What does the brain in a vat and double slit experiments illustrate?

In 1981, scientists came up with an interesting hypothetical brain in a vat. After cutting the brain from the body, put it in a nutrient solution that can keep the brain active, connect the nerve endings of the brain to the computer, and deliver the computer programs and ** to the brain, so that it can maintain a normal illusion, as if its body and everything around it still exists. You can even take a fragment of a memory from your brain.

This conjecture may seem ridiculous to us today, but the most basic question of this hypothesis is, how do you make sure that you are not in this predicament? There is also a record in Chinese history that is very similar to the brain in the jar, that is, the ancient Chinese Zhuang Zhou Mengdie. Zhuang Zhou dreamed that he had become a butterfly, and felt very free, but he forgot that he was Zhuang Zhou, and only found out his identity after waking up.

It is similar to the brain in a vat proposed by scientists in 1981. For us now, the conduct of this experiment is very unrealistic, we need very sophisticated instruments to support the whole experiment, and at the same time, we also need to obtain a living brain, which involves ethics, so we just know that this experiment has been a hypothesis since it was proposed, and has not been put into practice.

Before this experiment appeared, there was also a very famous double-slit experiment in the scientific community. In layman's terms, when conducting an experiment, scientists may observe one result, and when recording with an instrument, it is another result, and in the process of development, the double-slit experiment has too many uncertainties.

On the surface, there is no correlation between these two experiments, but if we analyze them at the cosmic level, whether it is the brain in a vat or the double-slit experiment, it seems to prove to us that the space we exist in may not be real at all, but a virtual space. The virtual space is far larger than the world we actually see, and on the basis of this theory, scientists have also continued to conduct in-depth research and found that the probability that the world around us is real is only one in a billion or even smaller.

In fact, these two experiments were carried out on the basis of assumptions, especially the brain in the jar has not been actually experimented. Perhaps in the future, with the continuous development of science and technology, driven by curiosity, we will continue to open up new ideas for our research, and one day in the future we can see the whole universe, draw a perfect end to these two experiments, and give a perfect answer to the world we live in now.

From the brain in the vat to the double-slit experiment, the question is raised, are humans real?

In 1981, the American scientist Putnam proposed a famous hypothesis - a brain in a vat. He believes that if a person's brain is taken out in its entirety and then placed in a special nutrient solution, and connected to a computer to communicate sensory information to it through special programs, it may be possible to create the illusion that the brain can still survive and move.

This sounds incredible, as each step of the experiment requires very sophisticated instrumentation and ethical implications, so the experiment has always been hypothetical.

At the same time, one can't help but think that perhaps we are the brains that live in the nutrient solution, and that everything we perceive is programmed as simple as reading a text, and that there are more advanced civilizations that control us beyond the universe as understood by humans. This kind of question about the relationship between the virtual and the real has been raised thousands of years ago, and Zhuang Zhou Mengdie is a classic example.

Prior to this, there was a well-known double-slit experiment in the scientific community, which was one result when scientists observed it, and another when it was recorded with an instrument and not observed.

At a time when quantum mechanics is constantly evolving, scientists believe that this is the uncertainty of the universe, and that there may be a broader space beyond the universe we observe and study, where everything is disordered and determined by human existence.

There is a view that both the brain in a vat and the double-slit experiment seem to prove to people that the space we exist in is not necessarily real, and that the possibility of human beings living in virtual space is actually far greater than the real world.

On this basis, there are also scientists who have delved into this**, if everything around us is real, then this possibility is only one in a billion, even if Einstein thought that God would not roll the dice, he could not change this number.

Of course, people shouldn't despair, because our technology is always evolving, and imagination gives us more new ideas. Perhaps one day in the future, we will be able to have more powerful technical support to get a glimpse of the whole universe and bring an accurate answer to all questions.

To sum up, the questions about the virtual and the real are still unsolved, people are in awe of the complex universe, curious about everything unknown, quantum mechanics is still evolving, and one day we will unravel its mysteries.

Human beings are real, I think, therefore I am. Whether it's a brain in a jar, or a double-slit experiment. It may not be real now, but there is a process of thinking about the problem and imagining the problem. We have an ego and therefore we are real.

Light is invisible, otherwise space would not be dark. There are two kinds of darkness, one is that there is light and there is darkness. What we see is light shining on things, objects, not light and light is invisible.

Since we have this kind of thinking, it already means that we are real, but this reality is only relative to us living on the earth, at least we are real here, and not necessarily in the eyes of the other world.