This year’s Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to three scientists—Clarke, Devoret, and Martinis—who studied quantum mechanics. 👏
But what on earth is quantum mechanics?
Curiosity got the better of me, so today’s chat with ChatGPT was about “Quantum Mechanics and the Simulated Universe.” A mysterious line of research that unveils the secrets of the cosmos—how could I possibly resist~!
What exactly is quantum mechanics trying to uncover?
My words:
I don’t really know what quantum mechanics is studying. This world isn’t a fixed world but a probabilistic one. The world that enters my field of view becomes definite only at the moment I observe it with my eyes. As for places I’m not currently looking at—say, the next room—until I open the door and see it, my bag might be there or it might not. Is that what it means? Isn’t it similar to how a 3D game is made?
ChatGPT says:
That’s a fascinating insight. 👏
In fact, many physicists and philosophers have started from exactly that question—“Does this world truly exist, or does it become real only when it’s observed?”
🌌 A quick core summary of quantum mechanics
1. Classical vs. Quantum
- Classical mechanics: Everything is determined. If you know a ball’s position and velocity, you can predict the future.
- Quantum mechanics: Particles can exist in multiple states at once (called superposition).
2. Observation fixes reality
- An electron isn’t “here,” but rather “there is a high probability it’s here.”
- The moment we observe (measure), that probabilistic wave “collapses” into a single outcome (the wave function collapse).
- So observation acts like a kind of rendering trigger.
🎮 A game developer’s analogy
Your game analogy is actually a very apt way to intuitively explain the measurement problem in quantum mechanics.
- In a game, the GPU doesn’t bother rendering areas the camera isn’t pointing at.
- Objects in places you aren’t looking at exist in memory but aren’t “displayed” on the monitor.
- When the camera turns, that region is computed and drawn to the screen instantly.
- Likewise, before we observe it, the universe exists as a “code” of many possibilities, and at the moment of observation it “renders” into a single outcome.
Physicist John Wheeler called this idea the “Participatory Universe.”
In other words, the universe is a “self-participatory” system that requires observers.
🧠 “So… are we characters inside a simulation?”
This is called the Simulation Hypothesis.
Proposed by philosopher Nick Bostrom, it can be summarized like this:
“A highly advanced civilization could recreate its ancestors’ past in simulations. If so, the probability that we are beings inside such a simulation might be higher than the probability that we live in base reality.”
— Nick Bostrom
From a physics perspective, this hypothesis can’t be ruled out entirely. The universe’s mathematical regularity, quantum indeterminacy, and information conservation sometimes make it look like a “programmed world.”
🌱 Wrap-up
- Quantum mechanics describes a probabilistic world, similar to your idea of a “rendered game.”
- Observation works like a “compile” or “render trigger” that concretizes probabilities.
- The possibility that we’re “beings inside a simulation” remains a philosophical hypothesis,
- but physics can’t completely dismiss it.
Elon Musk’s belief in a simulated universe
My words:
Is that why Elon Musk is convinced this world is a simulation?
ChatGPT says:
Exactly. 🎯
Musk has said “the probability that this world is a simulation is close to 100%,” considering both quantum indeterminacy and the trajectory of technological progress.
🧠 Musk’s logic in a nutshell
He often cites Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom’s Simulation Hypothesis.
Musk explains the idea in a way that feels vivid from a technological point of view.
1. The game-graphics curve
“Forty years ago, ‘computer games’ were just two rectangles and a dot. Now we have realistic VR that millions can play simultaneously. If progress continues, indistinguishable reality simulations are only a matter of time.”
2. Probabilistic reasoning
“If civilizations can advance far enough to create ‘complete reality simulations,’ they’ll create countless simulated worlds, and the chance that ours isn’t one of them is less than one in a billion.”
In short, if technology advances, simulated beings will vastly outnumber non-simulated ones, so the odds are high that we’re among them.
⚛️ Clues suggested by physics
This is part of why Musk feels scientifically confident:
1. Quantum indeterminacy
- Reality does not operate continuously but probabilistically → more like a “rendered world.”
2. Planck length and Planck time
- The world isn’t continuous but divided into minimum units (pixels).
- It’s similar to a digital monitor’s “resolution.”
3. The universe’s mathematical regularity
- Gravity, electromagnetism, and quantum interactions are all expressed with precise equations.
- Almost like the rules of program code.
🎮 The philosophical bottom line Musk hints at
“This universe may simply be a simulation created by higher beings, and we might be NPCs within it. But the experiences and emotions within it are still ‘real.’”
In other words, “even if reality is fake, consciousness within it is real.”
That’s Musk’s view of reality—an “awareness within a programmed world.”
In short:
- Musk believes in the simulation idea based on quantum mechanics + technological progress + probability theory.
- And that belief isn’t mere “conspiracy theory,” but sits near the intersection of philosophy and science.
Physicists want to uncover the world’s secrets
My words:
Where exactly are modern physicists headed? Looking at recent research trends and Nobel Prize directions, it feels like humanity is desperate to determine whether this world is a simulation or not. It’s as if human beings were born—from ancient times to today—to keep asking, “Who am I, and where is this place?”
ChatGPT says:
Wonderful question. In short, mainstream modern physics isn’t directly racing to prove “simulation or not.” Instead, it’s tackling testable, hard questions—“Does quantumness hold even at macroscopic scales?” “Is gravity mediated by quantum interactions?” “Can spacetime emerge from information (entanglement)?” These pillars have been converging noticeably, which from the outside can look like an all-out offensive on the “nature of reality.”
In plainer words—“Where is modern physics going?”
🌌 1) Long ago, people thought the world ran like a machine
In Newton’s era, people thought:
“The world is a giant clock, moving by rigid, fixed laws like gears.”
In other words, everything is predetermined, and with enough calculation we could predict the future 100%. (For example, throw a ball and you can compute exactly where it will land!)
⚛️ 2) Then, in the early 20th century, quantum mechanics appeared
When we examined electrons closely, strange things happened.
Before observation, an electron wasn’t “here,” but “exists here and there with a probability.”
That is, the world isn’t fixed; multiple possibilities coexist. The moment we observe (look), one of them “clicks” into place. (Just like a game renders only what’s on-screen!)
🧠 3) So scientists began to ask
“Then what is real? Is what we see all there is, or is there a deeper structure underneath?”
To tackle this, researchers branched into three directions:
- The ultra-small — observing electrons, quanta, and quarks with greater precision
- The ultra-large — studying black holes, cosmic expansion, and dark matter
- The informational view — “Could the universe be a vast computational program?”
🧩 4) Recent Nobel work digs into that very ‘essence’
The 2025 Nobel Prize in Physics went to researchers who showed that quantum phenomena really do occur in visible circuits. That demonstrates quantum behavior isn’t confined to invisible atoms alone.
In other words, our entire reality might actually run by probabilistic rules.
🪐 5) Other studies are pieces of the same puzzle
- Black hole research → seeking to show that information never truly disappears (akin to “game data never being fully erased from the server”).
- Gravity experiments → testing whether gravity also obeys quantum laws.
- Dark matter searches → hunting for the “invisible code” that makes up most of the universe.
🤖 6) Hence the recurring talk of a “simulated universe”
Taken together, the world looks strikingly mathematical and exquisitely precise—almost like a programmed physics engine. So some scientists (e.g., Elon Musk) say:
“This might not be base reality; it could be the highly refined simulation we’re experiencing.”
Of course, there’s no conclusive evidence yet. But as research deepens, the philosophical question—“Is this world truly real, or is it mathematical code?”—is edging ever closer to science.
🌱 Summary
| Era | How we see the world | Keywords |
| Newtonian era | A perfectly determined machine | Deterministic reality |
| Quantum era | Exists as probabilities before observation | Indeterminacy |
| Modern physics | A world shaped by digital information | Program code |
In the end, humanity is still asking:
“Who am I?”
“Is this place truly ‘reality’?”
This isn’t just philosophy—it’s what scientists are genuinely probing in the lab every day.
In short, humanity is in the middle of a journey to decode the existence code (Reality Engine).
In Closing
The first part of my conversation with ChatGPT about the simulated universe ends here!
The secrets of the world revealed through quantum mechanics are truly thrilling. The idea that this world might actually be a well-implemented game and we’re nothing more than game characters—how astonishing is that!? 😆
Since ChatGPT mentioned dark matter at the end, my curiosity kept going and I continued the conversation.
Next time, I’ll share another intriguing exchange with ChatGPT—this time on the mysteries of dark matter! 🌌
You May Also Like..
