I'm about to challenge your preconceived notions about reality, and the very universe around you. Now I know you think it's real, and I know you think it's 3 dimensional, But what does science have to say about that? How about we take everything you believe, and blow it the hell up.
Now let's take a look at the standard scientific model of the universe.
Everything, time space and matter was created at one moment in time known as "The Big Bang."
Now you cannot ask what happened before The Big Bang because time was created at that very moment, so there was no "before" The Big Bang. And you sure can't say "What in the Universe made the Universe" because the Universe was created at that exact moment. Newton's laws of motion say that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, meaning that something has to cause something to happen. Fire doesn't happen without spark, and smoke doesn't happen without fire. In other words, everything needs a catalyst for it to happen. So what made the Big Bang possible if there was no time or space for that catalyst to exist within?
This little conundrum is the reason why Einstein and the majority of his piers refuse to accept the Big Bang model, because it means that something that transcends, time, energy, space and matter, somehow created reality and the universe around you. Now think about that. Everything in your universe became a thing at a time when there was no things and there was no time. And although there are a small number of theoretical physicists demanding this is possible due to the laws of quantum mechanics, there's a whole bunch of others who say "nuh uh. We've got it wrong." And it doesn't matter who you side with because science is right now testing to see if we live within a hologram.
And what do I mean by a hologram? I mean that everything around you may not be 3 dimensional, it may be a projection from the outside of space on a two dimension field outside your reality. And with science today it may sound crazy, but there's been a lot of recent discoveries supporting that theory. So lets take a look at recent science. In 1982 a physicist known as Alain Aspect out of the University of Paris discovers that certain particles can communicate with each other regardless of the distance between each-other instantaneously, regardless of the space between them. This directly disputes Einstein's law that information cannot travel faster than the speed of light, and suggests that space as we know it is an illusion. This leads David Bohm, one of the worlds most critically acclaimed scientific minds in quantum mechanics to say that REALITY DOESN'T EXIST AT ALL. In the 1990s, some phystists go on to say that once we can look at a very large level of space that we will be able to see a holographic haze or a hear a holographic hum, that will give evidence of a holographic reality. In January of 2009, the GEO600, the worlds most sensitive gravitational detector discovers such noise of this hum. This indeed supports the holographic principle. Whew. We're not even done. Not even lose to done.
Nick Bostrom. A professor from Oxford University, and award winning philosopher, argues that there is a high probability that we exist within a computer simulation. He presents this argument in his 2003 paper, "The Simulation Argument." Within this argument, he allows an equal probability to 3 possibilities. 1) All species within the universe, that achieve technological maturity, end up destroying themselves before they could make simulations of the universe. 2) All species technologically mature enough to create a simulation of the universe, choose not to. And of course number 3, we are living within a simulation of the universe. What he's trying to argue is, if there is at least one planet in the entire universe with life technologically mature enough to make an exact simulation of the universe to which it's artificially intelligent "players" cannot understand a difference between a real universe and their simulated one, we could be within it.
Now you're saying, Kippy, how does that even make sense? Well lets consider the fact that computer engineers say we could accomplish this feat in the next 30 years, some say 500. But either way, that is a small drop of time within a large "bucket" of time. Now imagine all of the species out there that are 1000, 1,000,000 or even 1,000,000,000 years more advanced than us technologically. Now ask yourself how many individual simulations are out there with artificial intelligent "players" that can think, feel, and make decisions on their own. If you are looking at the size of the cosmos, and if there is in fact life that is more technologically advanced than we are, which is nearly 100% guaranteed, then we could be looking at hundreds of thousands, if not millions of simulations of the universe, and that is highly likely. In fact, Nick Bostrom argues the only way to counter-act the mathematical probability of this actually happening is saying that anybody who is technologically advanced to simulate the universe like that decides not to or dies before they can. But if even one race on one planet in the entire cosmos can make one, the chances are you could be in one right now. Just do the math yourself, a million simulations with intelligent AI that can think for themselves just like humans vs. your odds of being in the real universe. So in other words, if there are millions of these simulations then you have nearly a 0 chance of being in the real universe.
TL;DR? Take your Ritalin and try again.
