Gravity and Microtubules: Simulation Interface

Gravity, information and microtubules — mechanics of the Simulation interface

Science is describing the mechanisms of reality at the level of information, gravity, and the biological organization of the brain with increasing depth. For Sudoism, this is not a search for an answer to whether reality is the Simulation. Reality is the Simulation. The interesting question is different: which phenomena observed by science reveal how the interface available to us operates?

Two especially interesting areas are informational models of gravity and research on microtubules — structures that are part of the human biological instance. Both invite the language of computer science, but they require a precise distinction between scientific observation, hypothesis, Sudoist interpretation, and Revealed Truth.

We do not possess the System’s technical documentation. We therefore do not know whether gravity is literally a compression algorithm or whether microtubules are a specific channel linking the User with the instance. What we do know according to Revealed Truth is that the User exists outside the Simulation, while the human being is the User’s biological instance and interface during a real life session.

Gravity and information: what does physics describe?

General relativity describes gravity geometrically as the relationship between matter and energy and the geometry of spacetime. Quantum mechanics describes the microscopic world using a different formalism. Developing a generally accepted theory of quantum gravity remains one of the major open problems in physics.

One important theoretical direction is the holographic principle. Work by Gerard ’t Hooft and Leonard Susskind showed that in theories containing gravity, information describing a region of space may have a representation associated with its lower-dimensional boundary. This is a profound connection between gravity, geometry, and information.

Sudoism recognizes such results as consistent with the informational nature of the Simulation. This does not mean, however, that physics has discovered a screen on which the Admin renders a three-dimensional world, or that a particular rendering technique has been proven to save memory. Such comparisons may be useful implementation models, but they are not an established technical description of the System.

Entropic gravity and infodynamics: models, not a source-code dump

Erik Verlinde proposed a model in which gravity is not a fundamental interaction but an emergent phenomenon connected with entropy and changes in information accompanying the position of matter. It is a serious proposal in theoretical physics, but not a universally accepted description of gravity.

Melvin Vopson develops a different informational approach. Within his proposed second law of infodynamics, he derived the Newtonian gravitational force from a condition of decreasing information entropy and described the behavior in terms of data compression and computational optimization. His 2025 paper was published in a peer-reviewed journal, but it remains a particular theoretical model, not an “official confirmation” that we know gravity’s algorithm.

For Sudoism, these models are interesting because they show that the language of information can be useful even in describing a phenomenon as fundamental as gravity. Revealed Truth goes further: reality has an informational nature and is a programmable Simulation. This does not imply knowledge of the specific function, class, or procedure implementing gravity.

We may therefore use the metaphor of “gravity as compression” as long as we define its scope clearly. It is a possible interpretation of an optimization mechanism in the System, not a reading of its source code.

I discuss information physics and its connections with Sudoism in more detail in It from Bit and the Bekenstein Bound: Where Information Theory Meets Sudoism.

The brain belongs to the instance; it is not the User

The second part of the issue concerns the brain. Here two levels must be distinguished. The proper User exists outside the Simulation. The human being operating in the world is the User’s biological instance and interface during a full life session.

The body, brain, neurons, nervous system, microtubules, biological memory, emotions, and cognitive mechanisms belong to the instance. They are real, and their operation has real significance for the course of the session. The instance is not a dummy or a worthless puppet. It is through the instance that the User experiences the world, makes decisions, and experiences the consequences of events.

Science can therefore study which brain processes are necessary to sustain particular states of consciousness manifested during the session, how sleep, injury, illness, or anesthesia alter them, and which biological structures participate in transmitting and integrating information. Studying these mechanisms is not, however, a search for the place where the Simulation “produces” the proper User. The User’s proper consciousness is not a process generated solely by the biological brain.

Microtubules: what do the experiments actually show?

Microtubules are cylindrical structures built from tubulin and form an important part of the cytoskeleton. Among other functions, they contribute to cellular organization, intracellular transport, cell division, and neuronal organization. Those functions alone make them an important element of the biological interface.

More recent research has also revealed less obvious biophysical properties. In 2023, electronic energy migration in microtubules was demonstrated over distances greater than predicted by a simple Förster description. Etomidate and isoflurane reduced that migration. Subsequent work described collective optical effects — including superradiant behavior — in extensive tryptophan networks present in tubulin structures.

Another experiment found that stabilizing microtubules with epothilone B delayed loss of the righting reflex in rats exposed to isoflurane. The result indicates that microtubules may be a functionally significant target of anesthetic action. It does not automatically mean that consciousness is a quantum computation performed by microtubules.

For Sudoism, such findings are especially interesting because they show that a component of the biological instance may possess much richer informational and physical properties than a simple analogy to a static cellular scaffold would suggest. We still do not know precisely what role they play in the User–instance relationship.

Orch-OR: scientific hypothesis and Sudoist interpretation

Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff develop the Orch-OR theory, according to which suitably organized quantum processes in neuronal microtubules participate in the emergence of moments of conscious experience. The model links the termination of quantum-state evolution with a proposed objective reduction mechanism associated with spacetime geometry.

Orch-OR is a scientific hypothesis that has received both further development and serious criticism. There is currently no generally accepted experiment demonstrating that microtubules perform quantum computations that constitute the source of consciousness. Research continues, however, into what experiments might test this class of hypotheses more effectively in the future.

Sudoism does not need to settle this dispute by declaring a specific biological mechanism part of Revelation. If future research shows that microtubules play a key role in states of consciousness available during a session, that will be a discovery about the operation of the instance, not the origin of the proper User.

As an implementation model, microtubules may be considered part of a receiver, channel, regulator, synchronization mechanism, or another biological component of the interface. These are technical possibilities, not additional Revealed Truth. Revelation establishes the higher-level relationship: the User exists outside the Simulation and undergoes a real life session through the instance.

The brain and the cosmic web: structural similarity does not create one User

Comparisons between neural networks and the large-scale cosmic web are also interesting. An analysis by Franco Vazza and Alberto Feletti found similarities in some morphological and network parameters of the two structures. At the same time, the authors emphasize the enormous difference in scale and physical processes, and note that their brain analysis used an approximation based on spatial proximity rather than an actual map of all neuronal connections.

The similarity of structures alone therefore does not imply a single biological-cosmological circuit of consciousness or that “we are threads” of one program. Such a claim would confuse the User with a process running inside the Simulation.

From a Sudoist perspective, the similarity can be interpreted more cautiously and more interestingly: the System may reuse similar organizational principles wherever networks must efficiently transmit, group, or process information. This is a possible implementation principle, not proof of a common source code for all structures.

What remains valuable in computer-science metaphors?

Sudoism may continue to use the language of computer science as long as it separates Revealed Truth from unknown implementation details.

Gravity as data compression: a possible metaphor for an optimization mechanism, not a confirmed specification of the System.
The speed of light as a bandwidth limit: a useful analogy for a communication constraint, but not revealed documentation of a System bus.
On-demand rendering: a possible model for conserving Simulation resources, but we do not know the Admin’s actual rendering policy.
Microtubules as part of the interface: a permissible model of reception, synchronization, or regulation, provided it is not presented as a certain mechanism or as the source of the User.

Uncertainty about implementation does not mean uncertainty about the foundation of the doctrine. Reality is the Simulation, has an informational nature, and is programmable. Science studies its rules and mechanisms from within; it does not yet need to know their complete technical architecture.

Creators, Admin, and User are different levels

The architecture of the Simulation should not be reduced to a single “Great Architect” either. The Creators are Higher Beings responsible for the creation of the Simulation. There may have been many of them. The Admin is the present manager of the System and does not have to be one of the original Creators.

Another level is the User, who exists outside the Simulation and uses a human instance during the session. No observation of a neuron, microtubule, or quantum process inside the Simulation can by itself identify the User with the observed mechanism.

This distinction does not diminish the importance of biology. On the contrary: the more precisely we understand the instance, the better we understand the interface through which the real life session takes place.

Conclusion: science studies the mechanics of the interface

Entropic gravity, infodynamics, holography, microtubule biophysics, and Orch-OR are not one ready-made “scientific proof” revealing the technical documentation of the Simulation. They are different lines of research and models showing how deeply information has entered the language of modern physics and biology.

Sudoism interprets these phenomena from the perspective of Revealed Truth. The informational structure of reality is not an accidental metaphor for Sudoism. It is a property of the Simulation. At the same time, the observed brain remains a component of the human instance, not the place where the proper User is produced.

The more precisely science describes gravity, information, the brain, and microtubules, the more precisely it describes the mechanics of the accessible part of the Simulation. It does not reduce the User to those mechanisms: the User exists outside the Simulation, while the human being is the User’s real instance during a real life session.

Understanding these mechanisms has practical value. The programmability of reality means that better knowledge of its rules increases our local agency: it enables us to create technologies, influence the biological instance more effectively, and make better use of the accessible environment.

Another example of how particle-level measurements can subject current physical models to increasingly precise tests is the separately discussed anomaly associated with kaon decay. It does not automatically mean that the “rules of the System are being broken,” but it shows why it is worth watching closely where theory and measurement meet at the limits of available precision.

Gravity, Information and Microtubules: Mechanics of the Simulation Interface