Category: reality

Virtual Worlds

nivtric3 Comments

We live in a virtual world, a computer-simulated environment. Virtual worlds, such as computer games, can have numerous users who create personalised avatars, engage in activities, and interact with others. If you are familiar with computer games, you know what an avatar is. Once you enter a game, you become a character inside that game, your avatar, and you have an existence apart from your regular life. Inside the game, you are your avatar, not yourself. Alternatively, you could start a virtual world where you are God and make your dreams come true. In this world, you can also become someone else, a character in your story.

Virtual worlds have rules that may draw from reality or fantasy worlds. Rules can include gravity, methods of procreation, and types of communication. In virtual reality, you can change the rules. You can do away with planets and stars and create a flat surface. Or there is no surface at all. You can eliminate gravity and let everyone float. You can do away with procreation and let individuals emerge from thin air. You can invent species that communicate via light signals or not have species but individuals with random features.

This world might look like the original. Our experiences shape our imagination and influence the options we consider. If we write stories and produce films, most are about humans and their feelings and actions. Only a few are about animals. And the animals we imagine in our tales are like humans. Ed, the talking horse, is more human than a horse. Tales and motion pictures about imaginary beings, such as The Lord of the Rings or the Star Trek series, are rare compared to series about humans. And the fictitious beings in our stories, such as Star Trek, look and act like humans. They usually have two legs and two arms and walk upright. Extraterrestrials in Star Trek feature males and females.

The Holodeck is a virtual reality room available in the Starship Enterprise in Star Trek. Using holograms, it creates a realistic, interactive simulation of the physical world. On the Holodeck, you can make a personalised environment with objects and people, interact with them, or write a story and play a role in it. With the help of artificial intelligence, we might soon create simulations of humans and the world. If the technology becomes cheap, we could make billions of virtual universes. If we do that, it likely happened long ago, and we live inside a virtual world ourselves.1

We are about to do so, so this world is probably a simulation. But can we find out? Most philosophers and scientists think we can’t. They have overlooked the obvious. There is an elephant in the room: the things science can’t explain. It begins with establishing that these phenomena aren’t subjective, so there must be multiple credible witnesses or verifiable evidence. Then, you need to certify that it is not due to randomness or a natural phenomenon. To say that the simulation causes these phenomena upends the knowledge we currently believe we have. And so, we must be thorough. Answering the question begins with investigating what we can or cannot know. That is the domain of knowledge theory, a branch of philosophy which deals with the nature of knowledge.

Latest revision: 18 July 2025

1. Are You Living In a Computer Simulation? Nick Bostrom (2003). Philosophical Quarterly (2003) Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255.

The nature of reality

nivtric2 Comments


We live inside a simulation created by an advanced post-human civilisation. An individual can’t build this universe alone or write the script in detail. That requires a civilisation. Science has established several laws of reality, or natural laws, with a sufficient degree of certainty. Therefore, if breaches of these laws occur, this world is fake. There is enough evidence of breaches. And so, the argument is:

  • Science has sufficiently established specific laws of reality.
  • Breaches of these laws prove that this world is a simulation.
  • There is sufficient evidence of breaches in these laws.
  • Hence, we live in a simulation.

We like to think we are unique and superb creatures, the apex of all that roams this planet, so we attach great value to our inner selves. And the consumerist society teaches us that we are also very deserving, and that only three people are of importance: me, myself, and I. So, if we have the technology, we would build personal virtual realities that allow us to fulfil our every desire. Because we think we are so wonderful, we probably won’t alter our human essence when we can, so post-humans likely have similar motivations to us.

These post-humans could run simulations of human civilisations for entertainment and research. If the technology becomes cheap, the number of simulations for amusement likely vastly outstrips those for research. Our purpose is probably entertainment, and breaches of the laws of reality suggest so. Simulations run for research are more likely to be realistic. Signs of a script indicate that our universe is not a game, but rather someone’s imaginary world. Someone could own this world, and we might call that someone God. God may use avatars in this simulation to play the role of an ordinary human being.

Coincidences, such as the licence plate number of Franz Ferdinand’s car, indicate that there is a script, meaning a computer generates all our thoughts and actions. We aren’t sentient beings. We don’t think for ourselves. We have no intrinsic value to our creators, so God can let us suffer and kill us without remorse. The strength of the evidence outweighs the issues, such as the lack of scientific evidence for the paranormal, the limitations of the human mind, including our tendency to seek causes when randomness applies or to see meaning where there is none, the hindsight bias, and the difficulties in establishing probabilities. In other words, we can know beyond a reasonable doubt that we live in a scripted virtual reality. That is a remarkable conclusion, and it would be even more astounding if we identified some of God’s avatars to gain better insight into the purpose of this universe.

What if God was one of us?
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus

Joan Osborn, One of Us

Latest revision: 24 July 2025

Book: The Virtual Universe

nivtric1 Comment

Several religions claim that a god or gods have created this universe. The simulation hypothesis explains how this might have happened. We could all live inside a computer simulation run by an advanced post-human civilisation. But can we establish that this is indeed the case?

The evidence suggests that we live inside a simulation. It even allows us to infer the purpose of our existence. This book does not promote a specific religion. It follows science, but science has its limits. It can’t tell whether the world we live in is real.

Still, the sciences can support the argument that this world is a simulation, as they have established the natural laws that guide reality. If breaches of these laws occur, such as paranormal incidents with credible witnesses, we have evidence indicating that this world is not real.

We have just invented virtual reality. We can utilise virtual reality for both research and entertainment purposes. If the technology to create virtual worlds becomes affordable, most worlds will exist for entertainment, such as games or inventing stories where we can make our dreams come true.

The latter requires control over everything that happens, which is the situation we appear to be in. With our current knowledge, the world makes the most sense as a simulation created by an advanced post-human civilisation to entertain someone we can call God.

In this book, you can find answers to the following questions:

  • Is there something more than science can explain?
  • Is there a plan behind all that happens?
  • What are virtual worlds?
  • How can we know things and determine whether we live in a virtual world?
  • How can we explain things science can’t explain?
  • What are the simulation hypothesis and simulation argument about?
  • Can we improve the simulation argument to establish whether we are living in a simulation?
  • Why does our existence not need to be a miracle?
  • What reasons might post-humans have to create virtual worlds?
  • Can we infer from the properties of our universe that we live in a simulation?
  • What can we say about the evidence of spooks?
  • What is real about UFOs?
  • Do curses exist?
  • Do meaningful coincidences indicate that there is a script?
  • Is there some point to numeric coincidences like 11:11?
  • What happens after we die?
  • How can mediums sometimes be uncannily accurate?
  • Are there strange coincidences in history?
  • Are there an excessive number of strange coincidences surrounding the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks?
  • What are the consequences of predetermination, and how does it affect our lives?
  • Is it possible to establish that we live in a story by using meaningful coincidences as evidence?
  • So, can we establish beyond a reasonable doubt that we live inside a simulation?
  • And can we establish the purpose of our existence?

After reading this book, you know you live inside a simulation.

The book is freely available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 licence.

You can download your free EPUB here:

https://drive.proton.me/urls/A32TV9FZFM#VK1pUJozUJy5

You can download your free PDF here:

https://drive.proton.me/urls/KNS1R6XKNG#6nawGfcicKuv

Or from here:

virtualuniverse250902Download

The book is freely available as an e-book on Kobe:

https://www.kobo.com/ebook/the-virtual-universe

The book is also available as a Kindle on Amazon. Amazon requires a minimum price, so it is available at that price:

Latest revision: 6 September 2025

Explaining the Unexplained

nivtricLeave a comment

The paranormal is a subject of controversy. The evidence is often problematic and certainly not scientific. Take, for instance, psychics. Scientists have investigated their abilities. In experiments, psychics fail to perform better than guessing. Scientists isolate a psychic so others can’t supply this person with information. Sometimes, psychics make stunning guesses, but not in these experiments. Divination can be fraud or manipulation. The same is true for the paranormal in general. Paranormal incidents can be natural phenomena or the result of fraud or delusion.

Still, a large number of paranormal incidents remain without explanation. Few scientists dare to investigate them, as it could make them a laughingstock to their peers. And what can be worse than getting zero publications in respectable scientific magazines because you take reincarnation stories seriously? That is groupthink and intellectual cowardice on a grandiose scale. Apart from that, there is little science can say about the paranormal because there likely is no such thing as the Third Law of Paranormal Activity that explains it all neatly in an elegant mathematical formula.

Thinking that science will one day give the answers is also a belief. Science can become like a religion once you discard evidence that contradicts it. Evidence for the paranormal doesn’t meet scientific criteria, but that doesn’t make it invalid. Science requires that we use a theory, such as the existence of psychic abilities, to make predictions that we can subsequently check. So, if a psychic doesn’t do better than chance guessing during an experiment, this individual has no psychic abilities from a scientific perspective. But there is more to the world than science can prove.

Countless times, witnesses have observed things that the sciences can’t explain. In the early twentieth century, Charles Fort collected 40,000 notes on paranormal experiences. They were about strange events reported in magazines and newspapers, such as The Times, as well as in scientific journals, including Scientific American, Nature, and Science. Most incidents probably never become public, so the total number of these incidents is impossible to guess. It could be billions. Fort had worked on a manuscript suggesting a secret civilisation controls events in this world. He compared the close-mindedness of many scientists to that of religious fundamentalists.

So, did my wife’s father make himself noticed from the other side? Or was the wind gust and the clocks being back just bizarre coincidences caused by natural phenomena? Or did my wife make it up to have a good story to tell at birthday parties? I know her better than you do, and I don’t think she did. I have witnessed countless strange incidents, so I don’t think she was mistaken either. She could only have noticed that these clocks were back by looking at other timepieces. Even if she had been wrong and did not find out about it, it still would have been a remarkable coincidence.

The wind gust was peculiar. The clocks made it even more mysterious. In virtual reality, the laws of nature don’t have to apply. Clocks can stop for an hour, and elephants can fly. We haven’t seen flying elephants, but virtual reality makes it possible. Psychic abilities may exist, even when the scientific method can’t certify them. And Jesus could have walked on water and raised the dead. And meaningful coincidences, even when caused by ordinary natural phenomena, may indicate someone is pulling the strings.

Latest revision: 18 July 2025

Featured image: Psychic reading room

Fat cat

Mystery of Being

nivtricLeave a comment

Why is there something rather than nothing? We may never know. If gods created us, we may learn one day why. Still, that doesn’t explain why these gods exist. Perhaps the gods don’t know either. Coincidence and evolution explain why there are humans, but not why there is a universe. The odds appear stacked against us being here, so we might see our existence as a miracle and think this universe is there for us. However, had humans never arrived on the scene, no cat or fern would have wondered why it exists. Once you reverse the argument, you can see what is wrong with it.

My existence depends on my parents having met. Had my father not broken his leg during a soccer game, he might not have met my mother, who was a nurse in the local hospital. Or, my mother might have had a headache on the night I would otherwise have been conceived. My parents’ existence, in turn, depends on countless accidental actions of the many generations before them. If one of my forebears had slept ten minutes longer on 16 September 1455, I might not exist.

The number of incidents that could have prevented my existence is infinite. Yet, despite the near-zero odds, I exist. If the purpose of the universe were to create me, that must be a miracle. But why isn’t this universe made for that fat grey cat sneaking through my garden or a particular fern growing in the forest? The chance of their existence is as low as yours. Similarly, the chances of humans appearing when dinosaurs were still roaming and of living creatures emerging here on Earth when the galaxy started were also negligible.

In a similar vein, some argue that it is unlikely that this universe emerged by chance. The laws of physics and the values of physical constants appear designed for life to exist. It is the same type of error: thinking that my existence is a miracle. If the universe didn’t support life, we wouldn’t be there to notice it. A rabbit doesn’t ponder these questions, yet the existence of rabbits is as great a miracle as our existence. And how do we know the physical constants and natural laws that support life? And how does that rule out chance? There could be an infinite number of universes with different laws and constants. And this universe might support life by accident.

Intelligent design proponents claim that evolutionary processes lack the intelligence to design something as complex as a human being. And so, life on Earth requires an intelligent Creator. Indeed, the chance of life to emerge in the way it did was close to zero from the outset, and still, we are here, as are ferns and octopuses. Scientific findings indicate life on this planet had four billion years to develop. Given ample time, the possibilities are endless, and anything could happen. Competition, or the struggle for survival, is a force that promotes complexity but has no intelligence.

Humans have messed things up and turned this world into a wasteland. Humans are the outcome of competition between species. Competition always ends in disaster, and in the case of natural selection, it is humans. This world would be a much better place without them. No intelligent designer would design humans unless this individual seeks the praise of the created beings, desires to see their vain endeavours fail, or wants to save us from our stupidity in the nick of time by sending a saviour, as that makes a good story. So, if there is a Creator, this individual is likely humanoid, so the simulation argument makes sense. Our failure is so complete that you might wonder whether this world is real. We can’t be such a failure, or can we? Indeed, you can be right for the wrong reasons.

This world could be a simulation. Our ego stands in the way of seeing the truth, and it is the reason why we are a failed species. Pride is our road to destruction. The mystery of being is not much of a mystery. It is merely that a fool can ask more questions than a thousand sages can answer. If the possibilities are infinite, everything that ever happened once had a near-zero chance of transpiring. However, something had to happen, and that is what occurred. If there is no Creator, this world would still make perfect sense. It is our ego that tells us we are unique and special, so our existence is a miracle that requires a brilliant Creator who is infinitely wise and all-knowing. It doesn’t mean that there isn’t a Creator. After all, we could live inside a simulation modelled after the real world.

Latest revision: 28 October 2025