesting if there was evidence that this is exactly what happens? Wait a minute. Do we have proof? Sweet fancy Moses! Supporters of simulation theory often point to video games as a way to explain, if not prove, that our reality is artificial. In a video game, the only data that is rendered is what the player sees or interacts with. If you're playing a video game and there's a car or building a mile away, that entire object isn't rendered. The game engine only renders the bare minimum of information to make the object look real.

A distant building is rendered as just a few pixels, not that complicated. As you get closer, the engine renders more details, but still it's just a facade. The engine doesn't bother calculating what's inside the building until you actually go in. The game engine always knows how much data to send you and doesn't bother with anything else. If we live in a simulation, it would make sense that our reality is rendered the same way. And we could test this. Wait, what do you mean we can test this? Specifically, we can use the double slit experiment. Here's how it goes. If we fire particles in a straight line at a screen, after passing through a single slit, we would expect to see this clumping pattern on the screen. If we try this with a wave, we expect to see a pattern like this, where particles are most dense in the middle of the screen, If we try this with a wave, we expect to see a pattern like this,

where particles are most dense in the middle of the screen but radiate outward, similar to the clumping pattern. When we add a second slit, it starts to get fun. When the waves pass through the double slit, each slit creates its own wave. When those waves intersect, they cancel each other out. That creates a pattern like this. It's called an interference pattern. So particles passing through two slits create clumping patterns. Waves through two slits creates an interference pattern. Make sense? Yeah, I'm with you. Good. If we fire electrons through the slit, we see the clumping pattern as expected. An electron has mass, so it's a tiny bit of matter. So if we fire electrons through two slits, we should see two clumps.

But we don't. We see the wave interference pattern. This shouldn't be happening. What's going on here? For years, scientists assumed that the electrons were colliding with each other, causing the wave pattern. But in the 60s, the experiment was modified so that only one electron at a time

was fired through the slits. There was no way the electrons could interact with each other. Yet we still see an interference pattern. Scientists wanted to see what was causing this, so they added a detector to observe electrons as they passed through the slits. That's when things go from weird to paranormal. As soon as the detectors were installed,

the interference pattern went away and the clumping pattern returned. Take the detectors away and the wave interference pattern is back. But that's a different result to what we had earlier. So here's the last bit of sneakiness that we can play with atoms. Surely now, you know, we're going to get to grips with it. Leave the detector there, but just very quietly go and unplug it. Don't let the atoms know that you're not spying on them. Run the experiment again. Now, if you can explain this using common sense and logic,

do let me know, because there's a Nobel Prize for you. It's as if the particles are aware they're being observed. Then physicist John Wheeler had an idea. He called it the delayed choice experiment. How it works is photons are projected through the double slit, but the detector is not activated until after they pass through the slit, but before they impact the screen. Photons were emitted as waves, passed through the slits as waves, but when the waves were observed before hitting the screen, they suddenly behaved like particles again. Still don't think there's an intelligence at work? Well, what Wheeler's experiment showed is that even though the electrons started as waves,

but behaved like particles after being observed, at the moment the decision to observe them was made, the electrons recorded themselves as having passed through the slits as particles. The electrons changed their state by going back in time. I personally find that I gravitate more towards the information theoretic point of view and believing that the universe that I exist in is a very good, high-quality simulation. Now, this experiment is happening on a table in a lab, a very short distance. So what happens when we observe light coming from vast distances, like, say galaxy 100 million light years away. If light from a distant galaxy is projected through the double slit, it creates the wave interference pattern. But if we push those photons through a measuring apparatus to observe them, the wave

again collapses all the way back to its source. This is called retrocausality. Simply by choosing to observe the photons this way, they reach back through time 100 million years and alter their state on the other side of the galaxy. But like a video game engine, it only does this if we're looking. Even though our universe is full of galaxies, those galaxies may not actually be there.

If we're living in a simulation, then stars and galaxies could simply be projections, and only when we get up close would those projections become more detailed. This is an excellent way to save computational resources, and because we're stuck with the hard limit of the speed of light, getting to far off places is really difficult. Limiting the speed of light is a useful rule to have in place. Quantum mechanics like the double slit experiment and quantum entanglement only make sense if there's a program at work, because only the program can ignore the laws of physics and ignore the concept of time itself. You searched for your informant, who disappeared without a trace.

You knew there were witnesses, but lips were sealed. You swept the city, driving closer to the truth. While curled up on the couch with your cat. There's more to imagine when you listen. Discover heart-pounding thrillers on Audible. A convenient case for simulation theory is you can't disprove it. The Big Bang, that was the simulation booting up. We haven't found aliens. They're not in the simulation.

How come UFOs seem to violate the laws of physics? Well, because they're programs operated by the simulation creators. They don't have to follow the laws of physics. Yeah, but who created the simulation? Well, that's the big question, isn't it? When you think of the simulation creator as an omniscient intelligence who exists outside of our understanding of space and time, it sounds an awful lot like you're describing God. And just like you can't prove we're not in a simulation, you can't prove there is no God. If something miraculous happens or something horrible happens, you can say it's part of the simulation just as easily as you can

say it's part of God's plan. Something I find very interesting is that many believers of simulation theory are fierce atheists. They dismiss the idea of God as corny superstition. There are plenty of devoutly religious people who dismiss provable science like evolution and the age of the earth. People on the religious side say that if there is no God and life is just a simulation, then nothing matters. Without God to guide us and sometimes punish us, depending on what you believe, our actions don't have consequences.

I disagree. Even if we don't live in base reality, we still live in our reality. And our actions here do have consequences. As for what happens after we die, simulation or not, nobody really knows. Both sides argue that faith and science are not compatible. Isn't this hypocritical? Whether you believe in God or you believe in simulation theory, the real question is, what's the difference? Thank you so much for hanging out with me today. My name is AJ, that's Hecklefish. This has been

the Y-Files. If you had fun or learned anything, do me a favor and like, subscribe, comment, share. All that stuff really helps a small channel. Trying to solve the YouTube algorithm is like trying to find proof we're in a simulation. But with your help, we'll get to the truth. Until next time, be safe, be kind, and know that you are appreciated. You searched for your informant who disappeared without a trace. You knew there were witnesses, but lips were sealed. You swept the city, driving closer to the truth

while curled up on the couch with your cat. There's more to imagine when you listen. Discover heart-pounding thrillers on Audible.