Book: the virtual universe

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

There is sufficient evidence that we live inside a simulation, and it allows us to establish the most likely purpose of our existence. The book does not promote a specific religion. It goes along with science, but there are limits to what science can establish. God is beyond those limits.

The book addresses the following topics:

  • Why our existence is not a miracle that requires a creator.
  • Why the simulation hypothesis is not scientific.
  • How possible motives of post-humans can help us establish that we live inside a simulation.
  • Why there is no proof in real life, not even in science.
  • How our minds can trick us, and how to avoid pitfalls in our observations and reasoning.
  • How laws of reality can help us establish that we live inside a simulation.
  • Why evidence for the paranormal is not scientific but strong enough to count.
  • How to interpret religious experiences and miracles.
  • How to explain premonition, evidence suggesting reincarnation, ghosts, ufos, and meaningful coincidences.
  • How coincidences surrounding major historical events indicate that everything happens according to a script.
  • Why do many people see 11:11 and other peculiar time prompts.
  • What predetermination tells us about our purpose.


By reading the book, you will discover that the world makes perfect sense if we assume it to be a simulation created by an advanced post-human civilisation to entertain someone we can call God.

The book is freely available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 licence. You can download your free PDF here:

Alternatively, you can buy a Kindle or paperback on Amazon:

Mohammed receiving his first revelation from the angel Gabriel

Religious experiences and miracles

The Jewish people still exist after 2,500 years, while they did not have a homeland for most of the time. That is a remarkable feat, most notably because the Jews are supposed to be God’s chosen people. It is also a bit of an enigma that Christianity replaced the existing religions in the Roman Empire. Somehow the message of personal salvation through Christ caught on. A pivotal moment was the conversion of Emperor Constantine to Christianity in 312 AD. He made Christianity the favoured religion in the Roman Empire. A few centuries later, a small band of Arab warriors created an empire stretching from the Atlantic to India, spreading a new religion called Islam. Is it a realistic scenario that the illiterate camel-driver Muhammad became a crafty statesman after he had seen an angel? We only know this world, so we cannot answer that question. Jews, Christians, and Muslims worship the same deity. Our universe could be a simulation, and the fates of Judaism, Christianity and Islam could be implausible historical developments. In other words, God might be the best explanation. Only, we do not know whether or not these events are plausible.

When Islam arrived on the scene, there already was widespread monotheism as Christians and Zoroastrians in the area believed in an all-powerful creator. Muhammad had met Jews and Christians on his travels, so he was familiar with these religions. Before that, Christianity had faced an uphill struggle. While the Roman state suppressed this religion, pagans left their gods behind and accepted the Christian God as the only true God. And they did so in large numbers. That begs for an explanation, even though the conversion to Christianity was a gradual process that took centuries. The number of Christians increased at an average rate of 2-3% per year between 30 AD and 400 AD. Each Christian may have converted just one or two persons on average, but over time, exponential growth made Christianity grow from 30 followers in 30 AD to 30 million in 400 AD. There appears nothing supernatural about this process until you realise that the most often cited reason for conversions were stories about miracles Christians did.1

An early miracle was Jesus appearing to a few of his followers after his crucifixion. Christians believe that Jesus appeared in the flesh, but perhaps his disciples had visions of him. The New Testament also accounts for some miracles the disciples allegedly performed. These stories may have been exaggerated, but miracles are a consistent theme in Christianity, even today. And so, there may be more to it than science can explain. On message boards, people tell stories about prayers heard and miraculous healings. Chance is not always a plausible explanation. And it seems unlikely that Christians consistently lie about these matters.

Many people have seen the Virgin Mary. She appeared several times in Venezuela. In 1976, she showed herself to Maria Esperanza Medrano de Bianchini, who received special powers. She could tell the future, levitate, and heal the sick. In Egypt, Mary appeared at a Coptic Church between 1983 and 1986. Muslims also have seen her there. There have been many more Virgin Mary appearances. The most notable one was in Portugal at Fatima on 13 October 1917. The sun spun wildly and tumbled down to earth before stopping and returning to its normal position, radiating in indescribable beautiful colours. More than 50,000 people witnessed the miracle. They had gathered in response to a prophecy made by three shepherd children that the Virgin Mary would appear and perform miracles on that date.2

Jesus also appeared from time to time, but less frequently than the Virgin. An intriguing account comes from Kenneth Logie, a preacher of the Pentecostal Holiness Church in Oakland, California, in the 1950s. In April 1954, Logie was preaching at an evening service. During his sermon, the church door opened, and Jesus came walking in, smiling to the left and the right. Then he walked through the pulpit and placed his hand on Logie’s shoulder. Jesus spoke to him in a foreign tongue. Fifty people witnessed the event. Five years later, a woman gave testimony when she suddenly disappeared, and Jesus took her place. He wore sandals and a glistering white robe and had nail marks on his hands. His hands were dripping with oil. After several minutes, Jesus disappeared, and the woman reappeared. Two hundred people have seen it. It was on film as Logie had installed film equipment because strange things were going on.2

In virtual reality, this is possible. When it appears that God has heard your prayer, that could be part of the script. In that case, God did not listen to your prayer. Instead, you were supposed to pray, and the fulfilment of your request was supposed to occur. It is like a meaningful coincidence happening. Many prayers are in vain, so a fulfilled wish does not prove God’s existence. But some stories are incredible, and mere chance seems a poor explanation. And in a simulation, there is little difference between the appearances of Christ, the Virgin Mary, deceased loved ones, UFOs, angels and ghosts.

Feature image: Mohammad receiving his first revelation from the angel Gabriel. Miniature illustration on vellum from the book Jami’ al-Tawarikh, by Rashid al-Din, published in Tabriz, Persia, 1307 AD. Public Domain.

1. The Triumph of Christianity: How a Forbidden Religion Swept the World. Bart Ehrman. Simon & Schuster (2018).
2. How Jesus Became God The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher From Galilee. Bart Ehrman. HarperCollins Publishers (2015).

The Virtual Universe

Religions claim that God or gods have created this world. The simulation hypothesis explains that we might live inside a computer simulation run by an advanced post-human civilisation. But can we know that this is the case? The book The Virtual Universe: Evidence Demonstrating That an Advanced Post-Human Civilisation Has Created Us explores the evidence. A revised simulation argument may establish that we live inside a simulation. Using the information this universe gives us, we might even discover the purpose of our existence.

The argument works like so:

  1. If this universe is genuine, we cannot be sure it is. A simulation can be realistic and come with authentic laws of reality.
  2. This universe may have fake properties, but we cannot find that out because we do not know the properties of an authentic universe.
  3. Breaching the laws of reality is unrealistic in any case. If it happens, we may have evidence of this universe being virtual.

It follows from (1) and (2) that we cannot use the properties of this universe reflected in the laws of reality to determine whether this universe is real or a simulation. Science may establish the laws of physics or the properties of this universe, but science cannot ascertain whether they are real or fake. But if they are breached, that is evidence of this universe being a simulation.

We can discover that we live inside a simulation if we notice that reality is not realistic, at least in some aspects. There is evidence that the laws of reality may be breached from time to time, for instance, paranormal events, premonitions, meaningful coincidences and memories of past lives. The evidence appears sufficient to establish that the scientific laws of reality do not always apply.

Post-humans could have similar motivations as we have. They might run simulations of human civilisations for research or entertainment. Research applications could be about running what-if scenarios. Possible entertainment applications are games or dream worlds in which imaginations come true. These simulations may not be realistic in some aspects as they reflect the rules of a game or someone’s imagination.

Simulations of civilisations are complex, so guaranteeing a specific outcome, for instance, someone’s imagination coming true, requires control over everything that happens. That does not apply to games. Unpredictable developments make games more interesting. Looking at how we currently employ computing power, the number of simulations for entertainment likely vastly outstrip those run for research. If we live inside a simulation, we should expect its purpose to be entertainment.

If reality is unrealistic in some aspects, that suggests that our purpose is entertainment. A simulation run for research is probably realistic. Evidence of control indicates that the purpose of this simulation is not a game but to realise someone’s imagination.

The owner or owners may use avatars and appear like ordinary human beings to us. If you are familiar with computer games, you know what an avatar is. Once you enter the game, you become a character inside the game, your avatar, and suddenly you have a virtual existence apart from your regular existence. Inside the game, you are your avatar, not yourself. Similarly, you might start your personal virtual world in which you make your dreams come true. In this world, you also become someone else.

If beings in the simulation can think for themselves, that raises ethical questions like whether they have rights that the creators should respect. Considering how humans treat each other, it is not a given that these rights would be respected even when our creators acknowledge them. In a realistic simulation, bad things happen to people all the time. In the case of control, the beings inside the simulation are not sentient. It means that we may not think and may not have a will of our own. Hence, we might have no intrinsic value to our creators.

Meaningful coincidences suggest that there is a script, which implies that someone or something controls everything that happens in this universe. We may live inside a story with a preconceived ending. The purpose of this simulation could be to realise someone’s imagination. And so, there could be a post-human individual we may call God. And God might use an avatar and appear as an ordinary human to us.

And how does God experience the simulation? If there is a script, She probably does not actively direct events. Perhaps, God is in a dream state, where She is not in control of Her role and follows the script She has selected. That can raise yet another question. Does God know that She is God when She is in this world? And you can go even further because we can imagine gods. So, whose imagination is this world after all? We cannot answer these questions because we cannot know God, but perhaps it is possible to disclose some of God’s avatars.

Latest revision: 9 November 2022

You can find it here:

Simulation argument II: adding information

Simulations could be realistic in many ways while not being realistic in some aspects. If that is somehow noticeable, then we might find out that we do live inside a simulation. Instead of speculating about us living in a simulation by guessing the probability of the existence of post-humans and their abilities, resources, and possible motivations, it seems more illuminating to look at the available information about our universe. Perhaps there is a more conclusive argument to be made. It may go like this:

  1. If this universe is genuine, we cannot be sure that it is. A simulation can be realistic and come with authentic laws of reality.
  2. This universe may have fake properties, but we cannot establish this because we do not know the properties of an authentic universe.
  3. Breaching the laws of reality is unrealistic in any case. If it happens, we may have evidence of this universe being virtual.

It follows from (1) and (2) that we cannot use the properties of this universe reflected in the laws of reality to determine whether this universe is real or a simulation. And it does not matter whether the laws of reality are genuine or not. If they are authentic and breached, this universe is a simulation. If they are fake, this universe is a simulation anyway. Science can establish laws of reality or properties of this universe, but science cannot determine whether they are real or fake.

According to science, this universe kicked off fourteen billion years ago with a big bang. Ten billion years later, life on this planet began to develop out of chemical processes. It took another four billion years for life on Earth to evolve into what it is today. According to science, there is no evidence of an intelligent creator, the laws of physics always apply, and we are biological organisms made out of carbon and water.

Hence, the following properties of our universe have been certified by science. They are among the established laws of our reality, reflecting what scientists believe to be realistic:

  • The laws of physics always apply inside their realm, for instance, Newton’s first law of motion, which states that a change in the speed or direction of the movement of a body requires a force.
  • The universe started with a big bang. Life on this planet emerged from chemical processes, and evolution shaped it. There is no evidence of a creator.
  • We are biological organisms, and our consciousnesses reside in our bodies. There is no spirit or soul.

Evidence to the contrary might indicate that we do live inside a simulation. Meaningful coincidences suggest there is an intelligent force directing events. The paranormal defies the laws of physics from time to time. Evidence for reincarnation indicates that we are not biological organisms. But meaningful coincidences can materialise by chance. And there may be laws of reality we do not know. And there is plenty of evidence of the consciousness residing in the body while only a few people remember a previous life. A convincing case for us living in a simulation requires clarification as to why it is the best explanation for our existence. The clarification might consist of the following parts:

  • Our existence is not a miracle that requires a creator, but this universe can be a simulation.
  • The possible motivations of post-humans may allow us to establish that we do live inside a simulation and what our purpose is.
  • Science cannot determine that his universe is a simulation as we do not know the properties of a real universe.
  • Alternative explanations for strange phenomena seem less plausible as they run into logical inconsistencies.
  • Evidence suggestive of reincarnation might suffice to conclude that our consciousnesses do not reside in our bodies.
  • Evidence suggestive of ghosts, premonitions, and alien abductions might suffice to conclude that the laws of physics do not always apply.
  • The distribution of meaningful coincidences could indicate that an intelligence coordinates events in this universe.

Establishing that the distribution of meaningful coincidences is not the outcome of chance requires information about probabilities. Meaningful coincidences can happen by accident, and it is impossible to determine the odds of them materialising. Still, there are arguments to be made to certify that mere accident is not so likely. For that, we may consider the following:

  • Some types of meaningful coincidences are less likely to occur than others. The more elaborate the scheme, the less likely it is the result of mere chance.
  • Mere chance is also unlikely when elaborate meaningful coincidences surround the most important historical events.
  • If meaningful coincides are not distributed evenly across people and time-frames, and some people are heavily affected, it suggests interference and perhaps even destiny for those involved.

Simulation hypothesis

Already in ancient times philosophers imagined that there is no way of telling that the world around us is real or that other people have a mind of their own. Perhaps I am the only one who is real while the rest of the world is my imagination. This could all be a dream. Some major religions claim that gods created this universe and that we are like them. In the Bible it is written that God said: “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness.”

For long it was impossible to clarify why this world might not be real or how the gods might have created it. Recent advances in information technology have changed that. This universe could be a virtual reality. We are inclined to think that what our senses register is real, so we tend to ignore evidence to the contrary. For instance, you may think you see a pipe when watching an image of a pipe.The caption of the famous painting named The Treachery of Images of René Magritte makes you notice: this is not a pipe.

In 1977 science fiction writer Philip K. Dick was the first to claim that we do exist in a computer-generated reality. This is the simulation hypothesis. He came to this insight after experiencing a psychosis. If he is right then his name suggests that our creators do like to joke around. Professor Nick Bostrom explored the probability the simulation hypothesis being true in the simulation argument.

According to Bostrom there could be many different human civilisations. The humans in those civilisations may at some point enhance themselves with bio-technology and information technology, live very long and acquire capabilities ordinary humans don’t have. For that reason these beings aren’t humans anymore and called post-humans. These post-humans might be brains-in-vats or have uploaded their consciousness into a computer and have no physical body. These post-humans may run simulations of their human ancestor civilisations. In that case we may be living in one of those simulations ourselves. Bostrom argues that at least one of the following must be true:

  1. Nearly all real human civilisations end before enter the post-human stage.
  2. In any post-human civilisation only an extremely small number of individuals are interested in running simulations of a human ancestor civilisations.
  3. We almost are certainly living inside a computer simulation.1

It comes with the following assumptions that appear realistic to many experts in the relevant fields, but are not provenbecause we have not managed to do it yet:

  • The available computing power in post-human civilisations is sufficient to run a very large number of simulations of human ancestor civilisations.
  • The human consciousness needs not to reside in a biological organism, but can be implemented in a computer, perhaps in a limited form that appears realistic.1

Bostrom then concludes that if you believe that our civilisation will one day become post-human and will run a large number of human ancestor civilisations then you must believe we are currently living inside such a simulation.1 It might be explained like this. We do not know at what point in time we are, before or after the invention of virtual reality universes. If every year has an equal probability of this technology being invented, and we are going to invent it in the next 10, 100 or 1,000 years, then it will not happen later than that, because by then we will have done it. But what are the odds of it happening in the next 10, 100 or 1,000 years compared to the billions of years that already have passed?

There are many uncertainties. The available computing power of post-human civilisations might not be sufficient. It is possible that nearly all civilisations die out before becoming able to build simulations of human civilisations. Maybe post-humans will differ from us to the point that they will not be interested in running these simulations. Bostrom doesn’t try to guess the likelihood of the options. He thinks that we have no information as to whether this universe is real or not. But that may not be true.

Featured image: The Treachery of Images. René Magritte (1928). [copyright info]

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