Friday, May 22, 2026
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > News > Space & Astronomy > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Space & Astronomy

Researchers mathematically disprove simulated universe theory

By T.K. Randall
November 4, 2025 · Comment icon 14 comments
Virtual reality
Image: AI-generated (Midjourney)
Scientists now believe that they have finally disproven the idea that we are all living in a simulated universe.
What if we told you that the world you live in isn't real ?

It might sound like a concept straight out of the Keanu Reeves science fiction favorite The Matrix, but according to some of the world's top minds, the idea that we are living inside a computer simulation is not only possible, but perhaps even more likely than the idea that we are living in the real world.

Efforts to prove that this is the case have been ongoing for years, but now a group of scientists has reportedly found a way to mathematically prove that we are definitely not living in a simulation.

They've done this by showing that the fundamental nature of reality operates in a way that no computer could ever be capable of simulating.

"It has been suggested that the universe could be simulated. If such a simulation were possible, the simulated universe could itself give rise to life, which in turn might create its own simulation," said Dr. Mir Faizal, Adjunct Professor with UBC Okanagan's Irving K. Barber Faculty of Science.
"This recursive possibility makes it seem highly unlikely that our universe is the original one, rather than a simulation nested within another simulation."

"This idea was once thought to lie beyond the reach of scientific inquiry. However, our recent research has demonstrated that it can, in fact, be scientifically addressed."

The specifics of the team's mathematical proof are rather technical, but generally center around proving that a complete and consistent description of everything requires "non-algorithmic understanding."

"We have demonstrated that it is impossible to describe all aspects of physical reality using a computational theory of quantum gravity," said Dr. Faizal.

"Therefore, no physically complete and consistent theory of everything can be derived from computation alone."

"Rather, it requires a non-algorithmic understanding, which is more fundamental than the computational laws of quantum gravity and therefore more fundamental than spacetime itself."

Source: Phys.org | Comments (14)




Other news and articles
Our latest videos Visit us on YouTube
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #5 Posted by Tatetopa 7 months ago
I can't do the math on this one, and I can't refute the proof. But, Another alternative might be that quantum gravity makes no sense to us now because it is an inconsistent patch thrown in by the designers to keep the simulation running.
Comment icon #6 Posted by nevins 7 months ago
Great, so now i can freely go about my day in the comforting knowledge that when i scratch my nuts, it was in fact my impulse & not determined by some simulaation controller?
Comment icon #7 Posted by Freez1 7 months ago
I never bought into the simulation idea anyway. It was however a good hypothesis to think about. I guess the part I wonder about more is what science says about the amount of time it would take for human beings to form on this planet if you believe in everything on this planet originating from one spec of life. And if humans were formed over millions of years ago why do we have different races? Was there different races within all other humanoids? It’s more like someone populated the planet with different races of humans. Perhaps we are the aliens and each race came from a different planet. ... [More]
Comment icon #8 Posted by Ell 7 months ago
You mean Neanderthals and Denisovans and such?
Comment icon #9 Posted by Tom1200 7 months ago
I thought along those lines.  AFAICT the argument is that randomness in our Universe is utterly unpredictable, therefore cannot be algorithm-based.  Algorithms we design to be "random" still rely on a pre-coded list of values such as pi, so can in fact be predicted if you know the coding.  And randomness based on something apparently random like nuclear decay in the simulation is no good, because that "random" decay had to be programmed too. But could randomness be programmed to be genuinely unpredictable based on real-life factors in the "real" Universe?  (But which could itself be a crea... [More]
Comment icon #10 Posted by Kleng 7 months ago
Sounds like the plot for the game Star Ocean: Til The End Of Time....
Comment icon #11 Posted by OverSword 7 months ago
Wow.  The arrogance.  I have always been a big fan of the simulation theory although I don't believe we are simulated.
Comment icon #12 Posted by EBE Hybrid 7 months ago
If a universe were to be simulation, imagine how proud the designer of the simulation would feel, seeing life evolve to the point where that life spends a ridiculous amount of time finding ways to obliterate life and in it's spare time watches cat videos on the internet? Perhaps the Grand Designer is a cat!!!
Comment icon #13 Posted by Ell 7 months ago
I like the taste of strawberries in this simulation.
Comment icon #14 Posted by garen1 7 months ago
A science fad idea that came, going away, may comeback again  


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Recent news and articles