Universe a most advanced Computer simulation? Scientists debate

Although such unconventional theories can help science decode almost everything in the universe, the very next step in the process seem to take the science toward religion, towards a higher intelligence, a creator, or God, someone they cannot handle


Believe it or not, one of the latest debates among scientists today is whether the universe we live in is a sophisticated simulation. Vaah! That’s something very close to what I have been screaming about in some of my blogs here on who we are, why are what we are, how to get out of here, and what is our final destination.

Recently I came across a relatively long but interesting video about the subject matter and the first thing came to my mind was, hey, this people are open-minded. They are talking sense as against the other bunch of scientists who are so tightly confined within their understanding of the universe.

The people who participated in the debate held at the Museum of Natural History in New York, were some of the distinguished scientists –including Neil deGrasse Tyson; Lisa Randall, theoretical physics at Harvard University; Max Tegmark, a cosmologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); David Chalmers, a professor of philosophy at the University of New York; Zohreh Davoudi, a theoretical physicist at MIT and James Gates, a theoretical physicist at the University of Maryland. The event was a part of Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate series.

“According to the holographic theory, gravity in the universe comes from thin, vibrating strings. Researchers suggest that these strings are holograms of events that take place in a simpler, and much ‘flatter’ cosmos. Max Tegmark, a a cosmologist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, believes that up to seventeen percent of our universe could be a sophisticated simulation while Lisa Randall suggests like is real as it gets. “If you look at how these quarks move around, the rules are entirely mathematical as far as we can say” said Max Tegmark. Philosopher Chalmers commented “We’re not going to get conclusive proof that we are not in a simulation because any proof would be simulated.”

In the past, researchers have also proposed that the universe could be in fact he a sophisticated computer simulation. Robert Lawrence Kuhn, author and host of the Closer to Truth program, recently explored this theory in an episode where he interviewed several scholars, including Nick Bostrom, a philosopher at Oxford University, who argues that the scenario presented in the movie The Matrix might be true, but “instead of brains connected to a virtual simulator, own brains would also be part of the multiverse simulation.” (Source: Is the Universe a Sophisticated Simulation? Neil deGrasse Tyson and other scientists discuss the possibility | Ancient Code)

In another research work, a team of researchers at the University of Bonn in Germany led by Silas Beane say they have evidence to prove that the universe is indeed a most sophisticated simulation.

“In a paper named ‘Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation’, they point out that current simulations of the universe – which do exist, but which are extremely weak and small – naturally put limits on physical laws. Technology Review explains that “the problem with all simulations is that the laws of physics, which appear continuous, have to be superimposed onto a discrete three dimensional lattice which advances in steps of time.”

Interesting concept. Reminds of the Trimurti described in the Vedas. Image credit http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2013/09/universe-computer-simulation.html

What that basically means is that by just being a simulation, the computer would put limits on, for instance, the energy that particles can have within the program. These limits would be experienced by those living within the sim – and as it turns out, something which looks just like these limits do in fact exist. For instance, something known as the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin, or GZK cut off, is an apparent boundary of the energy that cosmic ray particles can have. This is caused by interaction with cosmic background radiation.

But Beane and co’s paper argues that the pattern of this rule mirrors what you might expect from a computer simulation. (Source http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2013/09/universe-computer-simulation.html)

Then we have our modern physics’ most cherished ideas of quantum chromodynamics. This theory describes the strong nuclear force, how it binds quarks and gluons into protons and neutrons, and how these form nuclei that themselves interact. This, it claims to be the universe at its core. In other words, if quantum chromodynamics can be simulated on a computer, they propose that it is more or less equivalent to simulating the universe itself.

There are one or two challenges of course. The physics is mind-bogglingly complex and operates on a vanishingly small scale. So even using the world’s most powerful supercomputers, physicists have only managed to simulate tiny corners of the cosmos just a few femtometers across. (A femtometer is 10^-15 metres.) That may not sound like much but the significant point is that the simulation is essentially indistinguishable from the real thing (at least as far as we understand it). It’s not hard to imagine that Moore’s Law-type progress will allow physicists to simulate significantly larger regions of space. A region just a few micrometres across could encapsulate the entire workings of a human cell. Again, the behaviour of this human cell would be indistinguishable from the real thing.
It’s this kind of thinking that forces physicists to consider the possibility that our entire cosmos could be running on a vastly powerful computer. If so, is there any way we could ever know?

Silas Beane, at the University of Bonn in Germany, and a few pals say there is a way to see evidence that we are being simulated, at least in certain scenarios. However, the limitation with all simulations is that the laws of physics, which appear continuous, have to be superimposed onto a discrete three dimensional lattice which advances in steps of time.

“The question that Beane and co ask is whether the lattice spacing imposes any kind of limitation on the physical processes we see in the universe. They examine, in particular, high energy processes, which probe smaller regions of space as they get more energetic. What they find is interesting. They say that the lattice spacing imposes a fundamental limit on the energy that particles can have. That’s because nothing can exist that is smaller than the lattice itself. So if our cosmos is merely a simulation, there ought to be a cut off in the spectrum of high energy particles. It turns out there is exactly this kind of cut off in the energy of cosmic ray particles, a limit known as the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin or GZK cut off. This cut-off has been well studied and comes about because high energy particles interact with the cosmic microwave background and so lose energy as they travel long distances.” (Source: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/429561/the-measurement-that-would-reveal-the-universe-as-a-computer-simulation/)

Assuming that the universe is a computer simulation, the next series of questions is, who made that supercomputer capable of performing zillions of calculations, who programmed the simulation and operates it even now, so accurately?

“Philosopher Nick Bostrom thinks that “the hypothesis of a giant simulation is a weak form of creationism, because the creators-simulators share some of the attributes traditionally associated with God, in the sense that they have created our world.” (Source)

But the biggest difficulty with a large number of scientists today is, instead of thinking out of the box, they prefer to remain confined in their never-ending speculative theories. The reason is obvious:

As soon as they think out of the box, like some of the mainstream scientists mentioned above do, all unresolved equations of physics seem to fall in their place, but although such unconventional theories can help science decode almost everything in the universe, the very next step in the process seem to take the science toward religion, towards a higher intelligence, towards a creator, God, and they cannot handle it because the theory promoting non-existence of God is the very foundation and backbone of today’s highest money-making industry. They call it science.

Here is a breath of fresh air delivered from India’s ancient science, based on Vedic scriptures.

Bhagavad Gita says:

apareyam itas tv anyāṁ prakṛtiṁ viddhi me parām
jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat

Besides these, O mighty-armed Arjuna, there is another, superior energy of Mine, which comprises the living entities who are exploiting the resources of this material, inferior nature. (BG 7.5)

What does this mean? Is this what our scientist friends are trying to understand when they say that perhaps there is another reality which is controlling what we see in this universe as reality? Are they right when they say that we are constantly fooled by someone?

Regardless of what they think and say, the reality is, there does exist another world which is conscious or “anti-matter”. Also, we are not fooled by force; we have chosen to be fooled by ignoring the eternal reality, the Supreme Controller.

There is another, even more direct reference in Bhagavad Gita about a different world which is situated in a higher dimension and is transcendental to this world:

na tad bhāsayate sūryo na śaśāṅko na pāvakaḥ
yad gatvā na nivartante tad dhāma paramaṁ mama

“That supreme abode of Mine is not illumined by the sun or moon, nor by fire or electricity. Those who reach it never return to this material world.” (BG 15.6)

Lord Krishna clearly informs us that the eternal world, which is the cause of this world, does not need to be illuminated by sun or moon or fire the way this world does. It is said in Vedic scriptures that the source of sunlight in this universe is brahma, the unlimited effulgence emanating from the transcendental body of Lord Krishna, the Supreme Personality Godhead.

The theory that this universe is a computer simulation and someone has programmed it gets further boost when we read the following, again from Bhagavad Gita:

mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram
hetunānena kaunteya jagad viparivartate

“This material nature is working under My direction, O son of Kuntī, and it is producing all moving and unmoving beings. By its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again.” (BG 9.10).


It is also stated in the same book that every living entity is given a particular type of body based on his previous karmas. This body is a machine (yantra) which operates under the direct supervision of Supersoul, or Paramatma, who is an expansion of Lord Krishna’s plenary expansion, Lord Vishnu.

īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe ’rjuna tiṣṭhati
bhrāmayan sarva-bhūtāni yantrārūḍhāni māyayā

“The Supreme Lord is situated in everyone’s heart, O Arjuna, and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy.” (BG 18.61)

This material energy, represented and managed by goddess Durga is further described in the article titled Ma Durga – Busting the biggest myth of all times. It sheds more light on how this universe is controlled, not by some unknown rules of physics as many scientists  assume, but by a higher intelligence.

Indeed, there are hundreds and thousands of statements in Vedic scriptures which clearly tell us that our universe, which is one of the innumerable universes floating in space, or ether, is a temporary manifestation of Lord Krishna’s material energy called maya, and that there is another world, the spiritual world, from where the temporarily visible variegatedness of this world originates. It is like a reflection of a tree in a lake. The nature of such reflections depend on the movements of the water, which, in a contextual sense, is our consciousness.

So while, the computer simulation theory is not perfect it does bring the modern science little closer to real knowledge, called the Veda. One of the wrongs with the existing model of the simulated universe theory is, it does not take into account that the role every person plays while being present in this universe is chosen by that very individual, and he is responsible for it. In other words, we are not just computer digits as some of the proponents of this theory seem to suggest. We are conscious beings.

Let me ask you a question: If you were to be a scientist who does not believe in God, and if you find that by hypothetically accepting the concept of higher intelligent beings and ultimately of God, you are able to solve all complex codes of physics, chemistry, biology and mathematics, would you accept that God exists or would you just prefer to spend your life in proving that He does not and die without finding answers to many otherwise never-to-be-answered questions? Would love to hear your realization.