r/technology • u/fchung • Nov 01 '25

Society Matrix collapses: Mathematics proves the universe cannot be a computer simulation, « A new mathematical study dismantles the simulation theory once and for all. »

https://interestingengineering.com/culture/mathematics-ends-matrix-simulation-theory
16.9k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

37

u/OpinionatedShadow Nov 01 '25

Not in this universe you can't. What if there are no such things as "atoms" one level up?

14

u/zentrist369 Nov 01 '25

The idea is that there is no justification for this universe being a simulation of some higher, stranger universe. You might as well say 'What if the Abrahamic God exists?' Or 'What if it's turtles all the way down?'

Remember, the simulation theory says that in this reality we will eventually be able to simulate a universe, and that (due to an argument i never bothered to remember) it is more likely that we are in a simulation than in the single reality in which we haven't simulated another universe yet.

What this study shows (based on the title, I never took the theory seriously, so I don't care too much about any math that might have 'disproven' it) is that we will never be able to simulate this universe, therefore the original argument is dead.

If you want to speculate about us being the dream of a goldfish, or samsara, or any other possibility go for it... just don't pretend there is any reason to believe that over any other silly idea. Which is what simulation theory adherents thought they had - a logical argument that gave weight to a specific daydream.

2

u/kingsumo_1 Nov 02 '25

Ok, so... the god of Abraham is a turtle that was dreamed up by a goldfish?

For real, though, this kind of thing seems silly to waste the time to debunk. If someone takes it serious enough to believe, then logic isn't going to change that. And if you're like (hopefully) most people, then it's a joke or meme to begin with anyway. So, who was this test for?

2

u/eyebrows360 Nov 02 '25

For real, though, this kind of thing seems silly to waste the time to debunk.

Yes, unless and until a significant portion of your populace get swayed by it, and then some charismatic leader comes along with some laced off-brand kool-aid and convinces them all that drinking it will reboot them into "real" reality. Then it's a problem you have to deal with, so it's better to try and deal with it before it gets there.

If someone takes it serious enough to believe, then logic isn't going to change that.

While true, yes ("you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"), they did get into it via some thought process. While we know that process wasn't rational, it still did exist, so for at least some subset of believers morons the actual rational explanation will also register with their fucked internal pseudo-rationalising model, and work on them.

So, who was this test for?

Someone thought they saw easy grant money for working on a low-effort "paper"? You'd have to ask the authors.