Would experiencing Groundhog Day prove that life was a simulation just for you alone?
There are other Groundhog Day questions and other Simulation questions. I believe this differs from all the others.
[This movie features a] ...TV weatherman who, during an assignment covering the annual Groundhog Day event, is caught in a time loop, repeating the same day ... [over and over]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groundhog_Day_(film)
The point is that only one character is aware that same day is repeating. Others all start their day as normal and continue unless their day is altered by interacting with the main character.
If you woke up repeatedly like the weatherman Phil Connors and could convince* yourself you weren't merely dreaming or hallucinating, wouldn't your only other conclusion have to be that you were (a) in a simulation of some kind and (b) it is designed just for you?
The reason I say this is that if your universe is the 'real' one then it would have to reset itself purely for your benefit to provide your repeating experience. Resetting the actual universe is presumably much more difficult than resetting a simulation based on one viewer's point of view - yours.
- When I say 'convince yourself' I don't mean prove it indisputably, I mean decide in your own mind - perhaps to preserve your sanity!.
This post was sourced from https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/q/132106. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.
1 answer
Speaking as a scientist, it would not preserve my sanity to believe the world and all the people in it were a simulation for only me. It would quite likely make ME a simulation too! (Particularly if, by investigation and/or observation, I cannot find any notable physical difference between my own body and others -- why should I believe they are simulations and I am not?)
If not, I'd be the only sentient in the world, and that would be the ultimate loneliness, and make me a rat treading water forever. Since I couldn't kill myself, I think I'd go insane.
Also, speaking as a scientist, there is no telling how much energy it would take to reset the universe to 24 hours ago, with only my brain and memories changed. It is entirely possible every moment of the universe exists simultaneously, so no "energy" is required at all. More generally, if you have no idea how something is accomplished, you have no idea how easy or difficult it is.
For example, before the existence of gunpowder or other explosives, somebody trying to compute how to accelerate a quarter-ounce stone (about the weight of a 9mm bullet) to supersonic speeds with a handheld device may conclude it is impossible to do with any combination of springs or levers. Does that make a handgun impossible? Of course not, they are just too uninformed to know that there is a pretty cheap, safe and easy way to do it; in fact it is so cheap and safe some people will shoot a few hundred bullets in a day for the fun of it, and never notice the expense.
As a scientist, if I can't figure out how something is done, I can't estimate the cost of doing it. Also, I will believe my own eyes, ears and senses: If everything looks like I traveled back in time with my memories intact, I will believe that is what I am doing, and that neither me (or my senses) or the people are simulations. Also as a research scientist, I am perfectly fine saying "I don't know", and I don't need even a possible explanation for a phenomenon, I am comfortable with no explanation. Most of the things science is investigating have no answer, nobody knows why they happen or how to predict them or how they work. It is our job to come up with testable ideas to give us clues to that.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads