On the one hand, I’m not sure if I’m pleased to share the same thought process with Elon Musk, as reported by Geraint Lewis in NewScientist (11 June 2016, paywall):
ARE we, and the universe we are in, a simulation? SpaceX chief Elon Musk thinks there is a tiny billions-to-one chance that we actually exist physically, and it is much more likely that we are data swirling around on someone’s supercomputer. What leads him to this strange conclusion?
However, given how nominative determinism keeps popping up these days, one is forced to conclude the programmer-in-chief needs to cut down on the random correlations.
Musk is immersed in a technological world that has advanced rapidly, and it seems inevitable to him that a functioning human brain, consciousness and all, will exist within a computer in the not too distant future. With the growth in computing power over the next few millennia, this first lonely brain will be joined by many more in a computed universe.
Which all sounds quite pleasant, I suppose, but I have to wonder if the limits of computation would have an impact on our capabilities once we’re encapsulated in a computer. I’ve mentioned this before, but there are days in which, wondering at how woefully awful we are at understanding our world, even with the use of science, I have to wonder if, already embedded in a computer, we’re also already operating with some inherent burdens springing from the computational model used by whoever has put us in here.
Of course, both sides of the issue should be considered: perhaps we are improved by our sojourn in the speculative computer? Better memories, perhaps, although that might lead to insanity. One is left to wonder: how to determine the edges of our computer simulation? It’s an interesting thought, at least to me.
