Do We Live in A Matrix?
I think most of us have watched the sci-fi films The Matrix. For a recap of those who did not see the movie, Neo, is stunned to see people defying the laws of physics, running up walls and vanishing suddenly. These superhuman violations of the rules of the universe are possible because, unbeknownst to him, Neo’s consciousness is embedded in the Matrix, a virtual-reality simulation created by sentient machines.
The action really begins when Neo is given a fateful choice: Take the blue pill and return to his oblivious, virtual existence, or take the red pill to learn the truth about the Matrix and find out “how deep the rabbit hole goes.”
Physicists can now offer us the same choice, the ability to test whether we live in our own virtual Matrix, by studying radiation from space. As fanciful as it sounds, some philosophers have long argued that we’re actually more likely to be artificial intelligence trapped in a fake universe than we are organic minds in the “real” one.
But if that were true, the very laws of physics that allow us to devise such reality-checking technology may have little to do with the fundamental rules that govern the meta-universe inhabited by our simulators. To us, these programmers would be gods, able to twist reality on a whim.
This is not really news to a lot of people, but it IS news to people who desire experimental verification. The ol' double-slit experiment strikes again this in instance with an interesting twist. Note: the idea of this type experiment has been around for a long time, but obviously getting it done with repute and procedural 'perfection' is another matter.
This is another boon to simulations theory (assuming its verified), which more and more heavyweights are now ascribing to. Also so to closed time loop theories that cite Information as the real key to mastering space-time, with consciousness perhaps being the material catalyst in that action can come from reaction e.g. registered phenomena gain meaning when consciously given a relationship with other registered phenomena.
For instance, say we combined this experiment with Mallet's closed-time loop laser experiments. We turn the machine on, intend to leave it on indefinitely, and are immediately flooded with info. From the future and the past. Whether or not those space-times have collapsed on themselves is irrelevant as there's an informational relationship outside of normal space-time regardless. The key is sending/recv bits instead of matter-energy. We can then consciously gain "it from bit" as Wheeler dictates, within our reference frame.
Quote:
With our ideal realization of the delayed-choice entanglement swapping gedanken experiment, we have demonstrated a generalization of Wheeler’s “delayed-choice” tests, going from the wave-particle duality of a single particle to the entanglement-separability duality of two particles39. Whether these two particles are entangled or separable has been decided after they have been measured. If one views the quantum state as a real physical object, one could get the seemingly paradoxical situation that future actions appear as having an influence on past and already irrevocably recorded events. However, there is never a paradox if the quantum state is viewed as to be no more than a “catalog of our knowledge”2. Then the state is a probability list for all possible measurement outcomes, the relative temporal order of the three observer’s events is irrelevant and no physical interactions whatsoever between these events, especially into the past, are necessary to explain the delayed-choice entanglement swapping. What, however, is important is to relate the lists of Alice, Bob and Victor’s measurement results. On the basis of Victor’s measurement settings and results, Alice and Bob can group their earlier and locally totally random results into subsets which each have a different meaning and interpretation. This formation of subsets is independent of the temporal order of the measurements. According to Wheeler, Bohr said: “No elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is a registered phenomenon.”5, 7 We would like to extend this by saying: “Some registered phenomena do not have a meaning unless they are put in relationship with other registered phenomena.”
Somewhere in there is "God's Thumbprint", the answer to "Life, the Universe, and Everything." And I'm really afraid that answer is "Divide by zero error."
It just as capably demonstrates the opposite: The future is singular, as Gödel theorized, so Victor's choice wasn't a choice at all. It was the only thing that was actually going to happen, so Alice and Bob's results remain consistent with his own. Alternately, Bohr was right and our understanding of what's actually happening is and will always remain incomplete. With their last paragraph, the paper's authors seem to side with the latter.
Either way, or bizarre as it seems, there's nothing new here. This particular quirk of the Standard Model has been known for a century. Experimental proof just makes it more awkward.
As I understand it, this was always Einsteins problem with quantum theory and the source of his quote, "God does not play dice with the universe."
You see this sort of thing throughout history, retrograde motions of the stars and etc... that eventually go away once a better model is found. Unfortunately, in this case quantum theory works so well in so many cases that it's really hard to see where it could be wrong.
So let’s go with this. Is reality real? Is our world a simulation? So should we say yes to the offer to take the red pill and learn the truth — or are the implications too disturbing? Could the answer to life be in there? Could the Matrix be a real thing?
The paper:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1203/1203.4834.pdf
