or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion › Are We Living in the Matrix? Scientist Say There is Evidence That Suggest It
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are We Living in the Matrix? Scientist Say There is Evidence That Suggest It

post #1 of 67
Thread Starter 
Scientists claim they have devised a way to tell if we are living inside a giant computer simulation, like the movie The Matrix, and that there's evidence to suggest we might be.
Quote:
The basis of the idea is that, if the universe is a simulation, then it would have certain observable constraints. The laws of physics, which appear continuous, would have to be superimposed onto a discrete three-dimensional lattice which advances in steps of time.

This lattice spacing, says Professor Silas Beane of the University of Bonn, would impose an otherwise unnecessary limit on the energy that particles can have, because nothing can exist that is smaller than the lattice itself.

And, he says, precisely such a a cut-off in the spectrum of high energy particles exists: a limit to the energy of cosmic rays known as the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin (GZK) cut-off. High energy particles interacting with the cosmic microwave background lose energy as they travel across long distances.

And there's something else to look for that could, perhaps, confirm things one way or the other. If we're living in a simulation, 'the angular distribution of the highest energy components would exhibit cubic symmetry in the rest frame of the lattice, deviating significantly from isotropy."

In other words, the cosmic rays would have a tendency to travel along the lines of the lattice, so that they wouldn't show up equally in all directions. And this is something that can be checked using current technology.

There are a couple of caveats. First, this technique would only identify a certain type of simulation - and we could be living in one that's constructed completely differently.

Second, the preferential travel of cosmic rays would only show up if the lattice cut off is the same as the GZK cut off. This occurs when the lattice spacing is about 10^-12 femtometers; if it's much smaller than that, there's no way of knowing.

The team's paper, Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation, is here.

What are your thoughts? Do you really think we might be living in The Matrix? I say, no.


[Source]
Edited by TeddyP - 10/12/12 at 11:34am
post #2 of 67
I thought I saw glitches before.

I bet everyone has.

That said,... if we are in the Matrix I hope it's part 1 and not one of those crap sequels.

-Brian
post #3 of 67
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post

That said,... if we are in the Matrix I hope it's part 1 and not one of those crap sequels.
-Brian
So true... the super computer should have been smart enough not to make those sequels.
post #4 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post

...............
That said,... if we are in the Matrix I hope it's part 1 and not one of those crap sequels.


^^^^^ biggrin.gif Funny stuff there!
post #5 of 67
If it is a simulation, and you guys are listening, give me a net worth of $50 Billion dollars and tax exemption for the rest of my pixelated life.
post #6 of 67
The joke is on everyone here!
AVS is, and always has been, the Interface of The Matrix.

So long, suckers....The Architect is calling.tongue.gif
post #7 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

The joke is on everyone here!
AVS is, and always has been, the Interface of The Matrix.
So long, suckers....The Architect is calling.tongue.gif

25908000-25908066-large.jpg
post #8 of 67
Quote:
the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin (GZK) cut-off.
So that's why I can't buy liquor after midnight...
post #9 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1 View Post

So that's why I can't buy liquor after midnight...
No, it's because you never can MAKE IT to midnight....wink.gif
post #10 of 67
Wow! Old news travels...slow. This story (or one similar to it) ran several months ago, followed-up by another saying, "nope, we're not a similation." Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to film my new movie with Blake Lively and pick-up a check for $10 million dollars.
post #11 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by smudge981 View Post

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to film my new movie with Blake Lively and pick-up a check for $10 million dollars.
That reminds me....what time tomorrow do I show up to film my sex scenes with Blake?
post #12 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

That reminds me....what time tomorrow do I show up to film my sex scenes with Blake?

Funny...you're the third person to ask. I think at noon. Are you going to make here to Monte Carlo on time?
post #13 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

No, it's because you never can MAKE IT to midnight....wink.gif
Son...that may be true.
post #14 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

No, it's because you never can MAKE IT to midnight....wink.gif

I think you're confusing The Matrix with Dark City.
post #15 of 67
Doesn't TV pretty much prove this thesis?
post #16 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by smudge981 View Post

Funny...you're the third person to ask. I think at noon. Are you going to make here to Monte Carlo on time?
I can, but it depends upon whether you can book me a suite at the casino (Yeah, I know...movie STARS can be picky).
Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1 View Post

Son...that may be true.
Hey, I'm here to help....
post #17 of 67
In all seriousness folks, no, the mad scientist's ideas don't hold water. Having a 3D matrix is not the basis of simulation. He might understand this if he were a better software engineer.

For a serious simulation, the very last thing you do is make a massive array and populate each cell of it. This is a kind of "cellular automata" that is not in any way sensible for the Matrix. You don't need to make every item in the Matrix somehow a discrete member of a voxel in the grid.

Each item can easily have it's own non-discrete properties. Simplified, an item isn't somehow locked to a specific x,y,z coordinate. It can sit "between" the coordinates but only rendered at one spot or the other. Sort of like having a 10x10 grid, with a simulated ball at (5.527, 4.22). It'll get rendered at (6, 4) (if not anti-aliased) but every item in the simulation will regard it at (5.527, 4.22).
post #18 of 67
....putting, of course, the only "discrete" properties the granularity of the floating point itself. No where near what this guy is (these guys are) saying.
post #19 of 67
Déjà vu
post #20 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by eweiss View Post

I think you're confusing The Matrix with Dark City.
I never get confused....today is Sunday, right?
post #21 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I never get confused....today is Sunday, right?
Dunno. Ask us tomorrow.
post #22 of 67
I am still waiting for the girl in the red dress to show up, preferably in my condo.
post #23 of 67
So what happens after the Scientists discover we're in some simulation asleep at the wheel else where, then what.


DJoel
post #24 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

In all seriousness folks, no, the mad scientist's ideas don't hold water. Having a 3D matrix is not the basis of simulation. He might understand this if he were a better software engineer.
For a serious simulation, the very last thing you do is make a massive array and populate each cell of it. This is a kind of "cellular automata" that is not in any way sensible for the Matrix. You don't need to make every item in the Matrix somehow a discrete member of a voxel in the grid.
Each item can easily have it's own non-discrete properties. Simplified, an item isn't somehow locked to a specific x,y,z coordinate. It can sit "between" the coordinates but only rendered at one spot or the other. Sort of like having a 10x10 grid, with a simulated ball at (5.527, 4.22). It'll get rendered at (6, 4) (if not anti-aliased) but every item in the simulation will regard it at (5.527, 4.22).
The real issue lies in subatomic particles' ability to exist in the quantum flux. The harmonics of the wave (in this case, produced mechanically) will dictate the order of magnitude superimposed upon the nucleus. Only then would the subluxing transmuting ether be determined to be an actual model or a simple observation. In other words, Luke knew he was kissing his sister.
post #25 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

That reminds me....what time tomorrow do I show up to film my sex scenes with Blake?

Monica Belluci and I are laughing at some of the posts gotta go know she wants to take me back to bed.
post #26 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post


Monica Belluci and I are laughing at some of the posts gotta go know she wants to take me back to bed.


You know this Monica Belluci doesn't exist, right? I know that when you put Monica Belluci in your mouth, the Matrix is telling your brain that Monica Belluci is juicy and delicious.

post #27 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamian View Post


You know this Monica Belluci doesn't exist, right? I know that when you put Monica Belluci in your mouth, the Matrix is telling your brain that Monica Belluci is juicy and delicious.

And probably taste like chicken, the Matrix had issues with certain meats tongue.gif

Djoel
post #28 of 67
Nah, MIB probably has it right. Our universe exists inside a ball on some dog collar which exists inside a universe of another ball on a dog collar which exists......
post #29 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Conrad View Post

Our universe exists inside a ball on some dog collar which exists inside a universe of another ball on a dog collar which exists......
It's no use, son - it's turtles .... all the way.
post #30 of 67
That explains why Mr. Obama got elected! wink.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion › Are We Living in the Matrix? Scientist Say There is Evidence That Suggest It