It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Universe A Matrix Computer Game Designed By Aliens, Say NASA

page: 12
92
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Exactly what i said, that we might even be arguing the same point, and you proved it! Were we not? You just put it in a conversation-shutting-down kind of way. xD




posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arrestme
Yep, like in Fringe, we just need to see if there are any "glitches", & we'll know it's simulated with bugs. Another good test. Any made system would have AT LEAST 1 bug SOMEWHERE. Unless..


I'm going to play the assumption game now. It is always an assumption that life is necessary in the universe. What if life is the bug you are talking about? Or what if rational thought is the bug? That would make US the mistake. But no one wants to consider that because humans arrogantly always think that they are special.

I know if I were to make a computer and parts within the computer became sentient and starting screwing around with the rest of the hardware and software, I'd be a little annoyed since my calculations would start messing up.

Edit: Also consider that 99% of the universe is hostile to all life on this planet. It actually kind of makes more sense that life is the anomaly than being the purpose.
edit on 11-5-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Arrestme
Yep, like in Fringe, we just need to see if there are any "glitches", & we'll know it's simulated with bugs. Another good test. Any made system would have AT LEAST 1 bug SOMEWHERE. Unless..


I'm going to play the assumption game now. It is always an assumption that life is necessary in the universe. What if life is the bug you are talking about? Or what if rational thought is the bug? That would make US the mistake. But no one wants to consider that because humans arrogantly always think that they are special.


Hard to say in this assumption game, so I see your point. But hmm....let me think about it either being a bug like "malware" or a "glitch" bug. Glitches are one thing. Those don't spread & can be fixed without being "sneakily broken again". But Malware couldn't be part of the original plan, so I think that's what you refer to. Within a stable system, that could only happen if created and injected. We didn't create ourselves, if we're malware, or if our reason is a virus to existence, somebody injected it into reality other than us.
So
a.)if our nature is ultimately malicious like malware, we were created with or "injected in" with that intent, and
b.)if our maliciousness is a flaw in our own understandings, then could it not be corrected? Either a or b doesn't seem to put responsibility on us.
but again, a fun assumption to ponder.

oh & c.)guess I'm not only one who got cornered into a "theologian corner". A sign? muhaha jk
edit on 11-5-2015 by Arrestme because: '']['' [[]] [[]] ][_,



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   
It is probably even bigger and more unfathomable than simply being a 'computer simulation'. We, as in 'us', the current human consciousness inhabiting this reality temporarily, seem to only understand this place within the current constructs of our own technology. It was not all that long ago that the planet was on the back of a giant sea turtle swimming through the ocean of space. That was back in the day that we could grasp the idea of sea turtles and oceans so it seemed plausible. Today, we've discovered and are beginning to understand computers and simulations, so that, not unlike the turtle theory, seems to make more sense, today. The Gods and angels of long ago, now become aliens and spacecraft, since we've discovered that technology. In the future, we will discover more, and other theories as to what 'this place' is will reflect that. Although it is fun to think about, it is most likely something either so wildly complex, or so infinitesimally simple, that our minds cannot comprehend it, and we only see reflections of ourselves instead of what 'it' is, anyway.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   
great point eatbliss. So maybe the real question is, if we are a simulation, then "Why?". If there's an occham's razer for that, u have my vote. If there is no answer, THEN the question becomes "how?".

We can only experiment against the question "how" (with #'s/physics/etc theories), but never scientifically accurate to ask "why". maybe thats our deal on why there seems to be no answers, even though we have a lot of them.
edit on 11-5-2015 by Arrestme because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   
I think every time we "unlock" a new part of the program, it just gets more complex. The program self-programs as it runs. This is why something doesn't exist until it's being observed.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arrestme
Hard to say in this assumption game, so I see your point. But hmm....let me think about it either being a bug like "malware" or a "glitch" bug. Glitches are one thing. Those don't spread & can be fixed without being "sneakily broken again". But Malware couldn't be part of the original plan, so I think that's what you refer to. Within a stable system, that could only happen if created and injected. We didn't create ourselves, if we're malware, or if our reason is a virus to existence, somebody injected it into reality other than us.


That is using human computing problems. Just because we don't have precedence for a computer glitch becoming sentient and starting to take over portions of the computer that encompasses its "universe" doesn't mean it can't happen to a large enough computer.


So
a.)if our nature is ultimately malicious like malware, we were created with or "injected in" with that intent, and
b.)if our maliciousness is a flaw in our own understandings, then could it not be corrected? Either a or b doesn't seem to put responsibility on us.
but again, a fun assumption to ponder.


If we are the result of a glitch, there is no way to correct our behavior. Our very existence would disturb the proper order of things.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arrestme
great point eatbliss. So maybe the real question is, if we are a simulation, then "Why?". If there's an occham's razer for that, u have my vote. If there is no answer, THEN the question becomes "how?".

We can only experiment against the question "how", but never a "why". maybe thats our deal.


The "is-ness" that is wants to experience everything that can, will, could, should, and has been. It's sort of like a never-ending way to keep itself entertained. All possible simulations and experiences to infinity ...



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Once more real quick; There's no end to the "how" questions. They are infinite, yet that's the only thing we can really investigate & mine for data (using our #/etc systems). A "why" question will always end somewhere, but just most likely with a philosopher or theologian. Again, I think it speaks volumes about why there seems to be no real answers, even though we have found a lot of them.

As far as the bugs go. It's clear our only solution is; like an addict, we may need an intervention. If there were ANY outside forces, they'd be responsible. Especially if they knew about the flaw. Tsk tsk outside forces, tsk tsk.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:10 PM
link   
The ironic thing is...I get a distinct impression that the "simulation" was thought up for us, by us.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12
I remember reading the Matilda MacElroy alien interview, the nurse from Roswell that Aliens are just energy in a shell travelling in Space as their real bodies could not come here. What I always found interesting was the theory that there is a catch all force field that keeps our energy bound to this Earth. The force field is left over from an ancient alien civilisation. The alien interviewed stated no one wants to come here as many have become trapped (souls or energy). As others are commenting perhaps we are a left over anamoloy if the elite know of this perhaps that is why our existence is treated by our own kind with such irrelevance .

A

edit on 5 11 15 by kazryll because: iPhone auto correct



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Simulator Node #23

Username: operator774
Password:

# grep -c ^ /var/log/simulation-errors.log
783294959291069393

# simmount -s /sim/greys -world -boundary 71LY /sim/humans
Linking greys to simulation humans. Process started.

# showspecies
/sim/alondrados * Alondrados Pop 4.5B Cap 19% Age 195MY Cur Online
/sim/greys * Greys Pop 5M Cap 87% Age 13MY Cur Linking
/sim/humans * Humans Pop 7.1B Cap 9% Age 200K Cur Online
/sim/wolf51 * Wolfpeople Pop 83B Cap 1% Age 893MY Cur Offline

# sim -s /sim/humans -c "INSERT OBJECT emdrive FROM SPACE_TRAVEL WAIT 5Y"
Insert complete.

# sim -s /sim/humans -c "ADJUST ENVIRONMENT VARIABLE (usa_election2016: condition=win value=random())"
Success

# sim -s /sim/humans -r "isis-hack-051115-0200" -l /var/log/isis-test-hack.log
Success

# logout
Session terminated.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12




So NASAs super computers are only double the speed of the human brain? From my observations....that's not very fast! People can't even think fast enough to use their turn signals BEFORE they start their turn.



Awesome



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Simulation or not, what's the difference in our experience of this environment, moment-to-moment?

That's a decent question.

And other questions follow, like what is the primary, real reality like and how did THAT come to be? Is this universe modeled off that real one, or is this some heavy metal dog-eat-dog nightmare universe Disney ride thing? Is someone cool, indifferent or horrible in charge of the simulation... or is it running itself without guidance or are we, ourselves, the "coders?" Is this possible simulation entertainment, educational, both... or something else entirely in purpose? Is this just a small overlay simulation of our immediate environment, where we see some "real" things, too, or is everything in the visible universe unreal?

And physics have been indicating this state of "unreality" for years... now it's just okay to talk about it and not get institutionalized. This article is one of many... but cool it's a tad more "mainstream." Religious folks can just think of it as us finding the edges of the fake stage and god is still in charge... just a few levels further away.... pretty Manachean Heresy-esque.

But it doesn't change too much, immediately... we still have to do the same biological things to continue the simulation... but possibly having someone or something else watching and deciding our ultimate fate could be disconcerting, if one is fixated on meeting the designer's expectations and possibly continuing their existence out in the real world... it would suck to be deleted permanently... or would it? One could get some anxiety trying to out guess the designer, trying to "beat the game" and continue existing...heh.

This doesn't answer the primal question of first cause, either, as in how did anything come to be in the first place? But it does start to answer some very puzzling things about this universe's peculiar fuzziness around the edges and many "paranormal" incidents.

And to those balking at the processing power running the universe would take... well, number one, it would only need the area of attention to be rendered and thus, depending on how many truly sentient creatures are playing, it could make the data manageable... or "they" could have the tech to render the whole darned universe and then some... who knows.

But it IS odd that since we can tell it's a simulation, there does seem to be a limit... a technological limit to the processing power.

I'd think the best course of action is to be kind and consider it a game of who can generate the most love... while having the most fun... and expect something pretty cool when "game over." Better than some dystopian hellscape, anyway.

But what do I know? I'm likely just an NPC.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:39 PM
link   
This has probably been said numerous times in this thread but we are likely living a simulation within a simulation within a simulation within......

You get the point. We are advancing enough right now that I can see where we can create our own simulation and then it evolves from there.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:58 PM
link   
No subscribe feature on mobile.....marking this thread for later participation



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Excellent post, but I thought NASA regularly responds to questions
about E.T.'s by saying they have found no evidence in the existence
of intelligent extra-terrestrial life in space.

Are they reversing their opinion on a philosophical basis?

Just wondering, it seems to conflict with they're official stance on
E.T.'s

Rebel 5



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   
The title of this article is very misleading and takes quite a liberty with the actual story.
"Universe A Matrix Computer Game Designed By Aliens, Say NASA"

NASA never said anything even remotely close to that. One person who works for NASA says Dr Bostrom may be on to something. That's not NASA saying the universe is a matrix computer game designed by aliens.

I really enjoy the idea and it's fun discuss the possibilities within the theory, but it's just not true that NASA is claiming this.
I guess "A guy who works for NASA says a guy who theorizes the universe is a matrix computer game designed by aliens may be on to something" just doesn't sound very interesting.

Not trying to be a buzzkill or anything. Just trying to deny ignorance.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: Entreri06

World of Warcraft doesn't simulate the state of each and every atom in each and every grain of sand either.


Irrelevant compared to the original assumption. That you would need a computer twice the size of the universe to simulate it.


I think an answer to where your going. Has already been posted.

I think the double slit experiment would explain how the computer handles the massive amount of information required. That's why observation seems to effect reality. The program doesn't run unless someone is there to observe it runnning.



posted on May, 11 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: snarfbot
a reply to: Entreri06

world of warcraft isnt a simulation. it doesnt model atoms or computers, or anything really.

anyway scale in a 3d videogame is basically arbitrary as its a function of the size of the viewport and the 3d models being rendered.

the point was that to simulate this universe that we live in to the accuracy that our real life technology can detect and measure to. in both scale and as a function of time. would require a computer much larger, billions of times so than the universe as we know it. and or run at a fraction of real time. billions of time slower.

i guess the real argument would be that, we all live in a simulation and our reality in no way simulates the real world, its akin to the "aliens" version of world of warcraft. i think people would be less inclined to believe that.



I think (not know) that's were observation comes in. The universe doesn't need to run the program with no one there to observe it, but the second some one looks "poof" it's there like it had been there the whole time.


I don't think it would take as big a computer to pull it off as you do. But that would save oodles of space!!




top topics



 
92
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join