Is the WHOLE Universe just a Simulation? 

The only question I'm asking myself is how this guy still has less than 100k subs.

3:47 "Which might explain why particles only have definite properties when they have to..." This comment is 110% profound for the subject matter and (I believe) is the crux of your entire theme here: bravo!

How do you know 10^120 GHz is a significant amount of computation for an "outside" computer? Also, our universe doesn't have to be simulated in real time, our perception of time is not linked in any way to that of a potential simulation universe.

"Particles only have definite properties when they have to" - Now that's a folksy description of the uncertainty principle.

I believe we are the universe experiencing itself, it's actually quite beautiful :)

Imagine if it was a simulation and the 'thing' running it watched this video and went like "Heck! They're figuring it out!"

29 dislikes from the overlords running the universe simulation.

Our simulations are always somewhat less “real” than reality. If we’re in an advanced sim, what did the creators leave out? Maybe the real world has quantum certainty.

"which might explain why particles only have definite properties when they have to"

I was programmed to write "yes, we are living in a simulation."

This channel is sooo f**king underated!!!

"Which might explain why particles only have definite properties when they have to". I laughed so hard at that one. Nice work man, I really like your work, and in a few years I'm gonna teach my kid physics with the help from your vids. I hope you get tons of subs and likes because you deserve it!

I wasn't seeing anything new, and I started to blame it on Nick until about my 4th play through of the end when I figured out that bit about particles only having definite properties when they have to or *are observed*. As usual, my compliments and gratitude. That was something I'd never considered.

Nice video, I've been waiting for someone to put these points together. I'm not educated at all, I mean I haven't really been to school in any way, so feel free to correct my thinking if you can. 20 years ago when I first started reading Newtonian physics I wanted to believe the world was mechanical and deterministic, and from a Laplace's demon point of view I started associating computing power with the universe. Then when I read about the uncertainty principle it immediately stuck me as the universe trying to conserve computing power, by only doing the calculations necessary. Over the years as computer games have evolved, to the point of 1st person view and beyond, it always stuck me how similar the programming must be to the way the universe must 'calculate'. When I read about Planck length it also struck me as fitting right into this universe as a computer idea. So it was great when these theories started getting thrown around and now are picking up support. (Also Susskind's work with black holes). But if we take it that our universe is in some kind of computer, then that computer must be somewhere, and we get a 'turtles all the way down' problem. But I guess in the computers location time would have to be running at a different speed, or maybe an absence of time? And maybe different laws of physics? Anyone have a problem with this so far? And also does anyone have any out of the box ideas how there could be a place outside our 'computer' where time wouldn't exist? Or any idea how to end the turtles problem?

10^120 Ghz in this universe, but if we're talking about being simulated by an extant reality, we'd have no idea that they even have the same laws of physics, nevermind computing equations.

Everything here is a derivative of hydrogen.

Your clones deserve their own channel lol

I like to think of Planck Length and Planck Time as representing the HERE and NOW, respectively:)

This was the best video on the Simulation Hypothesis, because you explain the actual reasons people use simulations. Brilliant analogy.

Some thoughts... I don't think we can ever know if it's a simulation or not. I can't think of any evidence that would hold up to scrutiny either way. If it's a simulation, whatever is simulating it could also be a simulation. This would also seem to imply a non-infinite set of parallel universes. Unless whatever is simulating them exists outside of time, in which case I don't think it would need to simulate universes, not that there needs to be a "why". I'd like to admit myself to the asylum now.

Consciousness itself seems to me to be a sort of fluid simulation. Every time we think we access our simulated reality and run new simulations. To be aware is to have a working simulation.

What actually would be the difference? At the most fundamental levels everything is either perception of electro-chemical reactions or is a description A perception based on a human construct called mathematics. So we basically constructed language that could in most cases predict and explain to humans what humans perceive which could all be simulation - which also can explain why mathematics need weird things like e, and Pi to work.

3:47 ".. the particles only have definite properties when they have to.." kinda explains why we can only assume where electrons are or quarks are or how quantum entanglement of particles are determined on observation.

How do you define a simulation? What is its opposite? Reality? As far as we are concerned, reality is merely electrical signals inside the brain. Absolute reality cannot be defined, hence, anything can be a simulation as long as its governed by mathematical formulas.

- Particles only have definite properties when they have to - Causality has a speed limit and it's pretty slow - Spooky action at a distance Looking at all that I'm quite inclined to believe the universe is a vast simulation.

This has got to be one of your best videos

If the universe is really a simulation, it'll explain alot of things, especially. 1. SUPERNATURALITIES when u play a game, u have to follow all the rules of the game, like how we follow the rules of physics. But when u die, u enter a spectator mode that u could just do anything beyond the game's rules like ghost's hobbies in haunted house. But you're still in the game though. Or it probably just a lag in a simulation. Psychic and rituals too. It's like a cheat code when u can command the properties of the game. 2.GRAVITY when u run a game with butt tons of information, there's a lot of processing so it takes time. When there's a difference of information between space. Time flows at different rate, causing time dilation and GRAVITY (sorry if u don't understand, i'm bad at englih) Too much information, and it's CRASHED, cause a BLACK HOLE. Note: it's just a theory, hope someone notice me and reply some other ideas.☺️☺️☺️☺️

Your videos are all great.

Sure, in the world of physics, lines of force we use to simulate possibilities into the world we create. Even the simplest building or engine is first a simulated model to study before we go on to work on it to get to a Nobel Tower. 🏰

03:48 - "which might explain why particles only have definite properties when they have to". Beside processing power, it also saves memory.

There should have been some mention of Konrad Zuse here. Anyways, keep up the good work...

I liked the video. There's one thing I should mention, though: You measured the required computing power for the universe in gigahertz; it should be measured in flops (floating-point operations per second) as that is a better measure of computing _power_ whereas gigahertz is a measure of computing _speed._ These two are not necessarily equivalent. Flops _can_ be improved by increasing the core clock frequency (less time between operations) but it can also be improved by way of increasing operations per tick (e.g., adding more cores). This is why GPU computing is so effective; it's not that GPU cores are fast, if I recall correctly individual cores are in the MHz range. It's just that there's _thousands_ of them per chip.

Yes. We have been able to document different behaviors of observed vs not observed. We can see this in our simulations as a common result of imperfect optimization code. Any arguments about limited processing power are just ignoring that we don't create many of our high end simulations in real time nor would we be able to tell whether we are acting in real time.

I went downstairs to drink water and I had this question: "what if the world we live in is a simulation?" When I went up back to my phone, guess what pops up into my recommend. Yup, you're right, this video

I love your videos. Thanks for being mind blowingly entertaining.

Please bring a 2nd part of this video

I remember John Carmack discussing breakthroughs in game programming with leaf sectors: on the fly rendering of only what the player POV is, saving processing power. The data doesn't change; the presence of the POV just renders it. Collapses its wave function in its very local universe. Why not scaled up?

The way you just put it blew my mind open.

hey nick!!!! upload an awesone video on p vs np problem man!!

Short answer: No. Usefull answer: no. Reasonable answer: no. Probable answer: no.

I had to give you a thumbs-up for mentioning the 13th floor, my favorite movie.

Before watching the video: no because the word universe means all that exists taken as one, so the whole of existence including all the machines that run simulations are part of the universe.

Y u have less number of subscribers as u r very awesome

Nick Lucid - Super Genius

I just recently switched from vsauce to this. This is by far higher quality and much funnier. (Please never stop the achtchuoolee "nerd clone" I crack up every time) I'd imagine the average person who has 'somewhat nerdy atributes' would prefer that. But full blown nerdy proclivity demands a more in-depth explanation for ridiculous questions. (I read research papers and dissertations for fun just for perspective) Anyway great job. I hope our opinions as fellow nerds is appraised to be of more value then "popularity".

This could be expanded with the recent news on black holes possibly being "holograms". Nick, could you do a video about your favorite scientists?? I think it would be very interesting :)

Don't forget that the Sun is also in an orbit around another orb, but we seem to find out predictions without considering that.

Sort of a small-scale example of the scene in that movie you referenced at the beginning of the video, and the 13th floor, where the dude runs out to the edge of the simulation

One of the big problems with particle simulations is that if your time step is too big relative to the velocity of the particles, you don't catch particle collisions and they end up not interacting. Maybe the speed of light limit is to limit the smallness of the time step to prevent missed interactions.

What even is a simulation? It's a representation or model of reality. The more complex a simulation is made, the more closely it mirrors "reality." The more interesting thing is whether there's a convergence point between reality and simulation? In other words, can you make a simulation so complex and detailed that it is no longer distinguishable from reality? Then what.

Along with the video on choice and pre-determination in time cones... A very interesting conversation. Living in the moment but the future from certain perspective (s) is the past and is therefore known.

booyah is the best condensed translation ever.

I’ve been questioning this a ton lately as of September 2017-now, and I have say that is living in simulation is a very very very very likely. For the reasons mentioned in the video, but my only question is, is energy able to be conserved within an atom or piece of some Subatomic particle? I only ask because I have heard stories about people being able to remember events they never actually experienced things from the past almost as if they were reborn or reincarnated or something. Lately I’ve been having a similar experience they many have also had which I believe is a lot more common, and that’s having a dream and later it comes to true to almost exactly like the dream. I’m currently in high school, sophomore year and throughout this entire school year, I’ve been having those experiences. And admittedly I can say for sure that only one or two of those dreams I can say for sure that it was at least generally but exactly the same. Just some details were left out. So I guess my overall question is, are memories just energy or it is something else? It’s been bugging ever since I noticed it was happening, and this isn’t the first time this has happened to me where the dreams are constantly recalled but it’s never been this repetitive. It’s like when I think there’s no more dreams, another one comes soon after. Which is why I was and still am considering the possibility that it’s just my mind noticing those things and since this has become very normal at this point my mind might be just making things up or I did think of these things but it’s all just coincidence. I’ve considered that too but it feels too strange to simply call it a coincidence. So another theory that I’ve been thinking about is that everything in the universe will be at some point destroyed and then remade, going through the same processes, but the only reason I’m having trouble accepting that theory is because if it were to be true then, is our consciousness more than a really fast process of events? Or is our brain just constantly absorbing information given by surrounding like as if our eyes were looking at it and observing the data? And so yeah, concepts like free will and of course consciousness have been the most interesting things this year so far. Which is what got me interested in things involving quantum physics, as well as philosophy and stuff like that.

Back in the early sixties superman was transported to an alternate universe , DC comics. That universe had extremely weak forces and superman did a lot of damage just by speaking. I was 10 and this started me thinking about reality. It occured that no matter how weak or strong the forces it was relative . This is a sort of simulated universe . What we think of as reality is really our prejudice that our world is solid and forceful. When George Berkely said something quite similar about reality to Samuel Johnson , Johnson became quite agitated and jumped up and brought his foot down on a rock and said "I refute it thus". I imagine if Johnson could have seen a video of himself doing this he would have thought otherwise

One way tat lesson the computational load is if like thermodynamics one can approach this at a macro level as well as a micro level. And along the lines of the old question if a tree falls in a forest and their is no one to hear it doe sit make a noise. So say one simulated the air in a room at a macro level but if anyone or anything needs to "hear: it at a micro level those micro components are made to order based on the macro properties sort of like how quantum states become fixed when sensed. That way the simulation could work at a higher level of abstraction but at the sake time handle those trees falling when there is anyone to hear it fall. Yes this would take a bit of bookkeeping to keep track of which trees have made a sound and which ones haven't but maybe that book keeping is doable. One other thought. There seems to be three answers to this question, is the universe a simulation, yes or no, and if so is it a computer simulation or is creation in the mind of God and not in some computer. The answer to that might also have some bearing as to things like computer capacity and such given if it is in the mind of God and God is infinite that may not be a limitation.

This guy is awesome. Great video.

I don't trust reality I'm sure "they" make me think I'm real!

Oof, not gonna lie, if I ran a physics simulation, and found out that part of the simulation accidentally became sentient, I’d feel a little bad when I had to unplug it.

The "Which Way" experiment is a clear point in favor of the simulation theory. In order to save process power, when no specific information is need it, the universe delivers an statistical result. But when a specific information is required, like thru which slit did the photon went, then the universe simulates its trajectory

Hi Nick! As far as I remember, the mathematical problem with any simulation is to proof, that it converges against the solution of the equations it is supposed to simulate. If the universe was a simulation, I can’t even see, against what it should converge. In other words, one can‘t proof that the universe is a simulation or not. Therefore, we will never know but can believe whatever I like. Isn‘t ‘t it?

Constants are a product of finite energy in a closed system. The expansion of the universe (which requires input energy) supports the claim that we are in base reality as the required memory of some finite turing machine is finite, and our current model of the universe would require infinite memory, processing power and/or clock speed to deal with spacial expansion as time tends towards inf... this is all just in support, but if fundamentals of the universe were to change with the expansion of the universe (like time got slower relative to all bodies from some outside observer) then you could argue we are in a sim. We never gunna know tho haha

What is the Planck length and the Planck time can actually change depending on where you were at it’s almost like a TV that can change Resolution and that change them is gravity and velocity The time dilation and length contraction or quantized

If this is a simulation, then what's to say whatever is outside our simulation isn't a simulation itself? It could be an infinite amount of simulations looping into itself for eternity.

What language do you code in? And do you have any of it available to the public (ahem *me!*) to see? I do a lot of coding for apps and automation (mostly for Linux related tasks). Id like to see some code covering this topic. Thanks! - And GREAT channel!

It's not reliable to assume what computing capabilities our simulation would require. Otherwise we would have to assume the real universe is the same as our simulated universe.

It's interesting that in the game Minecraft, people can create "lag machines" to make players in a whole server experience mild to severe lagging, depending on how complex the machines are. This might not sound very smart, but what if we could create and run some kind of machinery that is so complicated and enormous, it takes a lot of the "computing resources" of the computer(s) that runs this universe (this server, you might say) that we would also experience lagging. Maybe that is one way to find out whether we're in a simulation or not.

That also answers why the speed of light is finite.. is the maximum velocity the simulation processor can handle stuff

I should add that I have had questions which I have been unable to answer because the questions themselves 'dissolve'. Which leads me to the conclusion that certain questions are 'unthinkable' and that begs the question of why?

I am working on a theory that describes all the forces of nature and the particles on which they act as a complex sum of speeds. Turns out there are such things as imaginary speeds and negative speeds. The interesting thing is, if space expands faster than light, then anything moving through superluminal space must reverse course through time, meaning it comes back at us, but not before it annihilates with its antiparticle(s) so the cosmic background radiation? gamma rays shining into the "real"universe from the "imaginary" universe. Nothing in the imaginary universe can be certain, due to our inability to observe it HOWEVER it is infinite in scale and complexity therefore anything you can imagine might be in imaginary space most definitely is. Therefore, whatever you are imagining will happen after your death is exactly what will happen because your consciousness is the centre of your universe and you make it up as you go along. eventually the point in space that is your consciousness will fall into a black hole and an entirely new universe will be made with you as its centre of perspective.

If it is, my first instinct would be to think that not every single particle of it needs to be ran in the simulator. And that is very important because it saves a hell of computing power. Only things which are observable very close by a human observer, need to be simulated in detail. Example: the moon surface yes, the earth core NO. Also, the fact that the earth is a basically a gravitational prison - escaping it takes a LOT of energy. i.e. the simulation shows us that the universe is ludicrously big if not infinite, but we are allowed to be only in a really tiny fraction of it. Then the other question is: whoever is running the simulation, are they living in a simulation themselves? if so, when does it stop and what does the un-simulated universe look like?

Its a definition in terms. If the universe is a computer, what it runs is not a simulation because it is the original program. Any computer programs we try to run to predict what happens in the universe are then simulations, which is reduced to being "a facsimile of".

The universe can be a simulation. There is no need to code the big, just code the small- define what it does (single, couple, multiple), what it can do (s,c,m), what if .. processing speed is speed of light. When enter was clicked - information was distributed which we see as the bigbang.

Who says we're in "real time" if everything and everyone paused for certain length we wouldn't perceive it. we could be "paused" or go through one step at a time. We wouldnt remember any gaps we would remember the last time we weren't paused and link them together in our heads

Do you code? If so in what langue? By the way your videos are AWESOME!

When I heard from Roger Penrose's theories regarding the Universe and Consciousness and that Consciousness is outside of the brain, I thought of simulation too. It seems that Random Probability is key to understanding the Universe and Consciousness. Random Probabilty and Integral versus Continuity and Differential govern the difference between conscious vs robotic. The awareness of time and entropy, random probable (discreteness) as opposed to non-awareness, algorithmic (continuity) robots. A robot can solve non-linear equations in record time but cannot manage a kitchen and children or pick up trash; a robot is algorithmic and will never have consciousness. Robots may feign consciousness but are never conscious or aware of entropy and time. Whereas a housewife cannot solve a non-linear equation but can manage real-time chaos, can pick up trash; the housewife is conscious, random probable. Robots are Continuous, Differential, Determinant. Human is Discrete, Integral, Indeterminant. Are we = Random Probable indeterminant a simulation? Are robots = algorithmic, continuous, determinant a simulation? I have a guess.

When you said "if we increase the speed of simulation we get errors; and if we let it run in its own pace we have to wait long".This sounds like the origin of uncertainty principle.Is it?

it's a simulation. when you die, you just take of a helmet and remembered that you've just been playing a game. this must be the way it is

Nick.,your videos are good. I have been watching it go quite some time.

We don't need to worry about how much processing power it would take to simulate us in real time, because what we experience as real time might not be real time. Heck, even within our universe time is relative. Outside of it, who knows. Going deeper, though... if we decide that it is _probable_ we're in a simulation, then it is also probable that the machine that is simulating us is simulated as well. If we see one turtle, then it's turtles all the way down.

Simulation or no simulation I still have to pay my rent.

I liked your show. it's indeed ok to be crazy

You should check out a podcast called End of the World with Josh Clark if you enjoyed this video. It has an episode about this same topic but spends more time on it.

You could argue that a human brain is running a simulation of it's immediate surroundings, based on limited real time data, recent memory and learned experience. All it's receiving is electro-chemical signals.

3:36 i love that guy

This comment is pretty old compared to the video, but I really love your channel. I'm watching all the videos in order. Please help me understand, I don't really know what it means for the universe to be a simulation. Are we implying that there is a cosmic computer that is simulating us? What kind of implications would it have if we are not a simulation? Thank you!

The speed of light is max speed because that’s the limit of processing power of the computer that runs our sim. The closer you get toward the speed of light the more time slows down. Just like your computer runs slow when you simultaneously play music, play a video game and have 36 windows open.

This is a whole philosophical conversation. I've been down this route before, I questioned why am I - me, and all the other questions.Well, there are some stories. I think Stanislav Lem wrote some. Not sure, was a long time since I read it. But the main story was how a guy made a bunch of little computers, and each of them simulated a person in their world. A woman with a scar on her back, a bum. Can't remember. The point is, their universes, being computers, made by human, sometimes glitched, and from this came all sorts of weird stuff. Dega vu, precognition, duplication, in-universe laws of nature breaking, etc. The guy who made computers was showing them to a friend of his, and they were talking about how it is IMPOSSIBLE to know if you live, or in a simulation of a higer dimensional being. Even if you could tell that you are in a simulation - you wouldn't have ability to communicate with your maker, EVER. You simply don't have ability to transcend.

If we get into religious fields, the whole idea of the world and the afterlife in somewhere else, is enough to prove at least that people always believed this is a palid glimpse or a bad simulation of what is endeed "real".

I seem to be interpreting simulation differently to how some commenters perceived your video. If this ever expanding universe is a simulation similar to your mine craft metaphor, the void of "nothingness" is just pure potential and for anything to exist it must have data encoded into it some way. Would that "way" not be from perspective itself. The observational/experiential standpoint collapses the other possibilities like the Slit experiment. Thus making the universe a self generating simulation that we can have a hand in shaping it if we align our perspective to the principles/algorithms that govern this shindig?

Reality is never perceived directly, but through observation (in a very broad sense) which effectively abstract it. Being in a simulation does not have any impact, even ontologically speaking, on the experience of Reality, the same way the number 5 must always mean the same amount regardless of what it is an abstraction of.

I'm not sure but I'm leaning to it isn't there something about the number pi that says if there is a limit to pi shows the universe is virtual

I think it's the other way around. People keep asking whether or not the universe is a simulation by using simulations running on the universe to do it. I think simulations work the way they do because that's how the universe works.

The multiverse may be too and they spring into action when needed whilst building a real set past history with boundaries of possible things to happen perhaps random but eventually wave functions can collapse when needed?!

I'm not a simulation. I'm being me. I'm not pretending. Are you simulating or pretending to be someone else or are you being you?

Hi made a comment about this on the video about the double slit experiment. If we are in a simulation then there wouldn't be any such thing as solid matter. Everything would be made of energy. And it is.

Hi.@ 3 : 15 & refering to" Locality" . The use of mathematic & real deep understanding of it ( not an interpretation of the results ) , makes to appreciate this beautiful Tolls & Gift given to EACH ONE OF US , more & more EACH DAY. Hier some Topics - References if you are interested : ❶ Eulers "e ". ❷ Harmonic - Serie , ❸ Euler - Maschoroni ( Gama ) ❹ Riemann ´s , X ( 0 ) = 1 /2 , and putting all together : ❺ Fermat & ❻ Poincare Conjuctures. And don´t worry about the Success, if they made it, so can WE Do (each one of us of his own ). cheers🍻😁

To make things worse, things within the simulation don't need to be "sim-real". It is sufficient if you believe what you see is real. It's like dreams. In them you don't need to simulate a motorbike to dream of riding it. You just have the impression of doing it. So if the simulation we live in is not totally stupid, there is no need for a smallest size or anything definite. You can just be presented with anything as you look at it. Deeper and deeper ;-) One of my personal favorite explanations uses the bone marrow as a metaphor where white blood cells are being made. They act as antibodys and are produced randomly. As of their birth they cannot distinguish between friend and enemy. So they are presented with a lot of both. If they happen not to attac the friend things they are released into the wild of your body. Maybe what we undergo is the same procedure, conceptionally. We are being tested if we will behave well in the production environment. We are part of the training of a giant neural net if you will. And it is consistent with a lot of faithes. But so are all simulation theories of the world.

Love your videos

Who knows? But as Dr.Johnson said - I refute it thus. Does it really matter when the pain and anguish we feel is very real, no matter what the source. If it is a simulation then the creators have made a Frankenstein.

Fun speculation! Quanta like voxels, values exploding or converging, etc. Do our simulations simulate a real world or a simulation? Fun to think about but not important ... or is it?