Category
😹
FunTranscript
00:00 It was the rock band Queen who famously opened probably their most iconic record with "Is
00:05 This the Real Life?
00:06 Is This Just Fantasy?"
00:08 Music fans have debated the meaning behind those words for decades, and actually, they
00:12 could well have nothing to do with the universal nature of reality.
00:15 But in conceiving them, the singer and songwriter Freddie Mercury was at least tapping into
00:19 a universal truth, channeling a philosophical conundrum that has flittered through the minds
00:25 of humankind since we first became self-aware enough to consider it.
00:29 Is anything really real?
00:32 This is Unveiled, and today we're answering the extraordinary question; do we live in
00:36 the real world?
00:39 Do you need the big questions answered?
00:41 Are you constantly curious?
00:43 Then why not subscribe to Unveiled for more clips like this one?
00:46 And ring the bell for more thought-provoking content!
00:52 On the timeline of humanity, the question of reality has always been all around us.
00:57 That's kind of the point.
00:58 It's the fundamental question of our existence.
01:01 Are we living in a tangible, objective world?
01:03 Or is our experience a complex illusion?
01:06 Can we trust our senses, or are they hardwired to deceive?
01:15 In ancient times, we looked mostly to God, or to God's multiple, to try to explain
01:19 what we couldn't understand.
01:21 We developed stories and traditions, legend and myth, all in some way seeking to get a
01:26 grip on our lives.
01:27 In ancient Greece and Rome especially, records show that many of the most influential philosophers
01:32 - such as Socrates and Plato - were also endlessly interested in truly understanding what life
01:38 was.
01:39 What's the point of living?
01:41 And how is reality intrinsically formed?
01:43 By the time of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, there were multiple theories erupting all
01:47 over the world map.
01:49 Human beings have always been naturally inquisitive, but in just the last few hundred years, we've
01:54 really outdone ourselves - all leading up to now, a moment in time when almost everyone
01:59 alive has likely at one stage asked themselves questions like "why am I here?" and "how
02:05 do I know that what's happening really is what's happening?"
02:09 In the modern era, the pursuit of science has added new dimensions to this age-old debate.
02:14 And today, we can explore it via things like simulation theory, and through other Matrix-like
02:19 scenarios.
02:20 We can also consider the implications of a multiverse, the potential influence of artificial
02:25 intelligence, and even the possible existence of an extraterrestrial edge.
02:29 All have a role to play as we continually try to prove what's real.
02:33 So, let's get into it.
02:39 First up, simulation theory - which proposes that reality is in fact a computer-generated
02:44 sim.
02:45 It's an intriguing concept that actually has roots in ancient ideas, but it gained
02:49 prominence in modern times largely through the work of the Swedish philosopher and Oxford
02:54 professor Nick Bostrom.
02:55 Bostrom's seminal 2003 paper, "Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?"
03:00 suggests that, if a technologically advanced civilization can create realistic sims of
03:05 their ancestors - a prediction that many models do make - then the odds of us existing in
03:10 a base reality are extremely slim.
03:13 Instead, we're much more likely to be populating one such ancestor sim.
03:18 No matter how intelligent and capable of free will we believe ourselves to be, all of that
03:22 would in fact be false, or an illusion.
03:25 Elon Musk is a vocal advocate of simulation theory.
03:28 He argues, for instance, that, given the exponential growth of video game technology, it's now
03:33 certainly plausible that advanced enough civilizations would create simmed worlds indistinguishable
03:38 from reality.
03:40 The renowned astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson has also gone on record emphasising
03:45 the potential for all of this to be a simulated construct.
03:48 The chances for which Tyson has before claimed could be as much as 50/50.
03:52 50% likely we're living authentic lives, 50% likely that everything we've ever known
03:58 is artificially dreamt up and rendered by some higher power.
04:01 So, if our reality were a sim, then what would that mean for us?
04:05 It's the first chance of many that we have to properly question the true nature of what
04:10 we know.
04:11 On the one hand, would it matter if we were simulated?
04:14 Some argue, not really… but on the other, could our lives ever hold the same significance
04:19 if we knew that we were mere lines of code?
04:22 Importantly, sim theory is a speculative hypothesis lacking concrete evidence.
04:27 It isn't a proven fact.
04:29 But it sure does make you think.
04:31 In a broader sense, the Matrix has come to be something of a catch-all term for any proposed
04:35 social structure that takes us out of this dimension and into another.
04:40 Of course, the idea is most closely associated with the 1999 cyberpunk sci-fi classic, The
04:45 Matrix, which depicts a once-unsuspecting Neo as he has the veil of reality removed
04:51 to learn the truth.
04:53 Across all manner of blockbusting scenes and bullet-dodging special effects, Neo goes from
04:58 being essentially an extra in what he used to think was real life, to very much the main
05:03 character in a higher dimension.
05:05 But could Neo's story ever actually happen?
05:08 His advancements in artificial intelligence certainly have fuelled speculation about the
05:12 potential emergence of a Matrix-like reality.
05:15 As AI becomes more sophisticated, the prospect of an intricate, all-encompassing digital
05:20 realm somehow managed by intelligent machines seemingly becomes less and less like science
05:25 fiction.
05:26 And perhaps it wouldn't need to be a straight-up ancestor sim, either.
05:30 With growing talk around digital immortality, could it actually be that we're all actually
05:35 housed just on a server somewhere?
05:37 In this version of reality, it's like we've already died… it's just that we don't
05:41 know it.
05:42 But before our deaths, we all lived in a civilization advanced enough to know how to convert our
05:47 essence into something that could be digitally saved.
05:50 And if that were the case, then it would of course make sense to remove the parts of our
05:54 former selves that knew about digital immortality… because that knowledge could easily trigger
05:59 madness in the here and now.
06:00 Again, it's not something that's commonly said to be true - there is no proof of the
06:04 Matrix.
06:05 But versions of it do form the basis for a growing number of hypothetical ideas.
06:10 And occasionally, notions of a higher version of ourselves have bled into testimonies given
06:15 by those who suffer a near-death or out-of-body experience.
06:19 In general, the Matrix is a concept that explores the boundaries between human and machine consciousness,
06:25 blurring the lines of what we perceive as real.
06:27 And it could be becoming more and more relevant with every passing year and AI tech innovation.
06:33 And finally, and as with many an alt-model for how the universe works, some believe that
06:38 we have to consider the potential for alien intelligence guiding the way.
06:42 It adds another layer to the mystery, but could also solve many of the seeming problems.
06:47 The Zoo Hypothesis famously suggests that life on Earth is constantly watched by an
06:51 unknown alien group, pitching us like caged animals on show at the zoo.
06:57 The Lab Hypothesis builds on that by suggesting that those aliens are also actively experimenting
07:02 on us, turning the zoo into something more like a planet-sized petri dish.
07:06 Crucially, though, both would serve to solve some of the mysteries of the universe.
07:11 With the fine-tuning problem, it's now the case that reality works so well for us because
07:16 it's custom-built by a higher hand.
07:18 With the Fermi Paradox, we now know why we haven't discovered any aliens yet… because
07:23 our extraterrestrial overseers would never enter our enclosure.
07:27 For fear of scuppering the experiment, or just because it would be dangerous for them.
07:31 Even the apparent unknowableness of the Oort Cloud could even make some sense if it were
07:35 actually placed there by a superior force to double up as something like the viewing
07:40 windows in a reptile house.
07:42 Clearly, all of the above, and especially the alien option, are highly speculative.
07:48 Simulation theory, the Matrix, AI potential, and ET possibilities.
07:52 None are supported by empirical evidence.
07:54 However, all do form the basis for contemporary answers to the question of what's real.
08:00 On top of that, all could in some way be grouped together under the broader concept of the
08:05 multiverse.
08:06 If ancestor sims exist on a massive server somewhere, then all of those individual programs
08:11 essentially form a multiverse.
08:14 If digital immortality is viable, then the universe has far more layers than we typically
08:18 give it credit for.
08:20 If there's alien life that's sophisticated enough to create an entire star system for
08:25 us, then is it so difficult to imagine the wider bubble universes that are key to the
08:29 inflationary multiverse model?
08:32 For now, the scene is set for us to at least reconsider everything we know… and the search
08:37 is on to find the proof that would turn these hypothetical ideas into genuinely valid scientific
08:43 breakthroughs.
08:47 We know that sometimes things happen in our everyday lives that just can't be explained.
08:52 The most widely cited example is probably déjà vu; that eerie feeling you get whenever
08:57 it feels as though you've been somewhere or seen something before.
09:01 It's a common phenomenon.
09:03 But every so often there are examples of something much more than déjà vu; of bizarre theories
09:09 and experiences that ultimately cause those who encounter them to question their very
09:14 existence.
09:17 We'll start with probably the most famous thought experiment about the nature of reality
09:24 - Schrodinger's Cat.
09:25 It's a tale as old as time in terms of quantum science.
09:29 But it crops up so often because it's come to be a vital demonstration of exactly how
09:33 weird and unknown the world is.
09:36 It was devised by the Austrian physicist Erwin Schrodinger in 1935.
09:40 Legend says the first time it was ever voiced was during a (probably pretty complicated)
09:45 conversation between Schrodinger and one Albert Einstein.
09:49 So how does it work?
09:50 Imagine you have a cat inside a sealed box.
09:53 Along with the cat, there's a vial of poison and a radioactive atom.
09:57 Schrodinger's box is set up in such a way that the atom can decay, releasing the poison
10:01 and killing the cat… or it can remain stable, leaving the cat safe, well, and still alive.
10:07 The fate of the cat is tied to the behaviour of the atom.
10:09 But here's the twist.
10:11 Until we open the box and observe the cat, quantum mechanics says that that fate is uncertain.
10:16 In the quantum world, things can exist in multiple states simultaneously, thanks to
10:21 superposition.
10:22 So, before we open the box, Schrodinger's cat is both alive and dead at the same time.
10:28 So the theory goes.
10:29 In general, it challenges our common-sense understanding of reality.
10:34 Because in every day, something is either one thing or another, not both.
10:38 Here though, what's important is that the atom's decay is a truly random process,
10:43 and we can't predict exactly when it will happen.
10:46 Therefore, again, until we open the box and check, the atom exists in a superposition
10:50 of both decayed and undecayed states.
10:53 This then extends to the entire system, i.e. everything inside the closed box, including
10:58 the cat, whose life literally depends on it.
11:01 Ultimately, though, this isn't about cats.
11:03 It's about the fundamental nature of particles at the quantum level.
11:06 And it's an idea that has since been developed, not least by the winners of the Nobel Prize
11:11 for Physics in 2022.
11:13 Alain Aspay, John F. Klauser, and Anton Zeilinger.
11:17 In separate studies, and over a period of around fifty years, they all found proof that
11:22 Schrodinger was right, and that on the quantum level, particles are inevitably linked.
11:27 One possible interpretation is that it could imply that actually nothing is real until
11:32 it's observed, which, from an individual point of view, grants every single one of
11:36 us with a weirdly massive amount of power.
11:44 But next, let's take a closer look at something that seemingly isn't an imagined construct
11:49 first and foremost - our physical bodies.
11:53 Because according to one tech story, at least, we may only need to look inside ourselves
11:58 to find evidence of the unrealness of everything.
12:01 In August 2017, some bizarre headlines made the rounds, with reports that scientists had
12:07 managed to hack into a computer using DNA.
12:11 And actually, that claim wasn't hyperbole - it was true.
12:14 The study in question was conducted by a team at the University of Washington in America.
12:19 It set out to investigate "computer security, privacy, and DNA sequencing" and ultimately
12:25 found, reportedly for the first time, that DNA could be used to compromise computing
12:31 systems.
12:32 Now, the truth here is perhaps a little less concerning than you might immediately imagine.
12:36 Through a series of tests, the team were essentially able to show that the patterns found in DNA
12:42 could be converted into malicious code, which then could be transferred into digital systems
12:47 - especially as DNA research involves many computational elements.
12:51 However, at this stage, there's no real suggestion that a person could ever simply
12:55 use their own biology to hack into anyone else's private stuff.
12:59 So, you needn't worry about that.
13:01 The study is more to show that various DNA sequencing techniques and softwares are vulnerable
13:07 - a potentially big problem given that DNA data is a) widely shared and b) has become
13:13 exponentially cheaper to obtain in recent years.
13:16 But regardless of whether or not DNA hacks will trigger some kind of cyber-apocalypse,
13:21 why is it relevant to the question of the world not being real?
13:24 Well, one takeaway from the study is more simply that it's a direct representation
13:28 of exactly how programmed we are.
13:32 Everything about us really can be diluted down into a digital code, suggesting that,
13:37 with the right know-how, we really could all be reduced into a digital file.
13:41 It's not just science fiction anymore; it's an uncomfortable fact.
13:45 And so, while on some level the world is still real, it's not in any way that we currently
13:50 grasp it.
13:51 While Schrodinger's cat hints that realness only happens when we observe it, the concept
13:55 of DNA as a digital virus shows that even the most fundamental building blocks of us
14:01 can be rearranged into something that's totally different.
14:04 Our physical selves can easily be converted.
14:07 You thought you were only your body, but actually, you're potentially a non-physical entity
14:12 as well.
14:14 Naturally, and without any far-future modifications necessary.
14:18 And that's a little disturbing.
14:20 Next though, and not every apparent instance of the code of life revealing itself is quite
14:24 so unsettling, social media is awash with snapshots of seeming "glitches in the matrix".
14:31 This might be a photograph of strangers sitting next to each other on the subway, but all
14:35 are wearing the same clothes.
14:37 Or it could be a video of two people walking alongside each other in perfect sync, despite
14:42 being wholly unaware that their actions are being copied.
14:45 As bizarre as these moments are, however, they can almost always be written off as plain
14:49 coincidence.
14:51 With clothing, for example, it's perhaps not so surprising that any two or more people
14:55 would choose to wear a couple of the same items.
14:58 However, sometimes the coincidences do seem to go further, and American history serves
15:03 up two of the best.
15:05 First, the birth and death of the writer Mark Twain.
15:09 He was born in November 1835.
15:11 He died in April 1910.
15:13 However, what's interesting about those dates is that both double up as rare moments in
15:18 time when the elusive Halley's Comet appeared in the skies of Earth.
15:22 Twain was born when the comet could still be seen, two weeks after its closest approach.
15:27 And he died just one day after its next closest approach, 74 years later.
15:32 The author is even said to have predicted his own passing, as he's quoted for telling,
15:37 "The Almighty has said no doubt.
15:39 Now here are these two unaccountable freaks.
15:42 They came in together, they must go out together."
15:45 For many, the scale of this coincidence is enough to hugely question the authenticity
15:49 of what's real.
15:51 Finally, though, and this time, to the deaths of two American presidents, Thomas Jefferson
15:56 and John Adams.
15:58 The pair died on the same day in 1826, July 4th, aka the 50th anniversary of American
16:05 independence.
16:06 You might think that that in itself would be coincidence enough, but it's said that
16:10 both passings were even more closely linked.
16:13 Throughout their lives, Jefferson and Adams were friends, and then rivals, and then friends
16:18 again.
16:19 They were founding fathers of the USA, before political clashes drove them apart and into
16:23 opposite parties.
16:25 Years later, they reconciled and remained close until their deaths.
16:29 It's said that during his last words, Adams even remarked upon how Jefferson had survived
16:35 him.
16:36 Unbeknownst to Adams, Jefferson had actually died a couple of hours beforehand.
16:41 For some, it's as though their lives were entwined.
16:44 In modern times, we might even say that they were… entangled.
16:47 So could this have been a real-world instance of something like Schrodinger's Cat in action,
16:52 extrapolated all the way up to the top of US politics?
16:55 Could Mark Twain's coming and going represent more than just a peculiarity?
17:00 Might the contemporary realisation that DNA is hackable offer some kind of explanation
17:06 for when things happen in life that are otherwise unexplainable?
17:09 Clearly, none of this serves to prove the world isn't real, but it does leave cause
17:14 to wonder… can you ever really trust reality?
17:19 So, how much of this world do you think is genuine?
17:25 Are there parts of your life that sometimes feel not quite right?
17:28 Over the years, across centuries of thought, debate, false dawns and seeming breakthroughs,
17:34 the world's greatest minds have been bent toward answering life's biggest questions
17:38 such as these.
17:40 So much so, we now have a range of "philosophies" that offer up answers.
17:44 Which do you think is the one that truly gets to the heart of the matter?
17:51 Broadly, we know that reality - that which we perceive as the tangible and unquestionable
17:58 fabric of our existence - can be a disconcerting concept when examined closely.
18:04 Even the act of questioning the nature of stuff can evoke a sense of unease in many,
18:09 tapping into primal fears around a loss of control and unsettling the foundations upon
18:14 which we usually live.
18:15 Here, we're going to take a closer look at the real-world approaches that could offer
18:20 some solutions, travelling the realms of philosophy, probing the intricacies of the mind-body
18:25 problem and pitching it all alongside the notion that there's probably more we don't
18:30 know than do.
18:36 First off, why is it so discomforting to question what's real anyway?
18:40 The fear of the unknown, coupled with existential dread, can trigger a variety of phobias such
18:46 as basaphobia - the fear of falling; agoraphobia - the fear of open spaces; or, more specifically,
18:54 solipsism syndrome - the fear of the external world being an illusion.
18:59 All underscore the profound impact that our perceptions have on our psychological well-being.
19:04 That word, "perception", is going to be key.
19:07 But clearly, whenever we do cast our lives in doubt, we should also ensure that we never
19:12 dwell for too long.
19:14 That said, thinking about thinking is also pretty fun.
19:18 So, let's kick off with idealism.
19:20 It posits that reality is fundamentally mental or immaterial.
19:24 In this worldview, everything exists within the mind or consciousness.
19:29 The idealist enigma is wrapped up in a famous philosophical problem.
19:33 If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does that tree make a sound?
19:39 While some say yes, others say no.
19:42 The sound, like all perceptions, is dependent on an observer.
19:46 Real only happens when we perceive it - a mantra that might also be applied to Schrodinger's
19:51 cat.
19:52 On the other side of the coin, materialism asserts another reality - one that's entirely
19:57 composed of physical matter.
20:00 Materialists discount the existence of any non-material or supernatural entities.
20:05 Probably the most well-known encapsulation of this perspective comes from the astrophysicist
20:09 Carl Sagan.
20:11 He famously said that "the cosmos is within us.
20:14 We are made of star stuff", fully emphasising the interconnectedness of all physical matter.
20:21 For materialists, it's probably true that if the tree falls, it does make a sound - regardless
20:26 of who is or isn't there.
20:28 There are a range of midpoints between idealism and materialism, though.
20:33 Dualism separates reality into two distinct substances, usually mind and matter.
20:39 The mind-body problem - largely born out of the dualistic POV - explores the relationship
20:45 between the mental and physical aspects of existence.
20:49 In some ways, it's a much more complex depiction of what's really real, and therefore it leaves
20:54 a lot more room for interpretation.
20:56 However, the seeming split does at least mean dualists are confident that their own thoughts
21:01 are to be trusted.
21:03 René Descartes is an influential voice here.
21:05 As a key figure in the Enlightenment, he wrote "cogito ergo sum" - "I think, therefore
21:11 I am" - a line now widely used to highlight the certainty of mental existence, if nothing
21:17 else.
21:18 With all of this in mind, then, the question remains… can you trust reality?
21:22 In a world where the simulation hypothesis suggests that our entire existence might be
21:27 a complex, computer-generated construct, and where multiverse theories propose the coexistence
21:32 of infinite realities and timelines, it's sure difficult to be certain these days.
21:37 But this uncertainty ultimately boils down to the nature of perception.
21:42 The fact is that our perception of reality is inevitably, inescapably, inherently subjective.
21:48 It's wholly shaped by sensory input and cognitive processes, which means that no one's
21:54 perception is the same as anyone else's.
21:56 On a small scale, it means that no two people will watch this video in quite the same way…
22:01 or taste a cake, or listen to a piece of music.
22:04 But on larger scales, it means that no two people comprehend life in quite the same way,
22:09 visualise existence, or appreciate the universe.
22:13 In general, sensory experiences are a pretty fragile foundation for truth… but they're
22:19 also all we have.
22:21 If even our senses are sketchy and up for interpretation, then is there anything else
22:26 we could look to for a firmer understanding?
22:28 Ultimately, no, there isn't.
22:30 Aside from our senses, our memories are probably the most important sources we have to shape
22:36 our understanding of what's real.
22:37 The certainty of memory, however, is famously fallible.
22:41 In 1974, a key study into eyewitness testimony and leading questions was carried out by the
22:47 psychologists Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer.
22:51 In it, participants watched a video of a car accident, and were then asked about the speed
22:56 of the cars using different forms of a question.
22:59 Some were questioned using the word "smashed", while others were asked using words like "hit"
23:05 or "contacted".
23:06 Results showed that the choice of words significantly influenced participants' estimates of the
23:11 speed of the cars.
23:13 Those who heard the word "smashed" gave higher speed estimates compared to other groups.
23:18 Loftus and Palmer had demonstrated how easily memory could be distorted.
23:22 Elsewhere, and more than forty years earlier, there was the "War of the Ghosts" study,
23:27 conducted by Sir Frederick Bartlett.
23:30 Participants were asked to read and then recall, at different intervals over time, a Native
23:34 American folktale called "War of the Ghosts".
23:38 Results here showed that people tended to distort the story to fit with their existing
23:42 schemas and cultural expectations, which in themselves may have shifted over time, as
23:47 well.
23:48 Information in the story that was inconsistent with a participant's cultural background
23:53 was often omitted or changed, showing how memory is clearly reconstructive.
24:00 Finally, and in the mid-nineties, researchers Henry L. Roediger III and Kathleen McDermott
24:09 conducted an experiment to show that people can easily remember things that not only happened
24:14 differently, but in fact never happened at all.
24:17 In their study, participants were presented with lists of words related to a critical
24:21 word that actually didn't appear in the list.
24:24 For example, they might see the words "sleep", "rest", "dream", etc. while the critical
24:29 word (i.e. "bed") is absent.
24:32 Later, though, around half of the participants falsely remembered or recognized the critical
24:37 word that was not presented.
24:39 This revealed that false memories could be made based purely on association, or even
24:44 a subconscious kind of "guesswork".
24:46 We know, then, that memory can be significantly influenced by external factors.
24:51 We also know that even the memories that are correct are formed mostly by our sensory experiences,
24:57 which are entirely subjective to us.
25:00 Going one step even further, the wider philosophies about thought, reality, memory, about everything,
25:07 are ultimately subject to the same stumbling blocks.
25:10 We all hear, interpret and remember them differently.
25:13 We're all prone to adjusting them to fit into whatever it is we already know.
25:18 With everything considered, it's perhaps little wonder that many would rather describe
25:22 their worldview as "philosophical scepticism".
25:26 Philosophical sceptics cast doubt on our ability to know anything with absolute certainty.
25:31 From Descartes' methodological musings on the nature of the mind, to Loftus and Palmer's
25:35 seeming proof that we never remember anything correctly, the conclusion here is that we
25:40 simply cannot trust our perceptions.
25:43 Of all of the ideas we've covered, which do you most closely associate with?
25:48 Are you an idealist or a materialist?
25:51 A dualist or a sceptic?
25:53 Have you ever remembered something very differently to someone else?
25:57 Are you happy with your acquired sensory knowledge, or are you suspicious that the things you
26:02 think you know are wrong?
26:04 As always, air your views in the comments.
26:07 Clearly, it's a labyrinth, but it also needn't be a minefield.
26:12 Whenever we think deeply about who we really are, it can lead to a nasty helping of existential
26:17 despair.
26:18 However, if we embrace the uncertainty rather than fear it, then actually it has the potential
26:24 to be a wondrous journey.
26:25 Again, thinking about thinking can be fun.
26:29 As to whether or not you can trust reality, there's perhaps no conclusive answer.
26:34 The solution, it seems, is an infinite journey rather than a final destination.
26:40 Over the course of this video, we've covered a lot, and if you've made it this far, then
26:45 your head may well be ringing.
26:47 Again, be sure to let us know what you think about all the topics we've discussed in the
26:51 comments.
26:53 With any luck, we can kickstart some eye-opening debates.
26:56 And if you have any suggestions for our future documentaries, then be sure to let us know.
27:01 For now, we've moved from simulation theory to the Matrix, with AI and aliens along the
27:06 way.
27:07 We've discorded the multiverse, opened the box on Schrodinger's cat, hacked into our
27:12 own DNA, and reviewed some of history's greatest and strangest coincidences.
27:17 We've also dived headfirst into philosophy, and came up for air with maybe even more questions
27:22 than ever before.
27:24 But when you're dealing with the true nature of reality at the most fundamental levels,
27:28 that is to be expected.
27:29 [MUSIC]
27:39 Over the course of this episode, you may have found yourself picturing higher dimensions
28:05 and parallel worlds.
28:07 You may have been reminded of the massiveness, but also potential insignificance, of our
28:12 universe.
28:13 But one thing that's clear is that the uncertainty surrounding the nature of reality doesn't
28:18 diminish the value of our experiences.
28:21 Whether we live in a base reality, a simulated construct, a parallel world… even if we
28:27 live on a speck of dust on the fingertip of a hyper-advanced being on a plane that's
28:32 totally inconceivable for us, our emotions, relationships, and personal growth remain
28:38 inherently meaningful.
28:40 They are what make us human.
28:42 Do we live in the real world?
28:44 On one level, we definitely do.
28:46 On another, it's very much unknown.
28:49 The lines are drawn between perception and reality, material and mystical, artificial
28:54 and authentic, possible and impossible, but the edges are blurred.
28:59 And that's all part of the richness and mystery of life.
29:04 What do you think?
29:05 Is there anything we missed?
29:06 Let us know in the comments, check out these other clips from Unveiled, and make sure you
29:10 subscribe and ring the bell for our latest content.