Published on April 9, 2025 6:07 AM GMT
THE SIMULATION HYPOTHESIS
In 2003, Nick Bostrom used a probabilistic argument to introduce what became known as the simulation hypothesis: either advanced civilizations rarely emerge, they rarely run simulations, or we’re almost certainly in a simulation.(1)
FINE-TUNING AS SIMULATION EVIDENCE
Since then, public discourse has suggested the universe’s fine-tuning—the precise constants and conditions enabling life—supports the idea of being in a simulation. If there’s a “one in billions” chance of such fine-tuning occurring at random, then fine-tuning may hint at the existence of a fine-tuner, such as a programmer/simulator.
DISMISSAL OF FINE-TUNING AS SIMULATION EVIDENCE
Most philosophers and cosmologists rely on multiverse hypotheses to argue against the idea that fine-tuning implies a fine-tuner. If billions of universes exist or have existed, our life-conducive outlier isn’t surprising.(2) It is true that some, like Ian Hacking and Roger White, counter the counterarguments by arguing that multiverse hypotheses engage in logical fallacies—such as the Inverse Gambler’s Fallacy.(3) Yet most academics continue to dismiss fine-tuning with multiverse hypotheses. So is there any other physical evidence even mildly supportive of the hypothesis that we may be in a simulation?
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT AS SIMULATION EVIDENCE
During the double-slit experiment, photons and electrons exhibit wave-like interference when unobserved, but act as particles when their path is measured. More specifically, a particle begins in a superposition of two Gaussian wavepackets exiting two slits. Without measurement, these wavepackets spread and overlap, producing an interference pattern on a detection screen. However, introducing a measurement apparatus to determine which slit the particle passes through disrupts this pattern.
In the article "Measurement-induced Decoherence and Information in Double-Slit Interference" the authors explore how measurement precision affects this outcome, using a tunable apparatus interacting with the particle.(4) When the apparatus perfectly distinguishes the particle’s path, it entangles with the system, decohering the superposition into a state in which interference disappears. As precision decreases, partial interference reemerges, reflecting less information transfer to the apparatus. When precision reaches zero (no measurement), no path information is gained, allowing interference to persist.
The authors suggest that what is likely happening is that measurement-induced decoherence drives the quantum-to-classical transition. When the apparatus or environment gains "which-path" information, it entangles with the particle, collapsing the superposition and erasing interference. The authors further suggest this reflects a broader principle: information acquisition by an observer or apparatus alters the quantum state.
This aligns with ideas like quantum Darwinism, in which classical reality emerges from redundant information storage, making interference observable only when path information remains inaccessible.
CAN WE DISMISS THE DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT AND ITS ASSOCIATED QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT AS SIMULATION EVIDENCE?
We are able to question fine-tuning as evidence for being in a simulation with multiverse hypotheses, due to selection. Even in light of the Inverse Gambler’s Fallacy and other logical issues, there is no consensus on the validity of dismissing the Multiverse dismissal of a fine-tuner for fine-tuning. However, it seems we are unable to dismiss quantum information processing, and any associated simulation program, with multiverse hypotheses, since life would presumably be able to exist in a universe without the quantum information processing associated with the double-slit experiment.
To evaluate the degree of significance such potential quantum-entanglement evidence might have with respect to the simulation hypothesis, an allegory might be helpful.
I, HUGO
One day, eleven-year-old Mira goes to the hospital with her parents to see Mira’s grandfather, Hugo.
Almost two weeks prior, Hugo nearly drowned in the assisted living center’s swimming pool. He is unconscious, but he is able to breathe without a ventilator. His condition is stable.
Now it just so happens that there is no available neural imaging technology; nor is it even possible to even run an EEG. (Imagine this is a parallel universe, or this is simply how bad the public health situation and budget cuts have become.) Yet despite lacking these tools, the doctors have done their best to ascertain the extent of Hugo’s hypoxia-induced brain damage. He has basic reflexes indicative of intact brainstem functioning: his pupils constrict in response to bright light, he blinks in response to a cornea tap, etc. Yet thus far, there has been no evidence of any higher cortical processing. Given his condition, the doctors suspect Hugo may be in a persistent vegetative state—although they have not yet diagnosed this condition.
And so now Mira and her parents have just entered Hugo's room in the hospital. At the moment, Hugo’s hospital bed is tilted at about a 45 degree angle, and his eyes are open, so that he appears to stare at the edge of the ceiling. He blinks reflexively, and his blue-starred hospital gown quivers slightly with his breathing. Otherwise however, he does not visibly move.
Mira says "I'm gonna use my iPhone to take a video of Grandpa."
(Can you believe it? Mira is only eleven-years-old, and she already has an iPhone. It's shameful how some people spoil their children.) Mira's parents discourage her from the video plan, but Mira usually gets her way, and this time is no different. So Mira stands on a chair by the hospital bedside, and holds her phone a couple feet from her grandfather’s face. She says “Hey Siri, take a video.”
The phone assistant says “Taking a video.”
The moment the camera begins recording, Hugo begins blinking rapidly.
Mira cries, “Look! Grandpa knows I’m recording him!”
Mira’s dad says “Oh my God.”
Mira’s mom gasps, puts her hand on her father's shoulder, and says “Dad, can you hear me?”
Mira turns the phone camera to face her Mom, but the moment she does this, Hugo stops his rapid blinking.
Mira turns the camera back to Hugo, and he resumes blinking his eyes. She switches back and forth several times in succession, and during each time period the camera records Hugo, he rapidly flutters his eyelids.
In the meanwhile, Mira’s mom has begun weeping, and is begging, “Dad if you hear me, say something, do something.”
Mira’s dad hurries out of the room to fetch a doctor. When he comes back with Dr. Adams, she glances at Hugo, as Mira’s mom is explaining through gasps and tears about how Hugo blinks every time the camera records him. All the while, Mira switches her phone camera back and forth, demonstrating the phenomenon.
Dr. Adams takes Hugo’s hand in her own, and slowly says
“Hi Hugo, I’m Dr. Adams. Can you hear me? Squeeze my hand if you can.” Hugo doesn’t respond.
Next she says, “Hugo, can you track my finger with your eyes?”
She moves her finger slowly, first horizontally and then vertically in front of Hugo’s field of vision, but he does not respond.
(By this time, Mira has backed up, and is no longer recording Hugo.)
Hugo does not demonstrate horizontal or vertical eye tracking.
Since Hugo is not blinking rapidly at the moment, Dr. Adams says “Hugo, if you can hear me, please blink rapidly, like you were doing before.”
Yet Hugo does not respond. He just continues his slower, reflexive blinking.
Dr. Adams asks Mira to demonstrate the recording phenomenon again, and once again, Hugo blinks his eyes rapidly when being recorded.
At one point, while Mira has the phone camera facing her grandfather, she says “Hey Siri, stop recording.” The moment the phone stops recording, Hugo stops his rapid blinking.
Mira keeps the phone pointed at her grandfather, and says “Hey Siri, start recording.” Once again, her grandfather blinks rapidly.
Next, Mira says “Now I’m going to stop recording. She turns the phone screen to herself, and pretends to pause the recording, but really she leaves it on. Yet somehow, when she turns the phone back to her grandfather, he seems to know that he is once again being recorded (in spite of Mira’s claims to the contrary) as evidenced by the fact that he begins blinking again.
Hours pass, and the crowd inside Hugo’s hospital room grows. The next day, reporters come to see Hugo. The situation remains the same: Hugo responds with fast blinking every time he is being recorded, but otherwise has only reflexive and autonomic activity.
Due to all the publicity, someone manages to finally gain access to neural imaging machines. Diagnostics are finally run. And then comes the strangest news of all.
Although Hugo has no signs of cortical processing, the doctors discover nanobots with nanosize bluetooth receptors attached to the muscles controlling Hugo’s eyelids. But what is controlling them? They check Mira's phone, but there's nothing to indicate that it could be controlling the receptors.
They search the Hugo's hospital room, but can find nothing. Ultimately however, they hypothesize that there is information-processing of some sort going on, and a computer probably hidden somewhere. This information-processing program connects to and controls the nanobots around Hugo's eyelids. This program must also be monitoring Mira’s iPhone, since the program recognizes when the phone is recording. In the runtime environment, the program entangles/connects Hugo's eyelid behavior with the recording apparatus. The doctors, computer hacking specialists, and other detectives continue to search for the program that enacts entanglement.
In the meanwhile, physicists come to the hospital room. (Indeed, these are physicists, and not physicians. Yep, I guess it really is a parallel universe.)
The physicists explain the entanglement situation to Mira’s mother.
She asks, “But who did this? Who wrote the program that recognizes recording?”
One of the physicists says, “Ma’am you don’t understand entanglement. There is no need for a logical mind, or a “programmer” who understands the nature of recording or measurement at all. The program isn’t thinking. It simply recognizes recording/measurement and enacts entanglement, which causes your father’s eyelids to blink rapidly when being recorded. Nothing is significant about this phenomenon. It’s just information processing. Please relax, and leave the big thinking to us.”
CITATIONS
1-Nick Bostrom, “Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?,” Philosophical Quarterly 53, no. 211 (2003): 243–255.
2-Anthony Aguirre and Max Tegmark, "Multiple Universes, Cosmic Coincidences, and Other Dark Matters," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2005, no. 04 (April 2005): 001, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2005/04/001.
3-Roger White, "Fine-Tuning and Multiple Universes," British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51, no. 2 (June 2000): 246–257.
4-Joshua Kincaid, Kyle McLelland, and Michael Zwolak, "Measurement-induced Decoherence and Information in Double-Slit Interference" (unpublished manuscript, n.d.), Department of Physics, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, and Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.
Discuss
