Are we living in a simulation? Subscribe to my newsletter for a chance to win a Dell Monitor: gleam.io/otvyy/dell-nvidia-monitor-1 (Only available in North America this time)

"We have mapped this organism, exactly". No my friend. There are billions of atoms in there, and many relations that are not yet understood between cells/neurons/molecules etc. This is just a toy project.

Bioinformatician here. It's an excelent and nice model. Of course it's not even close to simulate even a, let's say, 0.0001% of the "reality" of a real worm.

“Would you still love me if I was an OpenWorm?”

“I can simulate a kidney down to the molecular level. That doesn’t mean my computer will pee on my desk “. Bernardo Kastrup

Futurama teaches us that if we run a sim at a slower speed, then compute power is less of an issue. We might be running slower than our makers. We might never know.

Matt, you really must realize that ML "neurons" and biological neurons are not even close to the same thing. Although ML is very much influenced by some of the attributes of real neurons, we still have NO real understanding of how neurons actually work. So scaling up the work done here to a human is in the realm of science fiction (no matter how intriguing).

When humans went through the machine age some people wondered whether we lived in a giant machine.

You don't have to simulate the whole universe. You *only* have to simulate what the observer experiences. You don't have so simulate each atom. You only have to simulate the atoms in the observer's experience. Everything else can be low resolution "big picture" dynamics. Just like a video game doesn't render the entire virtual world. It only has to render what is in the current viewport at any moment. Also, if the observer's memory is part of the simulation, the past can be changed at any time without the observer knowing about it, as long as the memories are kept consistent with the new paradigm.

I wouldnt use the word "exactly" like that. Simulation is not real. It is extrapolation of the known.

It’s maybe a simulation of it’s behavior, but not a simulation of a real worm. Even a worm is more than just neurons. 🤔

we came up with simulation because we cant explain consciousness..

Even with this worm, Roger Penrose said long time ago that we are missing quantum effects here.

I knew some people less intelligent than that worm so definitely we are inside matrix.

We're just Meat-GPT.

Bostrom didn't say "we are living in a simulation". He said that there are 3 possibilities: either civilizations don't progress far enough to make sufficient simulations, they lose interest in simulations or decide not to make them, or that we are likely living in a simulation (because by their nature simulated realities will outnumber actual realities). And he said that we should assign roughly equal probability to all 3. On the point about consciousness: we can make one in 9 months, so even if there's something magical about the wet meat between our ears it would still be possible to build a machine (or grow one) that mimics that. Simulation Theory is not something to be believed in; it's a thought experiment that exposes some very interesting possibilities, and a roadmap as we progress.

People easily make sense of religions, flat earth theory and so on.. just because things make sense, this doesn't bear a mark or reality

Yes, the universe is mathematically based. That is our personal experience since we're born. When we invent things like math principles and simulations and AI modeks, we are simulating our experience and knowledge. Therefore, modelling an organism may be very accurate, that doesn't necessarily mean we are in a simulation, but rather that we are modeling our known universe. I'm more interested in the unknown universe, and who or what created our universe.

Like start of the series "Devs"

In order for AI to be "conscious," it has to do more than regurgitate information. It has to understand it, and be AWARE of it. It has to know that it knows. There is no scale prediction for that.

"Morty that just sounds like religion with extra steps"

When I was a kid in the 80s, I tried to figure out how AI might be achieved. Having no clue about algorithms & LLMs, I figured we'd need supercomputers to actually grow a digital human being, atom by atom.

As long as the simulated beer tast good, i dont care

anyone who knows and smoked salvia already knows we are in a simulation

Computer simulation inside another computer simulator, inside another one and so on

I request a patch for this version.

Space-Time is a construct of our minds and therefore each of us is creating a simulation, but there is no separation in consciousness. Therefore it makes little sense to say that we are living in a simulation, as if that simulation is imposed on us.

If the worm squiggles off my screen onto my desk then I will definitely believe we are in a simulation

It is irrelevant how well it simulates a real worm, the question is whether it feels it is real?

While it is true that the estimated number of neurons is 86 Billion, the number of synaptic interconnections is more like 100 Trillion. In order to model the nematodes (much less a human), don’t the interconnections have to be modeled? If so, I would think that would change the complexity considerably.

Pixelated worm: wiggles a bit This guy: WORLD IS NOT REAL! WE DO NOT EXIST! SIMULATION!1!1!1!1!1!1!1

if it had 256 neurons i would shit my pants

just simulating limited behaviour of the worm in a snapshot of time.

Somebody fell asleep one too many times watching the matrix.

if you think about it every Religion believes in the " Simulation Theory" its not something new. the Real life / Nirvana / Buddha/ Paradise is after life

I believe that the core of this debate is: Are we more than just a bunch of cells interacting with each other like machines? Do we have something else within us that makes us human (a soul)?

Living in a simulation or not, i still have to go to work tomorrow!

The computational power required to simulate our known universe is nearly impossible. Theoretically, if that were attainable, we would also me able to predict the future assuming the simulation is deterministic.

A simulation of what? The computer "worm" is a simulation of a real thing, a worm. What real thing is the universe a simulation of? It's not a rhetorical question. I want an answer. The universe is real. Face that.

Nice video! Can you share your setup? Camera and which video editing tool do you use? Tks!

This was the kind of worm that ate part of RFK Jr’s brain.

The reality is that we can't even simulate 1 atom perfectly, let alone a worm.

The thing about simulation hypothesis is that you don't need to simulate an entire universe to explain your subjective experience. It only takes simulating your brain, and one could argue that that seems to be eventually possible, unless there's some magical quantum foam 4d space madness going on in there (which, to be clear, isn't impossible either)

Does anyone know where the option screen is located I am not entitely happy with my character and would like to change a few things.

Yeah of course we want a full tutorial, it's like asking Cartman if he wants another Chicken Pot pie.

Imagine a simulation so good, simulated beings make simulations to prove they're in a simulation. Crazy work

devs is the best sci fi ever. for real, legendary.

I love how Keanu is casually explaining the Matrix as though it's this obscure movie that people might not know 😂

We are just now finding that consciousness might be quantum in nature. There is no way to "scale up" a model like this to humans.

This has nothing to do with the physical real world. Its not simulating the atoms, its not simulating the electrons or the electromagnetic forces, its not simulating gravity (except in abstracted forms since we still dont know what or how "real" gravity works). Its not even simulating what truly goes on at the planc scale of each neuron. Its nowhere close to even attempting to simulate the newly discovered potential quantum effects of the microtubules, because you need a quantum computer to do that.. It is simply simulating individual connections between weighted nodes. It is incredibly impressive, yes. But it says nothing about simulation theory. Nowhere close. Just because you can simulate something in a simplified abstract way, does not mean base reality is a simulation. A hyper advanced AI version of The Sims, doesnt mean real conciousness is the same. It's a simplified abstraction. Nick Boströms theory itself has enormous logical flaws in it, and is riddled with assumptions. Such as, "you are whatever is more likely that you are, you are whatever is most common". Which simply isnt true. The most common organism on Earth are insects, yet you reading this, is not an insect. According to the Simulation Argument, you should have been born an insect, because there are infinitely more of them than "real humans". Secondly, if there is life and other civilizations in the universe, again, you should have been born into one of the largest most widespread civilizations out there, NOT the smallest single planet-trapped civilization barely entering the space age. Because the entire hypothesis is founded on the assumption that whatever there exists most of, you ought to be one of them... The "odds" of you being born as a Homo Sapien, a tiny species trapped on a singular planet in the enormous expanse of the universe, is close to zero. Yet here you are. And you cant argue "what if we're alone in the universe", because the entire simulation theory is predicated on that some civilizations must have existed, beyond us, to build the simulations.... Thus you have to wrestle with the above mentioned logical fallacy. He literally states, "there ought to be infinitely more simulated entities than real entities, thus the odds are you are a simulated one". Then why arent you an insect, or part of one of the largest civilizations in the universe? Because the assumption doesnt make logical sense, you arent what is most common, you are whatever you are, even if its exceedingly rare.. Because reality isnt just a math equation based on odds. Secondly, he conveniently completely ignores all the "real" entities that ought to exist in base reality, especially a base reality old enough to have had enough development and time to build all these simulations. How many "The Sims" characters are online and active in computers around the world at any given hour? According to Steam charts, a couple thousand simultaneous games in progress at any given peak hour. Add a few more offline players. How many actual simulated "sims" in each game on average? 1-10, lets say 5. A couple thousands times 5. Nowhere near the 8 billion "real" human beings out here. Why are we assuming simulated entities must outnumber real entities? Why are we assuming every single physical "real" entity just commited seppuku once they built computers running simulations? You cant "upload" yourself to a simulation, because your physical brain dies, and a scanned copy awakes in the simulation. No advanced species capable of immense feats of brilliance would forget that, nor would they be willing to ALL collectively, in teh entire universe at once, commit suicide to allow copies to wake up in a computer game. Would you kill yourself, to let a separate "Sims" character wake up in your laptop, that you would have no experiential connection to after youre dead? No. Finally, he assumes base reality (where they constructed said simulations) must have identical laws of physics to "here". Which again, makes no sense. The Sims doesnt have anything remotely identical to real physics or chemistry. For all he knows, base reality could be an 11 dimensional manifold of 4 time dimensions. Then every calculation he made to count the odds of how many simulated entities must exist, flies out the window. Because those odds only work if base reality is identical to our "simulation". A Sims character cannot use research and science discovered from WITHIN the game, to extrapolate ANYTHING about the outside base reality. No matter how long they work on it, no matter how intelligent they are, a polygon in The Sims has nothing to do with real atoms or electromagnetic forces. Any "odds" they calculate, only works in their simulation, and doesnt apply in any meaningful way to predict anything about base reality. So even if Nick Boström is right, and we DO live in a simulation, his odds of it being true means nothing, because you cant use calculations derived from within a simulation to glean ANY knowledge of "actual" reality outside. And if he's not right, its because reality isnt just a mathematical calculation of probabilities. But for people who dont think about these things for more than 4 seconds, his paper seems really exciting. Smart guy said the odds are we live in simulation. Must be true. Folks, think a bit deeper on these issues yourselves.

if we live in a computer simulation, I hope there's a backup somewhere!

Theres a saying that chaos theorists used to say, you can simulate a rainstorm exactly but it will neve make it wet, so take that with this and you can see how this isnt really consciousness

I completely believe that there is a better than 90% chance that we live in a simulated environment. I also believe it doesn’t matter. It’s real to us and we are familiar with most of the rules. There are many different types of simulation we could be in - but if you immediately think that means that every atom in our universe is simulated, you’re nuts and you’ll quickly decide that’s way too much to simulate. But if you think about it like a game designer, you quickly realize that at any given instant, the only thing that NEEDS to be simulated are the things *you* can sense. The things we can see, hear, smell, touch and taste. Even the internals of our body don’t need to be simulated until someone slices us open. So essentially only our brain *needs* to be simulated. And even when we’re looking at the moon, or out into deep space, what we see only needs to be simulated to the resolution that our eyes can perceive - like a picture. The long and short of it is that it would only take a tiny fraction of the compute power that you initially thought we’d need. And we’re probably living in one of MILLIONS of different simulations - some similar and some completely different. Ignore any articles that say the simulation theory has been debunked - because it’s unfalsifiable. It can never be proven false (or true) - and even if we are thousands of levels deep in nested simulations, the people at the very top of the chain - the ones who are “real” and created the first simulated universe - even they will never know for 100% certain that the universe they live in - is real. They’ll calculate the odds the same way we do and determine that they are almost certainly simulated. What are the implications? If we *knew* 100% that we were simulated, it wouldn’t change one thing about your life - but your death might be a whole different story. If we are simulated, there is a much greater chance of some sort of life after death - a “next level” or perhaps the ability to replay/relive our favorite scenes from our own past? Nothings guaranteed of course - but the possibilities are endless and it’s fascinating to think about.

A good start. We need to simulate at least the protein sequence to say we simulate a living organism. But a great start!

Good luck stimulating consciousness. First, you'll need to understand it. Ah! Your first roadblock.

You only have to simulate what is being observed

If being frivolous was what it took to make meaningful contributions, this would of won a Nobel Prize

Worms have an opening for nutrient intake, and a gut tube to an opening for eliminating waste. A biology teacher on commented, "in essence, we're all just advanced forms of worms."

All this time we thought we’d nuke ourselves, but it turns out we are going to replace ourselves. One simulation taking over another simulation? Infinite possibilities!

it took your monster that long? wow...

The Project is awsome but you shoud focus more on the technical aspects and less on talking about things you have no idea about

When the worm makes a simulation, that's when we should start to worry.

Does the worm know its in a simulation? We wouldnt know either 🙃

Neil DeGrasse Tyson isn’t not a reputable scientist. He’s just a tv personality like Bill Nye.

wtf confusing a computer program with consciousness

Guys create a really cool tamagotchi The internet: "This will change reality as we know it"

It's not really 100% simulated.

too much overthinking and i think we should really stop this ai hype cause even today majority of our models which we reiterate as AI are actually just predicating text

“you can run this simulation on your own computer” anybody can run almost any simulation as long as they got a good computer 😭

If we're in a simulation, I want the cheat codes

We are in a "simulation" created by God. The purpose is to see whether we will seek him out and turn to him in love/faith or not.

> Are we living in a simulation? You do, in mine!

We very may well be inside a black hole that’s why we can’t figure our way out.

O I guess worms having less simulation data then humans

I would totally follow along on how you put this together. I purchased a monster of a computer a few months ago for just this sort of thing and haven't really tested it out yet. Thanks Matt!

up and running details for the worm would be awesome, maybe the docker image?

What I'm gathering here is that with enough data points and computational power you can simulate a living organism. We're not there yet but we're making progress in that direction.

So this is that “Worm Odyssey” game I’ve been hearing so much about

What theyre saying is that they may be able to "predict" what humans will do, making such calculated guesses to basically "tell the future." This is literally all a concept from a show called "Devs" which i highly suggest to anyone who hasnt seen it.

The worm doesn’t have consciousness so that ends the question. ❤️😂

I read somewhere that the power needed to simulate a universe would require more energy than can be found in a universe, and openworm is a perfect example of that. Berman stated that he is using an "absolute monster of a PC" to run Openworm. A computer simulation of a nematode requires _orders_ _of_ _magnitude_ more energy to run, than for an actual nematode to exist.

Wake me up when they decide to use this to control a giant robot worm

Consciousness isn't just awareness...conscious means fallable is a quantifiable asset of survival...that builds character and personality

I would love to see how you run the code and how the worm reacts to food or some external stimuli, Are you able to track wich neurons are involved?

Why does everyone assume that a legit simulation is running 8 billion humans? Like, it could be running a couple thousand full humans, and npc the rest. THAT sounds very logical. 😊

I mean there are huge abstractions going on with whatever algo they are using, so it's not a "reality sim" or anything, but to understand how to implement those abstractions properly is a testament to the community developing this.

They turned this on is 2012. Weve already been living in this for over 12 years. Its all around you.

I love reading about the simulation hypothesis, the double slit experiement just makes me think it's kind of like some memory optimization equivilent on a computer. What if we ourselves are a form of AI inside of the simulation.

how to install, maybebyou can show the steps, would be cool

It is a very interesting proyect indeed but you have to remember that those "neurons" are just a strong simplification of an actual neuron. Remember that every one of those are a whole cells and simulating only one of them is far beyond our computing power.

I find it hard to believe we are in a simulation, even though a lot of things point to it, but if we humans were in the simulation, we would live forever.

Quantum computing has nothing to do with the type of computing used for this simulation. And yeah the show devs basically used quantum computer to mean magic machine. This is not one of the applications for quantum computing, an NVIDIA GPU is way better at this stuff than any future quantum computer would be

Interesting tidbit that I learned about nematodes a long time ago, is that we are essentially up to our chests in them, so realistically we should be mapping out our symbiotic relationships with nematodes because there would be a particular resistance/buoyancy factor as well as a variation in different pressure systems.

This worm was the start of the Alex Garland miniseries DEVS

And I remember when you didn't want a worm on your computer.

Supported them through kickstarter many years ago. Played around with the digi-worm years ago. Fun!

The funniest part of the Computer Simulation theory is when one of the guys studying it admitted that his task was pointless. He said that if he was able to discover that we are living in a computer simulation, then the creators of the computer could simply pause the program and remove the code that proved it was a simulation and then restart it lol

"It seems like we're getting close [to simulating human consciousness] if you just look at AI." Tell me you've never had a transcendental psychedelic trip without telling me...

I think someone simulated Minecraft by building a computer in Minecraft itself. It was a significantly more basic form of it. We could be the same. Slower speed of light, less dimensions, etc.

Let's start this discussion in a more fundamental point with a question: - Are our reality mathematical or are mathematics just an "language" humans invented to simplify nature fenomenoms? Just because we can mathematically prove something that doesn't mean the thing is mathematical in nature. It just show that we can translate our bigger complex reallity to this language of simple numbers so we can mesure it and understand it. But numbers don't exist in our reallity, there isn't a "centimiter" or a "inch" in space, that's just a mesurement we do to count distance. The distance exists, but it is much more complex than just simbols or "logic" and even logic has it flaws, we can breakdown space to centimiters to milimeters and go on to an infinity of fractions, so how can we cross this infinit fractions of space? Because, reallity aren't ruled by numbers or our logic and our Mathematical model aren't perfect. Simulations on computers are just us finally using the hability to translate reallity with numbers and logic to recreate our world. It doesn't mean that world is "real" or even close to ours, like numbers. Even if you could pefectly simulate down to the atom level, that doesn't put it to the same size of our reality because is limited to our mathematical knowledge who itelf is an abstraction and imperfect. "But can we say our reality is an abstraction of some bigger reality?" _ Yes, you could, but at this point, why believe in Simulation Theory is more diferent than a religion?