Started By
Message
1
Posted on 1/14/18 at 11:26 pm to BoarEd
The paranormal and supernatural are human constructs. Nothing can make them more than that.
Posted on 1/14/18 at 11:28 pm to Kentucker
Well yeah. I mean, a model that explains them would redifine them. They would no longer be mysterious.
Posted on 1/14/18 at 11:29 pm to BoarEd
quote:
the Supraconsciousness that we refer to as God
What to you think God is?
A being that sits on a golden throne and does magic (or Magicks)
A being whose quantum signature is higher than any other being
The universe itself.
I think you need to answer those questions for yourself.
Posted on 1/14/18 at 11:33 pm to Paul B Ammer
It's a pretty tough question to answer.
It's obviously not a dude on a throne. I don't think we can get a good feel for what it is while we are stuck on this plane. We get glimpses of the other side from time to time if we search diligently, but even then you aren't getting a full picture.
The one thing I know is that the conscious stream over there is awesome to behold. It feels as if it has all the answers and they are transmitted to you in a way that you feel as if you have perfect understanding, but you can't put it into words.
It's obviously not a dude on a throne. I don't think we can get a good feel for what it is while we are stuck on this plane. We get glimpses of the other side from time to time if we search diligently, but even then you aren't getting a full picture.
The one thing I know is that the conscious stream over there is awesome to behold. It feels as if it has all the answers and they are transmitted to you in a way that you feel as if you have perfect understanding, but you can't put it into words.
Posted on 1/14/18 at 11:50 pm to BoarEd
quote:
They would no longer be mysterious.
But they're not mysterious. At all. There's absolutely no evidence that they're anything more than imaginations by people.
Posted on 1/14/18 at 11:54 pm to Kentucker
quote:
But they're not mysterious. At all.
Totally disagree.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 12:16 am to BoarEd
What makes them mysterious? They exist only in the minds of people?
Posted on 1/15/18 at 12:29 am to Kentucker
What is it about simulation theory that makes you think it is supernatural or whatever?
Posted on 1/15/18 at 8:37 am to Kentucker
Consider this description of existence in a simulated universe:
1. Physical laws (the "computer code," if you will, that controlled the simulated reality) would be expressed everywhere at once, all of the time, but would have no existence within the simulation itself. They would be completely inaccessible to an AI inside the simulation, who could do nothing more than infer them based on observations of his "reality."
2. That AI itself would have both a "physical" existence inside the simulation, and an actual existence as an algorithm in a computer program in the real universe. The algorithm would obviously control the "physical" version of the AI, but would, again, be completely inaccessible inside of the simulation - i.e., no matter how minutely the AI studied its "physical" self, it would never be able to find the part of itself that was itself, because that would exist outside the simulation.
3. The idea of the programmer of this simulation sitting down and painstakingly entering the data for every particle to create a universe-in-being is ridiculous. It would be much more likely for this theoretical programmer to define the basic laws of the simulation, start from a single point, and let those laws evolve the universe for him.
4. This programmer, while necessarily superintelligent from the point of view of beings inside the simulation, would not necessarily be infallible. If we are truly living inside a simulated universe, it might be possible to determine so by looking for "bugs" in the system - i.e., things that happen that do not seem to be in accord with the basic laws and rules of the simulation. Quantum entanglement would be a prime candidate for this category.
5. Computers are deterministic by nature. It would be natural to expect a simulated universe to, at its most basic level, also be deterministic. Quantum mechanics in its entirety says hello.
Our experience of existence accords pretty much perfectly with that of an AI inside a simulated universe. Who created the simulation and for what purpose is, of course, another question entirely.
1. Physical laws (the "computer code," if you will, that controlled the simulated reality) would be expressed everywhere at once, all of the time, but would have no existence within the simulation itself. They would be completely inaccessible to an AI inside the simulation, who could do nothing more than infer them based on observations of his "reality."
2. That AI itself would have both a "physical" existence inside the simulation, and an actual existence as an algorithm in a computer program in the real universe. The algorithm would obviously control the "physical" version of the AI, but would, again, be completely inaccessible inside of the simulation - i.e., no matter how minutely the AI studied its "physical" self, it would never be able to find the part of itself that was itself, because that would exist outside the simulation.
3. The idea of the programmer of this simulation sitting down and painstakingly entering the data for every particle to create a universe-in-being is ridiculous. It would be much more likely for this theoretical programmer to define the basic laws of the simulation, start from a single point, and let those laws evolve the universe for him.
4. This programmer, while necessarily superintelligent from the point of view of beings inside the simulation, would not necessarily be infallible. If we are truly living inside a simulated universe, it might be possible to determine so by looking for "bugs" in the system - i.e., things that happen that do not seem to be in accord with the basic laws and rules of the simulation. Quantum entanglement would be a prime candidate for this category.
5. Computers are deterministic by nature. It would be natural to expect a simulated universe to, at its most basic level, also be deterministic. Quantum mechanics in its entirety says hello.
Our experience of existence accords pretty much perfectly with that of an AI inside a simulated universe. Who created the simulation and for what purpose is, of course, another question entirely.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 10:13 am to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
Our experience of existence accords pretty much perfectly with that of an AI inside a simulated universe. Who created the simulation and for what purpose is, of course, another question entirely.
Agreed.
But what's interesting to me is the idea that there is no "creator" per se, and the holographic simulation is naturally arising due to our entire known universe existing inside a super massive black hole. Where everything in existence has been crushed to the point where only raw information remains. And our consciousness acts as a processor through our brains to make sense of said hologram.
This would also mean that there is a sort of Supraconsciousness that governs the entire thing. Otherwise there would be no way for you and I to interpret the simulation in the same way (roughly).
Essentially, simulation hypothesis can prove the existence of God. It can also make sense of all number of inexplicable things we find in our own reality. Like these pesky UFOs everyone sees, but can never tack down, or ghosts, or whatever.
Edit for clarity: what I am trying (unsuccessfully it seems) to say is that in the above scenario there wouldn't be anyone who sat down to create this simulation. It would have happened on its own naturally. But that within this simulation our collective consciousness acts the part of God. Consciousness would not be local. And that would jive with pretty much what every single religious person in the world believes. There would be a plane that exists separate from the one we see now where nothing but consciousness exists. In this world (we know it as the astral plane) entire worlds are created with thought alone. The power of conscious thought is enough to write perfect code.
This post was edited on 1/15/18 at 10:37 am
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News