Universe, a Complex Simulation

Reads: 292  | Likes: 0  | Shelves: 0  | Comments: 0

More Details
Status: Finished  |  Genre: Non-Fiction  |  House: Booksie Classic

The mystery of the universe as we see it now and since time immemorial has deepened with passage of time. Our understanding of the complex formation has not significantly improved as one may think
but as Albert Schweitzer suggested that by acquiring more knowledge, things have become even more complex. The reason is not that we have stopped learning but because there are too many plausible
options to focus on and then pick one that sounds most credible is bit of a challenge. The plethora of choices has made selection extremely difficult, if not impossible.

Submitted: March 02, 2017

A A A | A A A

Submitted: March 02, 2017



The universe is a pretty big place. If it's just us, seems like an awful waste of space.”

Carl Sagan

“All you really need to know for the moment is that the universe is a lot more complicated than you might think, even if you start from a position of thinking it's pretty damn complicated in the first place.”

Douglas Adams


The mystery of the universe as we see it now and since times immemorial has deepened with passage of time. Our understanding of an immensely complex formation has not significantly improved as one may think but as Albert Schweitzer had suggested that by acquiring more knowledge, the things have become even more mysterious.

The reason is not that we have stopped learning but because there are too many plausible options and possible scenarios to focus on and then pick one that sounds most credible is bit of a challenge. The plethora of choices has made selection extremely difficult, if not impossible.

I firmly believe that there is a simpler explanation to that apparently extremely intricate mystery. We are well aware that patterns emerge and take distinctive shapes when we continue to monitor an activity over a period of time. From observing the peculiar behavior of let's say a cat that has never gone out or played with other cats, to monitoring the traffic flow at different times of the day on a highway. There are discernable patterns which convey messages as readings accumulate and trends firm up, without any logical reason though there is always one when analyzed in depth.

So what do patterns signify?  Well, they show to us that there are rules out there, physical laws and subtle senses such as instincts.  Another observation is that all systems from the tiny subatomic particles to ecosystem and the colossal galactic systems, all are subject to same physical laws regardless of their size, complexity or location in the universe.

Will it then be safe to assume that they are all interdependent, interconnected and are under control of the same architect? Or they are independent and are different from one another yet subject to same physical laws?

Whether they are independent, components or subsystems of a whole, they are complete systems. Well, if they are construed as systems then there must as well be an architect who must have conceived, designed and built them? But that is not the subject of my argument here.

All I am suggesting is that from our understanding of ‘Reality’, all that is there is real. From ourselves to things around us and the gigantic celestial bodies beyond our super-tiny planet and beyond the known and unknown range, and the force that maintains a perfect balance in the universe to keep the entire system in place.

From the standpoint of the creator who has designed these systems, are they only software or programs or more appropriately simulations? If the cat that never left its home and had never observed any other cat invariably behaves in the exact same manner in given situations as a cat would do, then the assumption that the animal is acting per a program written for its kind is rather logical, though with the excepton that each time a cat is born, it is a different animal altogether compared to a version of the same software copied over and over again.

If opponents present an argument that the particular cat did learn from its surroundings then the argument is not valid. Why, because if the animal had learned by observing those around it then its behavior should have mirrored the reflexes and reactions of the ones it observed, like the humans or other animals but that is not the case.

Even if we are able to train an animal to behave like any other animal, in the event of extreme danger, its reaction will instantly change, the built-in survival instincts and response mechanism will be activated at once. That fact alone manifests the immaculate programming sophistication on part of the program designer.

The other major difference between the species created and the worldly hardware or programs is that the species grow in size and develop in terms of intellect. For instance, the Homo sapiens or the other species of Nature which may not grow in terms of degree of intellect as humans do but they do exhibit learning skills. Thus we can safely assume that instincts are not and just can never be mere coincidence but are coded instructions to guide actions of a particular subject in given situations.

If we are living in a simulated environment then who are we? And why have we been created? If we are real, not from our perception of reality but from the architect’s standpoint then we are certainly being driven or run by programs, else patterns would never emerge in the first place for they point to an intelligently designed, extremely complex and highly sophisticated architecture.

Branches of science that digressed from their parents like for example numerology, does it really mean something when its practitioners talk about vibrations of numbers? Maybe the numbers are simple programs when coded, showing distinct patterns and commonalities which convinced its followers over a period of centuries that there was some truth out there. They grasped it in a subtle way according to their degree of understanding at that point, assuming it to be mystical in nature but they did not expand it further, viewing it as codes and programming.

In our so called advanced era, such topics are most regrettably brushed aside as occult or baseless whereas they present mathematical relationships and evidences which deserve to be explored and seriously investigated by academia.

If the entire setup is a simulation then there is some possibility that there may be other such simulations running in parallel which we are not aware of and have no way of finding out if they exist. Maybe there are multiple simulations and all those species within them have virtually no idea about the other such worlds existing in parallel? If those worlds do exist then will there ever be a time when we will be able to see through them, interact with their residents or perhaps even go there, inter-simulation travel? The past, present and the future existing in parallel?

If the assumption is valid then we might as well be immortals. Once the stay here comes to an end then we move elsewhere, or perhaps we just do not go anywhere, we get transferred to the central repository to be retrieved from there anytime, creating another copy or a newer and more advanced version?

What if that is the case and what is required to create another version of us? An abode or body, which if the assumption of a simulation setting is correct then is a matter of seconds or even less to reproduce us. Just a click and we all will be alive again as we understand the meaning of being alive or the assumed realm of reality. If all that we know or are not aware of is interconnected, one big system then it would be a rather simple job for the one who controls, to move us from one galaxy to another in the blink of an eye, at least theoretically.

All religious scriptures more or less narrate the same concept of resurrection, rapture, a time when we will rise from the dead. That too just cannot be a coincidence. If seen from the simulated setting concept perspective then it is a simple programming effort. Like rebooting a system or uploading a newer version, or simply reloading the same program.  

From a logical perspective it makes more sense to believe that our surroundings including us are not just a product of some galactic accident but a well thought-out scheme with a definite purpose.

Accidents lead to jumble and decay whereas creation leads to order and progress. Birth or the beginning does not breed the idea of death or the end. It denotes life or continuity which endorses the belief of immortality to be achieved at some point.

No system is created by accident, neither it evolves on its own. A system is designed, built, upgraded and continually maintained unless the architect designs self-regulated systems with software written in a way that they come to an apparent end, but in reality they help continue the cycle, something we rarely witness. 

Events like the supernova, a phenomenon in a massive birthplace where new stars are born while the older stars enrich the interstellar medium before perishing, creating a fertile environment for newcomers and so on and so forth. Just like our own setup here on this planet, people leave via a phase called death while the new ones arrive by way of birth. It is the same cycle throughout the universe though the degree of distance and their relative size makes them look somewhat dissimilar.

If whatever we have read so far makes sense then are we possibly the custodians of future simulations that we will be managing after this one comes to an end? There must be a purpose as to why we were brought on to this planet. Are there other planets like ours, maybe. If not then are we pioneers who will be relocating to new planets? And why do we need to physically travel to new and distant worlds millions of light years away? If we are saved as files in some central database and this is just one gigantic and interconnected system then we simply need to emerge wherever the architect wants us to be alive again.

Are we being prepared to take on new roles? In that case the Big Bang was perhaps the start of the simulation and subsequent evolution of species is a planned upgrade of the system, till the present time and beyond?

  • May be there is no life elsewhere in the universe. We are the first such living beings created?
  • May be there are countless worlds in existence but beyond our vision. Like in a game where characters cannot see outside but only experience the events within the defined parameters. There could be thousands or millions of such games being played simultaneously?
  • If the first point is true then the other planets will not remain uninhabited for long. They will be populated in due course?
  • May be the stars and planets are common to all the simulated worlds where creatures only see their own planet as inhabited while the rest appear without life?
  • Maybe all the previous living beings (civilizations) had long been perished and we are the last one in that sequence?
  • If all those born and departed will be recreated on this planet then we will need a much larger space if we all will inhabit the same planet?
  • Evolution is not random or uncontrolled. It is systematic and deliberate upgrade of the system. 
  • Whatever transpires is fully documented and recorded, and is retrievable?
  • We can retrieve those messages and images, if we know how?
  • Like in a treasure hunt game, the discoveries we so proudly call inventions were mere revelations, unveiled to those who persistently searched for them?
  • Time at some point will cease to exist, heralding advent of the era of immortality?
  • We will assume more advanced physical forms with enormous capabilities?
  • Scientists, researchers, teachers, astronomers and management gurus etc. who did exceptionally well on this planet will be entrusted with greater responsibilities to manage affairs of the other worlds?
  • It appears from lack of new initiatives, ideas, artistic creations and discoveries that most probably it is the wrap up time, or what we know as the end of times?
  • If all the objectives and milestones of the simulation have been achieved then be ready for our own existence to come to an abrupt end.
  • Remember, life means continuity and death is not the end, just an exit from this world or dimension.

If this is a plausible theory then it is not that complex really! It is a rather simple simulation from the perspective of the one who has designed it. From our blinkered standpoint though it seems incomprehensible, at least at this point where our current pool of knowledge only points at different directions without offering any concrete answers!


© Copyright 2018 Razi Akber. All rights reserved.

Add Your Comments: