Original subtitles

Colossal beauty.

Awe-inspiring intricacy.

Are the wonders of our universe a cosmic accident

or the result of intelligent design?

For centuries, religion and science were bitter foes.

Now science actively searches for our creator.

Some physicists think he's hidden in the math.

Neurologists think she might be in our brains.

And computer coders believe God is one of them

and that our world is nothing more than his simulation.

Through the Wormhole 1x01 with Morgan Freeman Is There a Creator? Original air date on June 9, 2010

Space.

Time.

Life itself.

The secrets of the cosmos lie through the wormhole.

Through the Wormhole 1x01 with Morgan Freeman Is There a Creator? Original Air Date on June 9, 2010

-- sync, corrected by elderman -- -- for www.Addic7ed.Com --

every culture claims a God,

an all-powerful entity

that created the world and directs our fate.

But why do we share this belief in a cosmic creator?

Did we dream it up to serve a need in our psyche or culture?

Is God really out there --

up there?

This is a journey into the science of God.

I promise you it's quite a trip.

Some of what we'll find almost defies belief.

Sometime in the early '70s,

I bought my daughter an ant farm.

She soon got bored, but not me.

I was memorized by this little menagerie

squeezed between two panes of glass.

And I wondered, what could they ever know about me,

the one who built their world?

What can we ever learn about who or what created us,

stranded as we are in this colony of humanity?

For as long as scientists

have struggled to understand our place in the universe,

there have been those who've hoped to get a glimpse of God.

400 years ago, the great astronomer Galileo Galilei

had a ground-breaking insight.

Nature's grand book is written in the language of mathematics.

From that time to this,

scientific geniuses like Newton and Einstein

used math to dig deep into the workings of nature,

to search for God

through the equations that defined the laws of physics.

The latest mind hoping to join these illustrious ranks

is Garrett Lisi.

The universe

can very successfully be described mathematically.

You have to imagine how the world's working

in a certain circumstance

and then use reason and mathematics

to develop a description of how that might be happening.

But it's imagination

that breaks the trail before reason enters.

After earning his Phd,

Garrett escaped the confines of academia

in search of adventure and a space in which to think.

Rather than go into a normal academic-track job,

I just split off for Maui, became a surf bum,

and did the research I wanted to --

mostly spent time doing physics research and surfing.

But all of our attempts to understand nature

so far have been fragmentary.

There's one set of rules for tiny atoms,

another for giant objects like stars and galaxies.

And the two sets of math don't fit together.

What physicists like Lisi seek

is a single, overarching theory,

a mathematical design that explains everything.

Garrett thinks he may at last have found

this theory of everything.

And if he's right, God could be one heck of a mathematician.

Garrett's work is at a leading edge of physics.

Before we plunge into this mind-bending math,

we first need to back up a bit,

because it's possible

there's already evidence for a creator in the math.

Andy Albrecht is a leading cosmologist.

Hello, how are you?

He's also a renowned chocoholic.

I'll have the chocolate soufflé and a latte.

Just as a perfect chocolate soufflé

relies on a precise mixture of ingredients

baked at a specific temperature for an exact time,

so our universe looks the way it does

because of a precise balance between four fundamental forces.

The four forces we know and love

in the world around us

are gravity, electromagnetism --

those you've probably heard of.

Then there's also the weak force and the strong force.

They're a little bit more specialized

but absolutely essential

to make the world work the way it does.

Gravity, in many ways,

is the force we know first.

We try to walk, and we fall down.

That's because of gravity.

When you carry something a little too heavy and it falls,

it's because of gravity.

Electromagnetism tells us how the chemistry works.

When you cook something, the energy you use

is ultimately electromagnetic energy.

Weak force is about a billion times less strong

than electromagnetism,

and it's responsible for radioactivity.

The potassium in a banana is radioactive.

If the rate were too high, it could destroy us.

The sun is basically a nuclear reactor.

The strong forces release energy in the nuclear reactions.

One of the remarkable things is, when you add it all up,

all these forces have to be exactly the way they are

for life as we know it to exist.

Change any one of them, dial the parameters,

and something will go wrong --

the planet will disappear,

the sun will shut down,

the DNA will come unraveled.

Some people call it the Goldilocks paradigm --

not too much, not too little, everything's just right.

Oh, that's perfect.

Some physicists believe

this precise calibration of forces is evidence of God.

Dr. John Polkinghorne did pioneering work on the quark,

a fundamental subatomic particle.

He is also a knight commander of the British Empire, a Sir.

And after a lifetime

of distinguished scientific inquiry,

he was inspired to follow a new line of work...

As a priest.

I do indeed believe in God, yes, indeed.

Yes, in fact, I'm an Anglican priest,

so it would be rather shocking if I didn't.

Those four fundamental forces are the portfolio of things

that bring about the physical processes of the world.

And a very interesting fact about the world

is that those forces,

in their specific strengths that they have,

have to be very close to what we actually observe

if we were to be here to observe them,

because it turns out that only a world

whose forces are very similar to the ones that we experience

would be capable of producing carbon-based life.

John finds it difficult to imagine

that the fine-tuning of our universe

has happened by accident,

that there is no divine hand behind it.

This fine-tuning makes it clear we don't live in any old world.

We live in a very particular universe.

And why is that? Why are we so lucky?

Of course, religious belief offers you

a very straightforward and attractive explanation.

But scientists are split

over whether this balance of forces

is a sign of intelligent design.

In fact, it could be nothing more

than a roll of the cosmic dice.

Dr. Alan Guth is a revered figure in cosmology.

His theory of inflation

is the accepted idea of how the early universe formed.

Inflation says that right after the big bang,

the universe expanded phenomenally fast,

doubling in size 100,000 times in just a fraction of a second.

Inflation helps explain

how the world we know could have come into existence.

But inflation has another head-spinning implication --

there ought to be more than one universe.

An important feature of this process of inflation

is that when inflation stops,

it doesn't stop all over at the same time.

What tends to happen is it stops in some places,

and those then become universes.

And elsewhere, in what we now call a multiverse,

inflation would go on,

and only later, more pocket universes would form.

And there can be an infinite number of these pocket universes

formed altogether by this process

that we call eternal inflation.

The point is that if there really is a multiverse,

we would be living in just one of these many pocket universes.

That could be, for example, our universe right there.

Each of these pocket universes

could have different laws of physics.

In our universe,

the four forces are aligned in a perfect way.

Together, they allow life to coalesce and flourish.

But each pocket universe in Alan's multiverse

could have a completely different balance of forces.

Maybe electromagnetism is weaker,

and perhaps gravity is way more powerful.

The result --

an entirely different universe with no chance of human life.

To Alan, our universe

is not carefully crafted by a divine being.

It's just a lucky roll in a cosmic crap shoot.

This debate for and against an intelligently designed cosmos

has raged inside the world of physics for decades.

And that's where Garrett Lisi comes in.

A single mathematical theory to explain everything

could bring science closer than ever

to understanding our creation.

And right now, it's all in the head

of a beach bum in Hawaii.

One universe.

Four forces.

Billions of galaxies.

The precision and complexity of our world

is enough to make even the sanest cosmologist

go just a little bit crazy.

How does it all fit together?

Is there a single, overarching design to the cosmos?

And if we find it,

will we glimpse the mind of God?

Scientists have spent decades and billions of dollars

on this quest.

They've build giant atom-smashing machines to probe

how the four fundamental forces actually work.

They've found that down at the microscopic level,

billions of times smaller than atoms,

forces are actually caused

by the movement of tiny particles.

Electromagnetism is carried by photons.

The strong force is carried by particles called gluons,

the weak force by particles called the "w" and "z" bosons.

But they've never found the force carriers for gravity,

the elusive gravitons.

And that's where their efforts

to unify the math of the universe

are stuck treading water.

But renegade physicist and compulsive surfer Garrett Lisi

could be on the cusp of succeeding.

Right after people got the idea

that there were these electromagnetic, weak, and strong forces,

which was toward the end of the '70s,

almost immediately people saw how they fit together

to make a grand unified theory unifying those three forces.

Now, it's much trickier

to try to bring gravity into the picture

because it's slightly different.

Tricky is an understatement.

The greatest minds in physics have all but given up

on unifying gravity and its unseen gravitons

with the other three forces.

But then Garrett had a vision,

a vision of twisted circles.

I was working on just how this whole algebraic structure

fit together, of gravity and the other forces,

and I started to wonder if this thing

could be understood as a whole,

if this entire structure could be described

as part of some larger lie group.

A lie group is a mathematical shape

that is a collection of circles twisting around each other

in a specific pattern.

Now, the simplest lie group is just a circle.

Now, if you take a second circle

and you wrap it around that inner circle,

keeping it perpendicular, you get what's called a torus.

It looks like the surface of a doughnut.

But if you take a third circle

and keep that perpendicular to the other two,

and you Twist it around the inner circle

as you wrap it around,

you can get all three of those circles

to Twist around each other

to form a three-dimensional shape.

But this is only the beginning.

Garrett kept on twisting circles around one another

until he'd done it 248 times.

The end result is a shape so complex

that it can't even be fully appreciated

in three dimensions.

It's called the e8 lie group.

To us, it's just a mind-bending pattern.

But Garrett Lisi realized

the way the circles twisted around one another

looked just like the way various fundamental particles interact.

In physics, each one of these circles can be associated

with a different kind of elementary particle.

One circle could correspond to electrons.

The other circles could correspond

to the force particles,

such as photons or weak-force particles

or strong-force particles, the gluons.

For months,

Garrett turned this kaleidoscope over and over in his mind.

And then it hit him.

He found a set of circles

that seemed to act like the never-yet-seen graviton.

And for the first time in the history of physics,

a mere mortal saw how gravity might fit in

with all the other forces and particles.

You know, seeing how gravity could be combined

with these other lie groups during this unification

was one of the greatest moments of my life.

Dr. Lee Smolin is a world-renowned physicist.

He's watching with keen interest

as Lisi struggles with his attempt

to put all the forces of nature

into a single mathematical framework.

My view of Garrett Lisi's work

is that he's doing something

which is very high risk, high payoff.

If he's right or if even something

in the direction that he's going down is right,

it's very important

because it's a kind of hypothesis

that most of us have given up working for --

that is, a unique unification

within a beautiful mathematical structure.

Garrett calls

this dizzying geometrical relationship

between all the particles and forces in the universe

an exceptionally simple theory of everything.

It predicts several as yet undiscovered particles.

And scientists across the world

are on the hunt for those right now.

One is the most sought-after particle in all of physics,

the Higgs Boson.

There are some parts that are in this larger group

that are not clearly these elementary particle forces.

But what they are is exactly what you need

to describe the higgs field.

And the Higgs field is this geometric particle field

that gives mass to all known elementary particles.

And it's exactly the missing puzzle piece you need

to tie everything together.

The center of the action in the Higgs hunt

is halfway around the world from Garrett's beaches.

In the cooler but no less scenic city of Geneva, Switzerland,

researchers are peering

through the most advanced scientific microscope

in human history --

the LHC, or Large Hadron Collider.

They're throwing everything they have at finding the Higgs Boson,

the particle that is supposed to give everything mass.

But they should also be able to detect

some of those new particles predicted by Garrett Lisi.

If they do exist,

the exceptionally simple theory of everything

could finally offer a blueprint of the entire universe.

This dizzying geometry might also be divine geometry,

a unified math that created you, me,

the sun, the stars,

everything in the known universe.

It would be another important factor showing us

that we live in a world of wonderful order,

and that is highly suggestive that that is because it is

a creation with a divine mind behind it.

The irony is

that the man who's taking us so close to the creator

is not himself a believer.

It's much more satisfying to me that this bit of geometry

could have come into existence

than to imagine some complicated creator

with some sort of personality and complex structure

brought this simple thing into existence.

Garrett's mind-bending search

could be getting closer,

or it could all be a bust.

There's a process of give and take,

of construction and criticism, that makes science work.

And it depends on courage and audacity to get started.

And a thing that I admire about

is that Lisi has that courage and audacity,

which doesn't mean I think he's right, okay?

But I think that people have to propose ideas

of the ambition of this idea

if we are ever to solve these big problems.

Garrett Lisi may be the first man

to discover the mathematics of creation,

succeeding where great minds like Einstein failed.

But what if he's wrong?

Or, worse, what if there is no math that unifies the universe?

Well, that wouldn't trouble this man,

because he believes that the creator

is not out there in the cosmos.

He believes God exists inside our minds

and that he might be able to summon him

by throwing a switch.

For thousands of years,

we have meditated, fasted, and communed.

We have prayed and chanted

to make contact with the divine.

But what if all you need

is a magnet on the right hemisphere of your brain

to see God?

This is Dominica.

She's a nursing student in Sudbury, Ontario.

She's about to experience God.

Dominica is not a visionary

or a priest or a nun

or even particularly religious.

I do believe in God.

However, I don't believe

that you have to go into church to talk to him

'cause he's everywhere.

Dominica has agreed to participate

in what she has been told is a simple relaxation experiment.

And this is the man

who's going to lead Dominica into the light,

Dr. Michael Persinger.

He runs the mind consciousness lab

in the basement of the science building

at Laurentian University.

Our primary research is involved

with understanding the relationship

between brain structure and function and experience.

And more specifically, is there a biological and brain basis

to some of the concepts that are called

the God belief and the God experience?

Dr. Persinger is a neuroscientist.

He believes that God resides in our brains.

In fact, he even thinks he knows in which part of the brain.

One of the things we were really excited about was

what's the brain basis sense of self?

After all, that's the great human definition -- who we are.

And we knew it was tied

to language and left-hemispheric processes.

But then we asked the question

what's the right-hemisphere equivalent?

So we have this second sense in the right hemisphere.

And when you experience it,

it's called the sense presence.

And we think that's the prototype of the God experience.

All he has to do to create this God experience

is place this yellow helmet on his subject's head.

He calls it the God helmet.

Okay, so we're gonna put on the helmet.

Our approach was very simple --

if you want to study the brain,

then let's look at the brain

in the laboratory with an experiment.

Just follow the experience

and let it come to you, all right?

Okay.

After putting Dominica

into a sealed chamber with no light,

the research team will monitor her brain-wave activity

for one hour.

In a few minutes, Dominica's brain waves

start to order themselves into a relaxed pattern.

Then Dr. Persinger activates a magnetic coil

sitting over the right side of her brain.

It's no more powerful than a hair dryer,

but it's designed to focus its energy

on a small set of brain cells in the right temporal lobe.

Those cells, he believes,

will stimulate in Dominica

a sense that someone or something is present.

We hypothesize

that, as the human being developed the ability

to forecast their own self-dissolution,

their own death,

which is tremendously anxiety-generating,

that another concept emerged

which allowed that anxiety to be reduced.

And whatever that concept was, it had certain parameters.

It had to be infinite and forever and everywhere.

Otherwise it would have an end.

If you have an end, then you have anxiety.

So there had to be a concept

inculcated within the brain itself

that there is something out there that goes on forever.

And if you somehow relate to it and can be a part of it,

the idea of anxiety becomes a nonevent.

Dr. Persinger believes

the efforts of our brains' right temporal lobe

to relieve the anxiety of death

is what we sense when we think we are sensing the divine.

And he's designed his God helmet

to produce that sense on demand.

Dominica?

Yes?

Okay, I'm about ready to come in. Just relax.

For one hour,

Dominica has been shut inside the chamber

without light or sound,

alone with her thoughts...

And perhaps also with God?

You said you felt the presence of something.

Yeah, there's, like, other things around me.

Okay, can you describe them?

Not -- there were just bodies of nothing,

not doing anything, just chilling.

How many were just chilling?

Um...

She actually counted them.

You see her move her hand? Yeah.

She was actually recreating it. Yeah.

More than 80% of Dr. Persinger's subjects,

whether they are religious believers or not,

sense a presence from the God helmet.

When the right hemisphere is being stimulated,

she felt a presence of things around her,

five entities that were faceless.

I can see, like, down my body was,

like, up more so I could only see, like, above.

How -- above?

Yeah. Okay.

She had these marked, intense feelings

of visual sensations in the -- always the upper visual field.

Did you notice that?

That's typical of the temporal lobe being activated.

I see you checked here that,

"the experiences did not come from my own mind."

Can you describe that?

I was, like, watching myself.

So it wasn't me feeling like --

I was watching myself lying on the road.

I didn't feel like my head was attached to me.

You felt like what? My head wasn't attached.

Okay, so you felt like your head was attached somewhere else?

Yeah. Okay.

Now, also it says you saw vivid images this time.

Yeah, there's, like,

heat coming up, like fire coming up around.

Which one did you like the best,

the first or the second? The first one.

You liked the first one? Okay.

I want to float again. That was cool.

Okay, well.

I'm not too much liking the fire part, the second one,

but I don't know.

The first one was awesome.

She had a classic experience that takes place in the chamber.

Now imagine what that would be

if she was sitting in a church pew

or a synagogue or a mosque

or, for that matter, laying by herself at night

in the middle of her bed, and this happened.

Can you imagine how she would label it

and the impact it would have on her entire life?

There we go.

Dr. Persinger's work

raises the extraordinary possibility

not just that spiritual experiences can be induced,

but that some

of the most intense and influential religious visions

in history may have their root

in nothing more than the wiring of the human brain.

Abraham,

Moses,

native American shamans --

almost all religious leaders and spiritual guides

have attested that they were struck

by vivid and thunderous messages from the creator himself.

In the history of religious experience,

many of the great religious thinkers

have had electrical ability in the temporal lobe.

Luther, as you know, who started Lutheranism, was struck by lightning.

These are brief events that have a powerful impact on people

during those critical times of their life.

And, really, the great challenge to science --

and this is the exciting part --

is not so much the fact

that the brain's generating the experiences --

is what are the stimuli?

You've seen a few examples of the crude stimuli,

when we apply magnetic Fields.

But what about natural stimuli?

What about stimuli

that are manufactured or manipulated by societies?

What about intrinsic chemical changes?

And what about all those stimuli we don't know yet

that can produce the most powerful experience

in the history of humankind, the God experience?

For thousands of years,

billions of humans have built their lives

around the cherished idea

that a creator is out there looking down on them,

caring for them,

a God who is both creator and protector.

Dr. Persinger's God helmet forces us to consider

a radical reimagining of human experience.

God may not have created us.

He may not be protecting us.

God may simply be in our minds.

But one scientist has an even more radical take

on the creator,

one that flips Dr. Persinger's theory on its head.

This time, it's God that's real and we that are imaginary.

Our creator may actually be a cosmic computer coder,

and we might be nothing more than a simulation.

The search for God continues.

Will we find him hidden in the deepest recesses of our brain?

Or can we uncover the creator in a mathematical theory?

Let's take a closer look

at perhaps the strangest possibility of all.

We'll start here.

Will Wright is a creator...

Of one universe, at least.

In the blockbuster hit video game "The Sims,"

this software genius created a world

filled with digital people not too different from you and me.

Well, the Sims inside the computer

really are digital recreations.

They're simulations of humans.

And so we basically have to describe to the computer

all the kind of overall aspects

that we think, you know, encompass humanity.

I think humans are very good

at displacing our identity into others.

We call that empathy.

And so a lot of the game is based

around the empathy that you're feeling with the Sims

so that what they experience basically is

what you're experiencing at one level removed.

But consider this.

How much empathy do you think you could feel with this SIM...

And how much with this one?

The rate of increase in computing power

that we've seen in the past few decades

shows no sign of abating.

And the level of realism of computer simulations

is bound to keep pace with that.

When our Sims look as real as our friends,

won't the lines

separating our real lives from our virtual lives

begin to blur?

Computers and games and simulations

are kind of on this path of increased reality.

You can see this in computer graphics and movies.

As we experience these things

at these very granular levels of detail,

again, these experiences, I think,

are starting to blur the line

between real experiences and virtual experiences.

Well, who's to say we're not there already?

One scientist

from the Jet Propulsion Lab in Pasadena, California,

believes we might be

and that the evidence could be all around us.

Rich Terrile has helped design missions to Mars,

discovered four new moons around Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus,

and taken pictures of a distant solar system.

He has a logical mind and a love for technology.

Now he's bringing that logic to a bigger question --

who or what is the creator?

For a god-centered universe, one has to think,

well, first, what are the requirements for God?

God is an interdimensional being

connected with everything in the universe,

a creator responsible for the universe,

and, in some way,

can change the laws of physics if he wanted to.

I think those are pretty good requirements

for what God ought to be.

Terrile thinks those requirements for God,

making the laws of the universe and changing things at will,

sound an awful lot like what programmers do

when they create simulated environments.

And then he started thinking

about how much computing power it would take

to create our world, our planet,

all its life, and all of our brains.

Moore's law is that computational power

tends to double about every two years or 18 months.

Actually, in the last 18 years,

it's been doubling every 13 months.

Right now, the fastest computers on the planet

are now comparable or even exceeding

the computational ability of the human brain as we estimate it.

That's about one million billion operations per second.

Where it's taking us is that in the next year, that'll double.

In the next decade,

that'll increase by a factor of 500.

So a decade from now, our supercomputers will be

about 500 times faster than the human brain.

Rich is sure that computers a decade from now

will be able to create a photoreal simulation

of all that we see around us.

But can a computer ever populate a simulated world

with thinking beings like us?

The answer is inside this box.

Suppose I have a box.

And in the box I've got, you know, a human brain,

which is the mind, or a person,

and I've got a laptop computer.

The human brain and a laptop computer

are about the same weight.

They're about the same volume.

And they take about the same amount of power.

Yet the human brain is about 100,000 times more powerful

than a current-day laptop.

Well, suppose this is a laptop computer from 50 years from now,

and I have them both in the box,

and I start asking them questions,

and I don't know which one is answering.

If I can't tell the difference

between a human being answering questions

and a computer answering questions,

then, qualitatively, they're equivalent.

And if I believe that the human is conscious and self-aware,

I must also believe that the machine has the same qualities.

Once computers have the power

to simulate artificially intelligent beings

inside a photorealistic representation of planet earth,

the ramifications are truly profound.

Suppose we have an enormous simulation

and we're simulating artificial intelligence.

We created this universe.

We're able to change the laws of physics.

We're able to do all the things,

all of those requirements that we put on God.

We're on the brink of creating worlds

inside the computers,

filling them with sentient beings,

and becoming their gods.

But this is not where Rich Terrile's quest for the creator ends.

The next step is truly mind-bending.

He believes that if science shows God can exist,

than maybe he already does.

Maybe we are the Sims

and our creator is sitting at the controls of a supercomputer.

The rise of the machines is close at hand.

Already, computers are taking over many

of the day-to-day functions in our world.

Are they already in charge?

Is our creator some kind of cosmic computer genius?

Rich Terrile thinks we might be living

in some kind of giant simulation,

that our creator might be using

a supercomputer with godlike powers.

And he thinks he's found evidence for it in nature.

There is one surefire way to tell

if you're looking at a computer simulation.

Zoom in.

Every computer-generated image, no matter how realistic,

breaks down into pixels when you get close enough.

You might think this doesn't happen in the real world,

but you'd be wrong.

In the past century,

physicists have discovered

that matter really is made of tiny, little pixels,

fundamental, indivisible particles

billions of times smaller than an atom.

The theory that explains all this, quantum mechanics,

applies not just to matter, but to the entire universe.

Look at the way the universe behaves.

It's quantized. It's made of pixels.

And it's made of individual atoms.

Space is quantized. Time is quantized.

Energy is quantized.

Everything is made of individual pixels,

which means the universe has a finite number of components,

which means it has a finite number of states,

which means it's computable.

Quantum mechanics means

it's possible everything we see

could really be produced

by lines of code inside a powerful computer.

But are there any signs

the universe is actually being computed?

In the physics lab at Caltech,

an experiment that's now almost 100 years old

offers a vital clue.

We're in a small room at the physics lab at Caltech,

looking at an experiment that was originally done in 1928.

This experiment takes an electron beam

and transmits it through a piece of graphite.

And what we're looking at is the electrons

kind of going through the graphite

and forming this kind of diffuse blob.

Now, an interesting thing is,

when we focus the beam on the graphite,

we find a very, very interesting pattern.

The experiment consists of a gun

which fires electrons at a target of graphite atoms

and a collecting screen

to record how they ricocheted off it.

If this apparatus was scaled up a billion times

and the gun fired real bullets,

the pattern on the collecting screen

would just be a random smear of bullet holes.

But in the scaled-down subatomic world,

the electron ricochets are not random.

The pattern on the screen

reflects the pattern of atoms in the target.

Each electron seems to sense

where every atom in the graphite is,

even though the target is much bigger than it.

It's as if the electrons are not dots, but spread out.

The electrons somehow know where all the atoms are,

and they form this diffraction pattern.

The experiment shows something really rather extraordinary,

and that is that matter,

even though it behaves when you're looking at it,

when you're measuring it, as individual particles,

when you're not measuring it, matter is diffuse.

It spreads out.

It doesn't have a finite form in the universe.

These basic rules of quantum mechanics

apply to all tiny subatomic particles.

When we look at them, they are just dots.

When we look away, they lose their physical form.

A different way of looking at that is to say,

well, how parallel is this behavior

with what I see in my playstation 3

when I'm playing a video game?

In a playstation 3, an example of that is "Simcity."

It's an enormous city.

I can navigate my way through every bit of it

because the playstation, the video game,

gives me the frame that I need when I'm looking there.

If I look somewhere else, it'll create that frame.

Well, oddly enough, the universe behaves that way in reality.

The universe gives you what you're looking at

when you're looking at it.

When you're not looking at it, it's not necessarily there.

Our world is pixilated

and only assumes definite form when observed,

the very same way our computer simulations behave.

Rich Terrile has tried to work out the probability

that we might be living in a simulation

to quantify the possibility that there is a God.

The question is how likely is something like that to happen?

And how likely is it

that it has already happened in our universe?

Now, let's step back from that a little bit and say,

well, you know, the universe is 13.7 billion years old,

and here I am 50 years

from basically being able to manufacture God.

What's the probability

that I would be so close to that threshold

and not be across the other side?

It's one chance in 300 million that I would be that close.

It's an extraordinary coincidence.

And, perhaps, more likely than not,

maybe we are a simulation on the other side of that threshold

and the deities that exist are our future selves.

Our world bears all the hallmarks of one that is smiulated.

And Rich's logic continues.

Who would be more likely to simulate humans than humans from the future.

Our descendants.

God-like beings with the power to create their own universes.

It's a very radical idea of the Creator.

But for Rich, it's not without spirituality.

One can ask, "what are you really saying?"

Are you saying the world was a simulation

and we're just entities in some Playstation 12 game,

or something like that.

I'm not saying that, I actually, uh

think this is a very, very wonderful phenonom

I take great solice in this.

It shows that somewhere along the line we have evloved from nothing

into self-awareness.

And that self-awareness has reached the stage now

where we, our future selves have become Gods.

This is a wonderful. Uh, to me a very, very spirtual thing

And that's where my spirtuality comes from.

in seeing things like that. To me that's a religion.

It's been said that God fills in the cracks in our knowledge.

Some see these cracks getting smaller.

We see that constantly in physics

that we start out with something

that looks complex and as we look at it's parts

it's parts are simplier.

Now, if you imagine some sort of Creator, that assumes that there's

more complicated than the thing that got created.

So to me that's a step backwards

in explaining a philosophically satisfying model.

For others the expansion of scientific knowledge

will never fill in all the cracks.

There always will be room for faith.

Be it in a Creator with our descendant

or in the Gods of our ancestors.

I think that the questions that arise from science

they give us some sort of notion that Jesus is a God.

But they leave many other questions about God unresolved.

And we also, I think are bound to recognize that we finite beings

will never totally understand God

The human instinct that drives our scientific curiosity

won't stop us from searching for answers.

Perhaps one day soon, science will provide us with

to look up and out through the cosmic pane of glass

that separates us from the true Creator of our World.

If there is one?

-- sync, corrected by elderman -- -- for www.addic7ed.Com --