Let's be clear: the idea of living in a simulation has always had an irresistible allure. Philosophers, physicists, even Elon Musk have built theories and made billion-dollar bets on it. But Frank Vazza, a researcher at the University of Bologna specializing in astrophysical simulations, decided to do the math with pen and paper. And the math, unfortunately for Matrix fans, doesn't add up.
His study, published Frontiers in Physics, shows that the simulation hypothesis is not only improbable: it is physically impossible. The reason? A question of energy, information and thermodynamics. Ingredients that, put together, shatter the digital dream.
The digital dream collides with numbers
The simulation hypothesis was born in 2003 from the brilliant mind of the philosopher Nick bostrom of the University of Oxford. His tripartite theory suggested that at least one of these statements must be true: Either humanity becomes extinct before reaching advanced computational capabilities, or advanced civilizations choose not to create simulations, or we almost certainly live in a simulation. The reasoning seemed logical: if a civilization can create millions of simulations, statistically it is more likely to be inside one of them than in the original reality.
But Vazza did what was missing: the energy calculations. The holographic principle, one of the most profound discoveries in modern physics, establishes that The information contained in a volume of space is proportional to its surface area, not to its volume. Think of black holes: all the information they contain is “written” on the surface of their event horizon, as if the universe were a sort of three-dimensional hologram projected from a two-dimensional surface.
Simulation Hypothesis: The Missing Energy
Here's where the simulation hypothesis falls flat. Vazza calculated how much energy would be needed to encode all the information needed to simulate even just the Earth at the Planck scale (the smallest measurable scale in physics). The result is astonishing: It would require energy equivalent to converting all the mass contained in a globular cluster of about 100.000 stars into energy..
But it gets worse. If we wanted to simulate the entire observable universe, the amount of energy required would exceed that contained in the universe itself. It's like trying to fill a bottle of water using water from the same bottle: mathematically and physically impossible.
Black Holes as Cosmic Computers
Vazza's research uses black holes as an extreme example of computational power. These cosmic monsters represent the most efficient computer theoretically possible: their operating temperature It can reach 10 million Kelvin in accretion disks, the maximum physically achievable. Yet even using a black hole as a processor, it would take millions of years to calculate just one second of an Earth simulation.
The fundamental problem lies in the second law of thermodynamics and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Creating and deleting information costs energy, and simulations must constantly transform information. Every AND operation between two bits, every calculation, every state transition requires an expenditure of energy that accumulates to astronomical proportions.
The simulation hypothesis and quantum computers
Someone might object: but what about quantum computers? Again, Vazza has a simple answer: Energy principles apply equally to quantum and classical computers. Quantum mechanics offers no magic shortcuts to bypass the fundamental laws of thermodynamics. Qubits must still follow the rules of physical information.
As we have discussed in previous articles, there are alternative theories that see the universe itself as a sort of quantum computer, but these do not support the hypothesis of a simulation artificially created by another civilization. Goodbye fantastic dreams, in short. Unless…
The only option left
Vazza allows only one possibility for the simulation hypothesis: that our simulators live in a universe with completely different physical laws than ours. A universe where thermodynamics works differently, where information has properties we don't understand, where the energy limits we know don't apply.
But at that point, we are talking about something so different from our physics that the hypothesis loses all practical meaning. It is like saying that we could be simulated by a civilization of magical unicorns: technically unprovable as false, but scientifically irrelevant.
Reality wins over fantasy
Vazza's work is a turning point in the debate on the simulation hypothesis. It is no longer a question of philosophical speculations or probabilistic calculations, but of fundamental physical limits that no technology, however advanced, can surpass. The physics of information It's relentless: simulating requires energy, and the energy available in the universe simply isn't enough.
In other words, the next time I look at my morning coffee and wonder if it’s real (especially when it sucks), I can resign myself. Not only is it real, but physics guarantees that it couldn’t be otherwise. The universe, for all its flaws and wonders, is 100% real. And maybe that’s what makes it so amazing after all. The universe, I say. Coffee is crap.
