How Reality Ends: An Exploration of the Brain-Computer Interface

Back in the ancient most primordial universe a period of inflation is predicted to have occurred. In the span of 10e-32 seconds our observable universe went from well under the size of an atom to roughly the size of a grapefruit. During this stage the universe was perfectly homogeneous and isotropic, and since the rate of inflation was precisely uniform, every moment in time was indistinguishable from each other. After this stage, previously empty space gave way to the formation of particles, and an asymmetric arrow of time emerged which we recognize now many billions of years later. There is much to explore in this story, but for today’s discussion we will focus on one lesson: the universe is capable of sudden, strongly irreversible processes which cannot be undone. As soon as the arrow of time emerged there was no possibility of the universe going back, it was a permanent change.

Let’s engage in a thought experiment that is sure to be familiar to anyone with even a glancing exposure to modern media. Imagine a technology that is capable of interfacing with the human brain. Perhaps this emerges gradually, at first only condoned as a medical treatment for whom the potential benefits justify the risks. After one or two decades of testing and development, a commercially available device is then capable of basic transformations, such as providing slight auditory stimulation or visual augmentation. However, it is clear where the consumer demand is: a perfect brain-computer interface (BCI). The perfect BCI is capable of producing at least the entire range of electrical stimulations to the brain that your natural senses can produce, and can read every outgoing signal to your muscles (limb movements, eye movements, breathing, etc.) With this technology, any experience that you could have naturally can be simulated, and even those which could not occur naturally. For example, it could replicate the experience of walking on mars, with your every step and movement perfectly simulated.

Science fiction escapades aside, let us now observe what happens immediately upon activation of this BCI. Why is it of particular importance that the BCI can simulate every experience you can have naturally? If this were the case, then the BCI would be capable of perfectly mimicking the experience of removing or otherwise deactivating the BCI. Consider this from the perspective of the observer who has activated the BCI. From that very instant onwards a strongly irreversible process has occurred which cannot ever be undone. Any conception of whether the user is experiencing something simulated by the BCI or naturally sensed cannot be deduced. There is no experiment the user could perform to verify whether the BCI is active, no possible way for the user to know they are truly interacting with the device if they try to remove it, no way for the user to interact with others with any certainty that it is actually occurring. And, most importantly, this is precisely permanent. Even if other people without a BCI tried to help this individual they would be simply incapable, for there is absolutely nothing they could do to truly prove to them that they are not simulated.

Could this process ever be avoided? Is it possible to build a BCI that is near-perfect, for example, and capable of simulating every experience except for a few select experiences (might I suggest the spinning of a top) so the user can always verify whether the BCI is active or not? This would require full faith that there was no loophole, or that the algorithm responsible for simulating the experiences could not augment itself to bypass this restriction. And of course, if a bypass did occur, there would be no possible way to prove it one way or another. The results only get more dire if we consider advancements in memory augmentation. No matter how you paint it, from the moment of activation, reality as we know it now has ended - it simply cannot be retrieved.

Recall that the BCI has only gradually increased in power. Would it be possible to pinpoint an exact time, or an exact development, where the reality breakage occurs? For example, if the BCI was quite grainy with lag in processing the user’s inputs it would be very simple to discern whether you were experiencing reality or not. However, I propose that there is no instant where we can definitely say a line has been crossed. And, if that is the case, perhaps there is no line. After all, what could I possibly do right now to prove to you that this isn’t already simulated?

Perhaps the situation with the BCI is not as dramatic as I have made it out to be - especially if we are eased into this technology over several decades. Reality as we know it now would not actually be lost; it would be more accurate to view it as absorbed into a far larger reality. Anything you can experience now can still be experienced, but just as you cannot say an experience on a particular part of Earth is more real than any other, so too is every experience the BCI simulates philosophically and logically just as real as any other. The universe may have undergone an irreversible process at one point, but this difference is even more grand, it is an irreversible process for consciousness itself. It is difficult to see the explosion of reality to a scale where our current conception of it is but an infinitesimal component as anything but the explosion of consciousness itself.

Reigning the discussion back in, there is an important point that must be mentioned. Although the far-out implications of a technology such as this are absolutely paramount, there are sure to be many smaller bridges that we cross as we get there. It is easy to say that equanimity, diversity, and inclusivity are top priorities, but what does that actually look like in practice? What viewpoints are acceptable, and what aren’t? This is perhaps the most dangerous question that could be posed. What would it look like if a democratic form of viewpoint determination was made, as society largely utilizes today, wherein those modes of life which are deemed undesirable are shunned and made to disappear as much as possible (e.g. violent acts)? It is easy to see that this is more than a slippery slope, and is more like an oil-laden cliff edge in a downpour.