Name: 霍金的大設計:生命的意義 (Stephen Hawking's: Grand Design - The Meaning of Life / Gran Diseño - Significado de la Vida)
Uploaded: 2016-08-08T10:53:09.000Z
Duration: 12 min 31 s

情態助動詞 B1

It may seem crazy to doubt that our concept of reality is true.

懷疑我們對現實的概念是真實的，這似乎很瘋狂。

But I think, to find the meaning of life we must answer the question:

但我想，要找到生命的意義，我們必須回答這個問題。

Imagine a scenario that is straight from a science fiction movie.

想象一下，這個場景是直接從科幻電影中走出來的。

The world around you is actually nothing more than an elaborate fabrication…

你周圍的世界其實只是一個精心製造的......。

A giant supercomputer provides you with all your senses

一臺巨大的超級計算機為你提供所有的感官服務

from what you see to what you smell, hear and touch.

從你看到的到你聞到的、聽到的和觸摸到的。

Your body does not exist. You are just a brain in a jar.

你的身體並不存在。你只是一個裝在罐子裡的大腦。

It may sound bizarre, but this is a genuine scientific hypothesis called:

這聽起來很奇怪，但這是一個真正的科學假說，叫做。

For all we know, every one of our perceived reality is simply fed to us

我們所知道的，我們所感知的每一個現實都是簡單地餵給我們的。

And the simulation is so perfect that we never even notice.

而且模擬的非常完美，我們根本就沒有注意到。

But here’s the crack: It doesn’t actually matter.

但這裡有一個破綻。這其實並不重要

It’s as Descartes said: We think, therefore we are.

就像笛卡爾說的那樣我們認為，所以我們是。

The hamburger could be nothing more than a piece of computer code.

漢堡包可能只是一段電腦代碼而已。

But our desire to eat it, is still our own desire.

但我們想吃，還是自己的慾望。

Our minds still exist, even if we are in a simulation.

我們的思想仍然存在，即使我們身處模擬之中。

So doubting the true nature of reality serves no purpose.

所以懷疑現實的真實性沒有任何作用。

It’s simpler to just accept that there are fundamental limits to what we can know.

更簡單的做法是接受我們所能知道的東西是有基本限制的。

How do you know if a table still exists if you go out of the room…

如果你走出房間，你怎麼知道一張桌子是否還存在... ...

For all you know, the table could pack up and disappear out the window.

據你所知，這張桌子可能會打包從窗口消失。

It could take a visit to the International Space Station.

All this before returning to the exact same spot and instance before you reenter the room.

所有這一切，在你重新進入房間之前，回到完全相同的地點和實例。

This, of course is a pretty unlikely scenario.

It is much simpler to assume that the table stays put when we are not there.

假設我們不在的時候，桌子會保持原樣，那就簡單多了。

This is essentially what we do in science.

這基本上是我們在科學上的工作。

We create best fit models of how we believe

我們創建了最適合的模型，我們如何相信

They suggested that the earth was a large sphere, motionless…

他們認為，地球是一個大球體，不動的... ...

But later pioneering scientist like Copernicus and Galileo…

但後來哥白尼、伽利略等先驅科學家... ...

found a much simpler and completely revolutionary model to describe these same observations.

發現了一個更簡單的、完全革命性的模型來描述這些相同的觀察結果。

They proposed that the earth itself was spinning and orbiting the sun at the same time…

他們提出地球本身在自轉的同時也在繞著太陽轉...

But neither can be said to actually be true.

Because they, like all models, are just models in our heads:

因為他們和所有的模型一樣，只是我們腦海中的模型。

我們所感知的現實的最佳契合點。

In fact, physicists are forever creating ever more sophisticated models…

事實上，物理學家永遠在創造更復雜的模型... ...

And the truth of those models is impossible to establish.

而這些模型的真實性是無法確定的。

A good example of this came in the 1960s.

When physicists devised a theory of really tiny bits of matter, called quarks.

當物理學家設計了一個理論 真正微小的物質，稱為夸克。

These quarks were proposed to be the building blocks of the subatomic particle called:

這些夸克被提出來是亞原子粒子的構件，稱為。

these quarks were held together by a force…

這些夸克被一種力量固定在一起... ...

that got stronger as you tried to separate them.

當你想把它們分開時，就會變得更強。

As if the quarks were bound by tiny rubber bands.

彷彿夸克被細小的橡皮筋捆住了。

This model also implied that there is no way one can ever see a single isolated quark.

這個模型也意味著，人們不可能看到一個孤立的夸克。

If something by its very definition can never be seen,

如果一個東西從其定義上來說，永遠也看不到。

Does it make sense to say that quarks are real or not?

夸克是真的還是假的，有意義嗎？

In vast particle accelerators like this one at CERN in Switzerland…

在像瑞士歐洲核子研究中心這樣的大型粒子加速器中... ...

Scientists are on the hunt for quarks and other subatomic particles.

科學家們正在尋找夸克和其他亞原子粒子。

By smashing protons together at incredible speed…

通過將質子以不可思議的速度撞擊在一起... ...

We can study the behavior of the tiniest particles in nature.

我們可以研究自然界中最微小粒子的行為。

Although we haven’t enabled to directly observe quarks,

雖然我們還沒有啟用直接觀察夸克。

we have seen evidence of particle behavior predicted by the quark model.

我們已經看到了夸克模型所預測的粒子行為的證據。

The answer is they exist only as a model that works.

答案是它們只作為一種有效的模式而存在。

This is called the concept of model dependent reality.

這就是所謂的模式依賴現實的概念。

And I believe that lead us directly to the meaning of life.

而我相信，這能讓我們直接找到生命的意義。

To my mind, science has taught us something pretty remarkable:

在我看來，科學教會了我們一些很了不起的東西。

We humans are highly complex biological machines behaving in accordance

我們人類是高度複雜的生物機器，其行為是根據

with the laws of nature. Our brains create and sustain our conscious mind

與自然規律。我們的大腦創造並維持著我們的意識心態。

through and extraordinary network of interacting neurons.

通過和非凡的交互神經元網絡。

That consciousness creates a three-dimensional model…

一個最適合的模型，我們稱之為現實。

This reality is much more than what we see around us in our everyday life.

這個現實遠比我們日常生活中看到的周圍的情況要多得多。

A vast array of ground and space telescopes have extended our senses.

大量的地面和太空望遠鏡擴展了我們的感官。

And build a much bigger model than ever before.

並建立一個比以往更大的模型。

As we peer further and further into the cosmos…

當我們越來越深入地觀察宇宙時... ...

our reality has grown bigger and bigger still…

我們的現實已經變得越來越大了...

where once we saw a chink in heaven’s flow…

在那裡，我們曾經看到天堂的流動的裂縫... ...

我們現在能看到像太陽一樣的遙遠的星星。

Then we discovered distant galaxies, home to billions more stars.

然後我們發現了遙遠的星系，它們是數十億顆恆星的家園。

All the way to the birth of the universe itself.

All this, the entire 13.7 billion year history of the universe…

所有這些，整個137億年的宇宙歷史... ...

作為一個模型存在於我們的頭腦裡面。

So, where does this leave us with finding a meaning to life?

那麼，這讓我們從哪裡去尋找生命的意義呢？

Meaning itself is simply another piece of the model of reality…

意義本身只是現實模型中的另一塊...

that we each built inside our own brains.

我們每個人都在自己的大腦裡建立了自己的大腦。