A question that has vexed physicists for the past century may finally have a solution – but perhaps not the one everyone was hoping for.

A team of physicists led by Mir Faizal at the University of British Columbia has demonstrated that the universe cannot be a computer simulation, according to research published in October 2025[1].

The key findings show that reality requires non-algorithmic understanding that cannot be simulated computationally. The researchers used mathematical theorems from Gödel, Tarski, and Chaitin to prove that a complete description of reality cannot be achieved through computation alone[1:1].

The team proposes that physics needs a “Meta Theory of Everything” (MToE) - a non-algorithmic layer above the algorithmic one to determine truth from outside the mathematical system[1:2]. This would help investigate phenomena like the black hole information paradox without violating mathematical rules.

“Any simulation is inherently algorithmic – it must follow programmed rules,” said Faizal. “But since the fundamental level of reality is based on non-algorithmic understanding, the universe cannot be, and could never be, a simulation”[1:3].

Lawrence Krauss, a co-author of the study, explained: “The fundamental laws of physics cannot exist inside space and time; they create it. This signifies that any simulation, which must be utilized within a computational framework, would never fully express the true universe”[2].

The research was published in the Journal of Holography Applications in Physics[1:4].

  1. ScienceAlert - Physicists Just Ruled Out The Universe Being a Simulation ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎

  2. The Brighter Side - The universe is not and could never be a simulation, study finds ↩︎

  • BusyBoredom@lemmy.ml
    151·
    2 天前

    Well yeah sure if you want a set algorithm to perfectly reproduce this exact universe deterministically, that’s not gonna work out so well.

    But a simulation doesn’t have to be perfectly consistent and deterministic to “work”. If anything, the fact that some things can’t be predicted is evidence in favor of us being in a simulation, not against.

    This paper just rules out a class of algorithms. Were not in a specific type of simulation. Doesn’t mean we’re not in a simulation at all.

    • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
      32·
      2 天前

      The laws of physics have been consistent everywhere which is a basic premise over which the rest of the physics is based. Everything can be predicted however not very accurately. Every phenomenon has a function to determine probability of each and every outcome. That doesn’t mean we know everything. Things we don’t know makes us unable to be accurate.