Well as I was reading above some of us were considering corners cutting reality.
Scientists hope to prove we are living inside a simulation
- Thread starter Magical Realist
- Start date
Well as I was reading above some of us were considering corners cutting reality.
...a practice that only succeeds, consistently, when applied to fitting larger square pegs into smaller round holes...
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
"The Prime Living Entity is situated in everyone’s heart and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy [the human body]”---Bhagavad-gita 18.61. (500-400 B.C.)
It is interesting that all cultures initially assign a special role to the heart of much greater import than just being a pump. This I think is because back then, death was associated with the ceasing of the "thumping noise" in the chest; usually believed to be due to the soul or life force leaving the body.
Heart Produce large EMF If Not the Largest of All Organs?
http://www.heartmath.org/free-services/articles-of-the-heart/energetic-heart-is-unfolding.html
.."The electrical field as measured in an electrocardiogram (ECG) is about 60 times greater in amplitude than the brain waves recorded in an electroencephalogram (EEG)." .....
http://cellphonesafety.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/emfs-and-the-heart/
... the heart generates over fifty thousand femtoteslas (a measure of EMF) compared to less than ten femtoteslas recorded from the brain.”
At least one of the 12 cranial nerves connects to the heart. r6
http://www.heartmath.org/free-services/articles-of-the-heart/energetic-heart-is-unfolding.html
.."The electrical field as measured in an electrocardiogram (ECG) is about 60 times greater in amplitude than the brain waves recorded in an electroencephalogram (EEG)." .....
http://cellphonesafety.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/emfs-and-the-heart/
... the heart generates over fifty thousand femtoteslas (a measure of EMF) compared to less than ten femtoteslas recorded from the brain.”
At least one of the 12 cranial nerves connects to the heart. r6
children are much more aware or are born aware of or closer to the truth of reality on an intuitive level. children are very enamored with pretend created worlds, especially attracted to cartoons and 2d environments. we assume that the more complex or more dimensions, the more real it is when it may be just the opposite further away. our 3d or holographic existence could be a projection.
Children are more filled with wonder and joy about the world. It is refreshing to be around them.
our holographic existence is more likely a morphed form of reality but it is obvious we are connected on a deeper level with finding out the truth of what reality is as we are imbued with enough awareness to "wonder" what and why. the fact we don't know and our search is a big clue that 'our' reality does not have all those answers and therefore more likely not the building blocks of reality. perhaps even what we can eventually penetrate may not be it as well, just another layer of existence. what children are aware of is 'possibilities' the underlying understanding that all that we think has to be is still a construct. it only makes sense to us in the temporal existence because we have to adjust to it but on a grander scale, there is no logical reason for the particular set of even universal laws we contend with. it actually doesn't make sense, it's limiting because it is a construct and a particular one. even things such as death is something we have to accept but again, there is no definite reason for it, except within a construct of our existence. this is why children wonder why? why must it be this way or why is it this way? even adults don't have these answers or really understand what life is on a fundamental level, we can only observe processes.
kmguru
Staff member
"Biblical creationists can no doubt embrace these seeming cosmic coincidences as unequivocal evidence for their “theory” of Intelligent Design (ID). But is our “God” really a computer programmer rather than a bearded old man living in the sky?"
So, Gita could not get us out of the simulation...only a demi-god outside could...then again, do we have linkages from outside?
So, Gita could not get us out of the simulation...only a demi-god outside could...then again, do we have linkages from outside?
It's not that we have to look outside for a link (or plead with a fat controller), we merely have to look at turning things "inside out" (and no I'm not being silly about the concept, that's actually the correct course of action).
Last edited:
( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°)
Registered Member
Which group is more annoying: the Dawkin-type atheists who lack abstract thought, or the Protestant fundamentalists who lack logical thought?
I'd suggest the group that joins the Star Trek Vs Star Wars thread with the intention of just causing mischief. (If you want a breakdown of why this answer, well the particular thread in question is an epic battle between people over different belief systems based upon fictional worlds who take their stances very seriously. With the occasional "firestarter" molotoving both sides for shits and giggles.)
Last edited:
danshawen
Valued Senior Member
The thesis of this thread (that reality is some sort of simulation) probably does make a lot of sense to someone with two or perhaps three working neurons. Sentience covers a wide range of cognitive sophistication; from a mouse trap to Marilyn Vos Savant. Who is to say which model of reality is the more versatile? Marilyn is next to useless at sensing killing mice, for a start. Possibly a little better at feeling remorse for taking the lives of so many small mammals.
If reality is a program, it sports a wicked fast, flexible and optimized random stimulus generator. Eight billion of them in parallel, perhaps?
If reality is a program, it sports a wicked fast, flexible and optimized random stimulus generator. Eight billion of them in parallel, perhaps?
IF we are in a simulation, we have no way to know how much or what kind of computer processing is required or whether it can be done or how well it can be done. IF we are in a simulation, nearly everything we think we know about science might not be accurate outside of this simulation. The genuine world could be extremely different from this fabrication.
danshawen
Valued Senior Member
OK, so I read the discovery.com article and about half way through I find a reference to "lattice quantum chromodynamics".
So, the wheel fell off the trolley. QCD folks seem to have great difficulty even predicting the mass of a proton, given a week's worth of supercomputing effort and 20 free parameters to adjust, so how is it they have any credibility remaining to tell us that the universe might be just a computer simulation? How many protons are there again? The amount of gullibility necessary even to entertain the idea is what is most shocking.
So, the wheel fell off the trolley. QCD folks seem to have great difficulty even predicting the mass of a proton, given a week's worth of supercomputing effort and 20 free parameters to adjust, so how is it they have any credibility remaining to tell us that the universe might be just a computer simulation? How many protons are there again? The amount of gullibility necessary even to entertain the idea is what is most shocking.
kmguru
Staff member
Well, it depends on how you explain in a legitimate way....for example, if someone says, you as a human is like a computer...and that when you go out the door, you first simulate the process before taking actual steps...then you can call the whole Universe the same way....
That is you SEE what is coming in a grand scale and adjust as to your needs. Then you can have the simulation as part if the picture....that is if bad things (Nuclear bombs) wanted to happen and someone changed that to a smaller bad thing (like basic explosions) in the future directions...then you went through a simulation...and managed the process.
Someday we will know for sure.
That is you SEE what is coming in a grand scale and adjust as to your needs. Then you can have the simulation as part if the picture....that is if bad things (Nuclear bombs) wanted to happen and someone changed that to a smaller bad thing (like basic explosions) in the future directions...then you went through a simulation...and managed the process.
Someday we will know for sure.
Computers came from a projection stemming from humans and not the other way around. Humans invented computers and not computers invented humans; got it backwards. What unconscious projection is, is when the unconscious mind overlays reality with internal content, such that the sensory data appears to gain an additional layer, like a movie projection. People who don't see the projection, see reality as a composite and not as reality.
As an example, say you were biased against the Tea Party, in general. If you met a person and talked to them, you may like them. If they say I am with the Tea Party, instead of just see that same person, one may begin to see a composite of the person, and the delusion of a collective bias. The other person takes on you personal and collective psychology overlay and appears to be someone they are not.
One would need to talk to the person, longer, to gain more reality data, so the composite is evolving until enough reality data allows one to average closer, back to reality.
Scientists who already has this theory and bias will see reality in the image of their bias. They don't plan to let the data speak for itself, but will set up experiments in the image of the bias overlay; data stacking. I liked being a development engineer because you let the data speak and change with the data, instead of starting with projection bias and then setting up a simulation stacked with your expectations. This is good for mapping the psyche.
As an example, say you were biased against the Tea Party, in general. If you met a person and talked to them, you may like them. If they say I am with the Tea Party, instead of just see that same person, one may begin to see a composite of the person, and the delusion of a collective bias. The other person takes on you personal and collective psychology overlay and appears to be someone they are not.
One would need to talk to the person, longer, to gain more reality data, so the composite is evolving until enough reality data allows one to average closer, back to reality.
Scientists who already has this theory and bias will see reality in the image of their bias. They don't plan to let the data speak for itself, but will set up experiments in the image of the bias overlay; data stacking. I liked being a development engineer because you let the data speak and change with the data, instead of starting with projection bias and then setting up a simulation stacked with your expectations. This is good for mapping the psyche.
Except you were not an engineer. You were a technician that did not have the formal education of an engineer, as revealed in your posts.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
@ RR6,
No, it has now been proven that virtual particles exist and pop in and out of existence all the time. This happens so fast that until now we were not able to observe this phenomnon.
However, scientist have now constructed an electronic mirror which can detect the appearance of pairs of particles as they pop in and out of the holomovement (Bohm) of physical space.
As to the concept of a holographic universe, I suggest reading David Bohm's "wholeness and the Implicate Order"
No, it has now been proven that virtual particles exist and pop in and out of existence all the time. This happens so fast that until now we were not able to observe this phenomnon.
However, scientist have now constructed an electronic mirror which can detect the appearance of pairs of particles as they pop in and out of the holomovement (Bohm) of physical space.
http://consciousresonance.net/?p=1768
As to the concept of a holographic universe, I suggest reading David Bohm's "wholeness and the Implicate Order"