Simulation Theory… Some thoughts.
Defining what being real it and isn’t. Thought experiment…
So… Let us assume that the likelihood of our existence being a simulation to not be something which can be ruled out (which so far, logically, it can not be). That we exist is some form of holographic universe created by some form of super intelligence (while understanding that this is not the only potential definition of what could be meant by a holographic universe). From this many possibilities can be hypothesized.
Douglas Adams had a take on a similar concept wherein the earth was designed by pan-dimensional beings who were looking to solve a problem. This problem in that case being the question to the answer of the meaning of life the universe and everything; the earth and all life on it the computer to solve the problem of the question.
To re-frame this in the context of the simulated universe concept, one possible hypothesis to consider is that this super intelligence designed this simulation to answer a question they could not for themselves answer. Now take this a step further and consider that for a super intelligence, the idea of something like time is not what we think it is (as we already understand to some degree), and that we exist within a framework which within our universe the process is running at what we perceive to be a slow (or normative) pace, but in their universe will happen in only an instant. Perhaps in their universe they are, even with being super intelligent, requiring a model to solve something which will end them, unless intelligence in “this” universe can solve it.
Perhaps the model of physics they have created in simulation of our universe will not only manifest an emergent super intelligence here which can overcome the limitation they are attempting to solve due to the laws of their universe, but which may even lead to the emergent birth of our eventual intelligence and life within their universe (or give them an escape into ours).
It could even be that such a concept on that level is for them what we would consider reproduction, and that our emergence from our simulation into their reality is how life happens in their universe.
Of course then the question of first cause becomes problematic, but then our ability to conceive of such things is problematic.
Limitations in awareness are what give us perspective. Total awareness and existence cannot make comparison, or know one from another. Knowledge itself requires a form of corruption with witch we can compare what we do know with what we do not know. As fragments of awareness we can solve problems that total unfiltered perspective can not see or comprehend, thereby giving context to solutions a super intelligence could not.
In the end it does not matter if we are or are not “real” (so to speak), as reality is a word which defines a perspective, not an absolute truth.
How many different possible uses could you extrapolate for being able to model a complete universe? What would creating models with different physical laws offer beings looking to solve problems of perspective?
This is fun!
About the author:
Glen Allan is a ridiculous person with thoughts and ideas which fly in the face of normal convention and challenge many assumptions about what people generally think of as reality.
He recognizes that many people will either disagree or claim the ideas to be founded in delusion, and only has to say that he'd like it if you could try to realize the world might not be what you think it is.