Original:

One of life’s biggest mysteries ironically is, what life actually is. Do we actually exist, or are we just lines of code in a computer simulation? Depending on who you ask, the answer is different. According to Elon Musk, there’s only a one in a billion chance that we exist in base reality—the actual reality where all other simulations stem from—and we are living in a Matrix-like simulation (Wall 2018). Others may say that God created the universe, or that the Big Bang happened to due to gravitational waves, thus the universe created itself (Hawkins 2005). Two researches, however, have claimed to have found proof that one of these beliefs is false.

According to Zohar Ringel and Dmitry Kovrizhin’s  research paper titled “Quantized gravitational responses, the sign problem, and quantum complexity,” there is proof we don’t exist in a computer simulation. The paper published in Science Advances on September 27, 2017, discusses how when trying to use a quantum Monte Carlo, a method to figure out the locations and interactions that subatomic particles may have with each other, the computing power needed to calculate the answer increases exponentially as you increase the number of particles in the problem being solved.

Final Version:

Are We All Just Strings of Numbers Existing in a Computer Simulation? According to Two Researchers, the Answer is No

What is life? How did we get here? Is anything even real? Do we actually exist, or are we just lines of code in a computer simulation? These are questions that average Joes, plain Janes, and philosophers alike have pondered since life began. The number of theories out there is as numerous as the number of stars in the night sky. One theory, stated by Elon Musk, is that there’s only a one in a billion chance that we exist in base reality—the actual reality where all other simulations stem from—and we are living in a simulation where nothing is real and everything is just computer generated (Wall 2018). Some other beliefs include that God created the universe, that the Big Bang happened to due to gravitational waves (so the universe created itself), and that the universe and all that exists in it makes up God (Hawking 2005). With all the uncertainty, almost every theory has arguments for and against it. Two researches, however, have claimed to have found proof that we can rule one of these beliefs out altogether.

According to Zohar Ringel and Dmitry Kovrizhin’s research paper titled “Quantized gravitational responses, the sign problem, and quantum complexity,” there is proof we don’t exist in a computer simulation. Although their research doesn’t specifically dive into disproving this belief, it comes about due to their discoveries. The paper published in Science Advances on September 27, 2017, discusses how when trying to use a quantum Monte Carlo, a method to calculate the exact locations of subatomic particles after they have interacted with each other in a closed system (Ceperley 2011). In their research, Ringel and Kovrizhin ran into problems calculating the answers for complex quantum Monte Carlo simulations, and some were seemingly impossible to solve with today’s knowledge. Their findings suggest that the computing power needed to calculate the answer to quantum Monte Carlo simulations increases exponentially as you increase the number of particles in the problem being solved, so just adding a few particles in a simulation makes it hundreds of times harder to solve (Ringel and Kovrizhin 2018).

Now why is this? Shouldn’t a few electrons or protons not make a difference? Well, the problem arises because of the absurd nature of particles on the quantum (subatomic) level. There are many phenomena that occur on the subatomic level that completely go against the principles discovered by Sir Isaac Newton, or what is grouped together and known as “classical mechanics”. Take, for example, this strange phenomenon. If you had a ball and threw it against a wall, you would expect it to come back to you 10 times out of 10. How shocked would you be if you threw the ball against the wall, and instead of returning to you, it appeared on the other side of the wall and kept moving as if there had been no wall? This is in essence what happens when what is known as “quantum tunneling” occurs (Flowers et al. 2017). Other strange occurrences at the quantum level include electrons appearing to be in two locations at the same time, and particles spinning both clockwise and counter-clockwise at the same time (Sutter 2017). The phenomenon that complicated the solving of quantum Monte Carlo simulations the most was the thermal quantum Hall effect. When a magnetic field is run across a flow of electrons in a solid, a temperature gradient is created, which affects the symmetry in the system . This made solving the quantum Monte Carlo for larger systems incredibly complex, as noted by Ringel and Kovrizhin.  All of these phenomena make the subatomic world extremely unpredictable.

With this information, you can now see why running quantum Monte Carlo simulations is extremely difficult. Yes, with a few molecules it is doable, but as you add more and more subatomic particles, the amount of computing power needed grows exponentially. This is the crux of the argument against life as we know it being a computer simulation. If we were to exist in a computer, with the sheer number of molecular interactions needed to be mapped in just a square millimeter of space (let alone a square centimeter or a square foot) the computer would have to be so large, that there wouldn’t be enough matter in existance to make up that computer. Further, there is a fundamental limit to the amount of data that can be stored in a square meter. After reaching a density of 1064 megabytes of data per square meter, the data storage device would condense into a black hole that would release fatal electromagnetic waves (Becker 2014). Thus, this evidence suggests that it would be impossible for us to exist as a computer simulation.

It is important to note that this evidence is not without caveats. If we do exist in a computer simulation, it is possible that the results obtained by Ringel and Kovrizhin are just simulated data generated by the same computer that generated all of us. It would thus be impossible to be 100% sure that we don’t exist in a computer simulation.

Considering this counterarguments to the proofs given, only undering the following assumptions can we be certain that we don’t exist in a computer simulation. The first would be that the same laws of physics exist in our hypothetical simulation and in base reality. If there aren’t the same laws, then who is to say that there are really no such things as black holes in base reality, or that they have other means of mapping out subatomic particle interactions? The second would be that all information gathered is not just randomly generated by the simulation. It could be that the beings out there want to test certain conditions, so the data we get is made up them to continue desired tests. Lastly, we would have to assume that there is a limited amount of matter in base reality and they don’t have infinite resources. It’s possible that there is no fundamental limit to data storage in base reality and that there is an unlimited amount of (what we would consider) matter there as well. The beings existing in base reality could potentially create a computer as large and powerful as they desire to simulate our universe and all of our lives.

So while yes, there technically is proof that we don’t exist in a computer simulation, it’ll take a lot more evidence for it to be considered a fact. The decision is up to the reader whether or not they choose to believe it, but until there’s more proof, all we can do is guess.

References

Theopold K,Pold  Langley R, et al. Tunneling [Internet]. 2017 [updated 31 May 2017; cited 6 March 2018] Available from https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Supplemental_Modules_(Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry)/Quantum_Mechanics/02._Fundamental_Concepts_of_Quantum_Mechanics/Tunneling

Becker, Kate. 2014 April 25.  [Internet] [cited 6 March 2019] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/is-information-fundamental/

Hawking, Stephen. 2005. The Origin of the Universe [Internet]. [cited 6 March 2019] Available from http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe.html

Ringel, Zand K, Dmitry, L 27 Sept. 2017 Quantized gravitational responses, the sign problem, and quantum complexity. [Internet] [cited 6 March 2019]

Available from  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1701758

Wall, Mike Sept. 7 2018 We’re Probably Living in a Simulation, Elon Musk Says [Internet] [cited 4 March 2018] Available from

https://www.space.com/41749-elon-musk-living-in-simulation-rogan-podcast.html