The essence of life, awareness, free will, simulated reality, etc., is debated among many philosophers and scientists. However, it will never be possible to prove any of the theses because of Alan Turing's (logical) halting problem.
To prove that we live with absolute free will, without external involvement, is enough to prove that there is one human activity that cannot be expressed mathematically.
Alan Turing proved that any mathematical algorithm could be translated into a Turing machine. (computer)
- Therefore, if we run on a computer with sufficient power all human algorithms, then if the computer is stopped because of a "malfunction," a sign that a particular activity does not have an appropriate algorithm and then the meaning that we live with free will. On the other hand, if the computer finishes running all the algorithms of human life (including the cognitive ones), there is a reasonable chance that we are living in a simulation.
The wording I am presenting is identical to the halting problem formulated by Alan Turing in 1936.
- It is worth emphasizing that this is a deep and broad topic that has preoccupied mathematicians and philosophers and concerns the logical limitations of mathematics and computing. The mathematician-Austrian philosopher Kurt Goodell proved that there is a logical contradiction in mathematics. The problem is known as incompleteness. Following him, Alan Turing expanded the problem and translated it into computer science.
The (shocking) conclusion is that we will probably never be able to prove any of the theses on the subject. The secret of life will remain forever!
Incompleteness theorem - Math's Fundamental Flaw.
What does it take to prove that we live in a computer simulation?
- It is impossible to prove that we live in a computer simulation from our system. The question is very similar to the halting problem posed at the time by Alan Turing. The conclusion is that this question has no solution. (Logical limitation)
To prove unequivocally that we live in a simulation, one of two things must happen:
- Intelligent aliens will appear on Earth and show us convincing arguments that we live in a simulation.
- We will crack the riddle of the universe, and we will be able to find the simulation formulas at a level where we can predict events with probabilities that do not leave a doubt of randomness.
At the moment, neither option looks pretty close. In my opinion, currently, the first option is more reasonable than the second. (Just an intelligent and unscientific guess)
Is computing power strong enough to simulate all human beings at the theoretical level at once?
- The answer to the question concerns the nature of the simulation. Assuming that simulation controls only significant milestones in our lives and not every second and every marginal decision, the answer is "yes" the computing power required is enormous but probably possible theoretically.
A research proposal could examine arguments for the possibility that we live in a computer simulation.
The findings cannot unequivocally prove one of the two possibilities but only strengthen the reasonable possibility of the two.
- Observing flora and fauna from the dawn of creation may illuminate far-reaching philosophical and scientific questions. It turns out that insects and even flowers and plants apply complex mathematical methods of optimizing resources. If you want examples, look for the explanations for why the beehive is made of hexagons. Why are flowers arranged according to the Fibonacci series, etc. (There are many examples)
- If we prove that a beehive 100 million years ago was actually in the shape of squares (compared to hexagons today), then there is proof that this is indeed an evolutionary event. If we assume we will find 480 million-year-old fossils of flies with eyes arranged in the shape of hexagons; then it is probably not about evolution but about creation itself.
Continue reading the entire article: Human simulation - the pinnacle of 21st century scientific and technological achievement.
Strange as it may be, the possibility that we live in a very sophisticated computer simulation cannot be verified or ruled out.
