Bostrom's 'Simulation Hypothesis'

Translated by AI

Is it possible that our world is nothing more than a highly intricate computer simulation? This isn't just the stuff of science fiction movies. In fact, Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom ( Nick Bostrom ) discusses this very idea in his renowned paper "Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?" ( "Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?" ).

Bostrom's simulation hypothesis relies primarily on the following premises:

1. Computing Power of Future Civilizations: Future humans or other intelligent life forms might possess exceedingly powerful computing capabilities, allowing them to simulate entire universes, including every detail and lifeform within.
2. Motivation for Simulations: These future civilizations might have ample motivation to create such simulations, whether for scientific research, entertainment, or certain moral or religious purposes.
3. Number of Simulations: If simulations are indeed created, it's likely there would not be just one, but potentially countless simulated universes.

Based on these premises, Bostrom proposes a trilemma, suggesting that at least one of the following three scenarios must be true:

1. Almost all civilizations like ours go extinct before reaching a technological stage capable of running such simulations.
2. Even if civilizations reach this stage, they aren't interested in creating simulations or choose not to for some reason.
3. We are currently living in a computer simulation.

His paper elaborates on how he arrived at this conclusion. From a probabilistic standpoint, if future civilizations can generate numerous simulated worlds and we lack direct evidence showing we're not living in one, then the probability of us living in a simulated world is high. After all, just one non-simulated civilization can spawn countless simulated worlds, making the likelihood of residing in a simulation far greater than living in the real world.

Despite the logical appeal of Bostrom's hypothesis, it faces skepticism from various fields:

1. Limited Computational Resources: Some scientists and critics argue that the computational resources needed to create so many realistic simulations would be overwhelmingly large, even for future supercivilizations.
2. Moral and Ethical Considerations: Others believe that creating such vast numbers of simulations may not align with ethical or moral standards, as it would mean generating worlds filled with pain and suffering.
3. Experience and Verification: A cornerstone of the scientific method is verifiability; however, the simulation hypothesis is essentially unprovable, limiting its acceptance within the scientific community.

These critiques may seem reasonable at first glance, yet with the rapid advancements in AI and quantum computing, computational resources appear increasingly abundant, while moral and ethical constraints become negligible under the pressure of population growth.

If this 'simulation hypothesis' holds true, it answers the question we posed earlier: "Where does this stage come from?" The next question, then, is why — what exactly motivates the investment of massive resources to create such a stage?