I have a hard time grasping that the CEO of a major corporation actually believes that there is only likely a 1 in billions chance that we are all currently living in reality, but that most likely we are all living in a virtual reality video game/program.
Seems like he holds a very dim view on reality.
Have you met reality recently?
The idea that we’re inside a simulation, or nested inside multiple simulations, isn’t new.
I happen to think he’s right, and as messy as our reality is, sometimes it actually seems a bit too tidy. Plus there’s the issue of the odds of you ever being born. Do you really think that the universe came into being exactly as it did, life on Earth evolved exactly as it did, and somehow out of 4 billion people(at the time) the exact woman and the exact man necessary to create you met and fell in love? And that of a hundred million sperm and thousands of eggs, the right combination led to you? The odds of all that going down are trillions to one if not higher. So that means you are here by design. God probably exists, we just probably don’t know much about him. And he might not be any smarter than you.
Of course, there are other possibilities. If there’s an infinite number of universes then you will always exist somewhere. There’s also the hypothesis of the biocentric universe, which states that consciousness creates the universe, not vice versa. But the simulation hypothesis has always struck me as pretty compelling.
Sure. If they hadn’t (and it hadn’t) I wouldn’t be here to contemplate it.
I certainly hope we’re not part of a video game. My video games have dragons and aliens and power armor and shit. I can’t imagine how dull some alien’s life must be that watching virtual me do landscaping takeoffs is considered entertainment.
Hey alien! What do I have to do to get some dragons and romantically-inclined elf women around here?!
And yet, as you note, there are billions of us (currently 7 billion), so it’s not really that uncommon.
Musk’s theory is interesting, but I don’t believe it. Of course, if we’re in a simulation of the past and it’s really the year 12016, I suppose the whole point is that we don’t realize it. Frankly, it’s actually a neat idea, though. To think someone might actually be paying attention to everything we’re doing.
So, what, are we all brains in jars somewhere, or are we sentient software?
I’ve heard that argument too and accepted it for awhile, but the odds are just SO steep that chances are my being here was inevitable. If we assume the current accepted version of reality, I only had one shot. One in a quadrillion, win or lose. So the most unlikely thing that will ever happen to you is just being here in the first place. That just strikes me as unlikely to be how reality actually is. What seems more likely is that your odds are one in a quadrillion, but you get an infinite number of rolls of the dice.
We’re probably not a video game so much as a simulation that is just run in five minutes from the user’s perspective, just as you can sim a whole baseball season in five minutes with current computers. For example, maybe we’re in a sim entitled, “What if the North had won the Civil War?”
He’s a Silicon Valley businessman, not a philosopher. His views on this as relevant as asking Warren Buffet as to whether there’s actually a fortune telling machine out there that can grant the wish of a kid to turn into a fully grown Tom Hanks.
Well, his views are relevant in that a shit-ton of money is coming from these guys to go to scientific research and it’s tending to go towards the more pie in the sky goals, like space travel and anti-aging.
It’s a wild guess with too many assumptions on things we couldn’t possibly know. We don’t know whether it will ever be possible to simulate consciousness, among many other things.
It’s like trying to guess the exact chances of life elsewhere in the galaxy – there are just way, way too many things we don’t know at this point to even attempt to answer.
His views aren’t any different than believing that (a) God created the universe and us.
A currently untestable hypothesis. But it’s not as if real scientists don’t come up with the same ideas. Crazy things like multiple universes are accepted by more scientists than not.
Right (though “accepted” for things like the multiverse is really acceptance that this is a good possible explanation of something based on the evidence so far, rather than accepting something is definitely true), but that’s very different than saying “there’s only a 1 in a billion chance that we’re not in a simulation”.
But such ideas come from theoretical physicists, as opposed to billionaires who think the Matrix movies were really awesome.
Uh oh, now you’ve done it.
The Matrix just ripped off Ghost in The Shell.
Yes, but since it’s coming from St. Elon, there are a lot of people who will listen.
I, on the other hand, think this seems like the beginning of him following in the footsteps of Howard Hughes.
The simulated universe idea certainly is getting a lot of traction in the media lately, even though the idea has been around for awhile.
Seems to me it’s like saying “God did it” but people want a sciency way of saying “God did it.” They’re still apparently searching for God. No law against that, but I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.
Dude, what if we’re all just like characters in God’s D&D game and there’s like a billion gods and when our god gets called to dinner we’ll stop existing?
we scoff at the people who promote the “sovereign citizen” thing, but give this mindset credence?