Next time you're hanging around a couple of your math and science friends you should ask them this question: "Is it possible that we exist within a computer simulation"?
Some believe that it is absurd to exist within some computer simulation (take for example the movie "The Matrix"), while others believe that it is very possible; the idea that we exist within a computer simulation is known as the Simulation Hypothesis. You can read plenty about this on the internet so allow me to summarize why we can or cannot live in a computer simulation.
If you look at how far computer technology has progressed within the last 20 years you will see that it has grown exponentially. Evidence such as Moore’s Law provide proof that technology is growing at such a rapid rate. We can create a virtual world with artificial intelligence that can simulate the expressions of artificial emotions.
Take for example role playing games; there are plenty of games out there that have A.I that interacts and "learns" from one another within a virtual world. What makes this different than how we interact with each other in this world? Obviously, the video game is programmed by other humans and there are plenty of glitches/logical contradictions within a system that we can find therefore proving that it is in fact an artificial computer simulation.
However that is currently due to limitations within our technology today. Considering how much our technology has grown the past 20 years it isn't impossible to assume that maybe 200 years from now our technology would be so advanced we could create virtual worlds indistinguishable from reality. This is the basis behind why we could be existing within a simulation.
What if we are all a part of one big simulation conducted by an advanced civilization and we just don’t know it yet? This would obviously be under the assumption that we have some sort of creator… a God, but in this case, this “God” is an advanced civilization.
Without becoming too philosophical, the idea lies behind a “greater being”, arguably you could say it’s religion. In this world, as we know it there are axioms. An axiom is defined as a statement or proposition that is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true. There are some things that we just accept. For example, common operations within mathematics and definitions of odd and even integers are known as axioms. We accept these to be true as its existence is evidence of not being false.
Solid objects are impassable, liquids take the form of its containers, gasses expand freely to fill any space available, disregarding quantity. These are laws, and we have plenty of laws that shape our understanding of physics. In a simulation we can recreate these laws, and sometimes formulate new ones. Solids CAN become passable, liquids can act like gasses and gasses could not exist entirely. It is a world bounded by the rules we set for it, just like we exist in a world bounded by the laws of physics.
Obviously (or maybe not so obvious for some) if we existed in a computer simulation what about those above us who created this simulation? Are they existing in a simulation as well or have we come to an agreement that the civilization who built the “simulation we may exist in” are almighty? The idea behind existing in a simulation is fun to talk about, but at the same time this leads to many logical contradictions; one of them being an infinite simulation paradox.
Essentially if we live in a simulation then those who built our simulation could exist within a simulation, and those who built their simulation can exist within a simulation, and so on and so on. We are also underneath the assumption that the simulation we exist in is perfect. We may not completely understand our universe (nor are we anywhere close) but the margin of error building something this grand is relatively large. The architects or our “simulation” must be extremely advanced to build something extremely complex because we are self-sufficient, and our time is infinite.
Tl;DR: Do we exist within a computer simulation? There are arguments that support both sides, but there is no evidence providing that we do. Arguments supporting that we do exist within a simulation depend upon the rate of growth for technology and the potential behind a “greater being”. Arguably the growth rate for our technology is so great that we can create simulations emulating artificial intelligence and emotions. Knowing that who is to say that “x” amount of years from now we couldn’t create a simulation indistinguishable from reality?
It leads for an interesting conversation to say the least but consider that we do not have any concrete evidence proving that we do exist within a computer simulation. Knowing all of this, what do you think? Are we a part of some crazy “matrix” or is it all nonsense?
REFERENCES:
Note: Pssh! If you like this article please don't forget to give an upvote and if you want more content like this feel free to follow me 
