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.

 

About Simulated Reality 'Theory'.

page: 1
15
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2016 @ 04:03 AM
link   
Ah.. a week ago I said that I will post my theory about the alternative history of humanity. Someone even called me a punk for not posting.

Well to be honest is quite a lot to digest/write/translate . So instead of posting a very long incomprehendable post I post a short incomprehendable post


To Clearify ... a bit ,

The base of my 'theory' is that reality is simulated. Well that has done before but in my approach I use paradigms to understand history/human behaviour and uncommon events.
In future posts I'll often link to the paradigms in this post.

This is the base set of paradigms I use to understand what is happening:

The Existance

1.1 The Existence is the entire Set of all possible events.
1.2 Mathematical rules/laws/algoritms e.d are appliccable to the entire Exisistence.

The Construct

2.1 That what is known as our Physical Reality is a Subset of The Existance.
2.2 Physical Reality is Simulated by a device , hencefort called The Device.
2.3 All events created by The Device form The Construct.

Conscience

3.1 Conscience is part of The Existence.
3.2 Conscience can interact with The Device and therefore change events in The Construct.

The Device

4.1 The Device Simulates events only by request of Conscience. (e.g when observed)
4.2 The capacities of The Device are finite.
4.3 Physical Time and Space is simulated by The Device.

Current Science

5.1 Any Observation of any part of The Construct does not reveal information about The Device nor The Existance.
5.2 Processes 'within' The Construct seem causal related but are on a deeper level Contextual related.
5.3 Physical Constants found in The Construct can change and probably have changed in the past.
5.4 The fundamental Physical Constants 'within' The Construct are not related to properties 'within' The Construct. Therefore can never be explained by observation alone.




posted on May, 26 2016 @ 04:09 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries

So this device, will it become observable once we are able to measure at the individual unit of Planck length?

Which is quite possible only a few years distant.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 04:25 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake




we are able to measure at the individual unit of Planck length?


I think Not because,

4.3 Physical Time and Space is simulated by The Device.
5.1 Any Observation of any part of The Construct does not reveal information about The Device nor The Existance.

The point is that planck length is a length so 2 points in space. and that space self is part of The Construct so a simulation BY The Device not the Device itself.

it's a bit like you're unable to see the source code from within a FPS (game).

On the other hand when planck is observable all the physical (simulated) particles will be discovered so this will bring us a meaningfull insight of 'The Construct' (Physical reality).



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 04:42 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries

I tend to lean toward the principle that our universe may be holographic by nature but lets say that we were to discover this to be the case.

What do you think the implications would be regarding humanity and our place in the cosmos?

Personally i dont see most people being up for swallowing that particular red pill.



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 05:03 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

I took a lot of red pills


In my theory this physical universe (The Construct) MUST be holographic !
Let me explain...

The Construct = simulated physical reality. As I understand holographic means something like 'in every part is the whole visible'. The simulation Device is much like a computer. So objects that seem physically unrelated always spawn from the same source (The Device). I a way The Device is projecting the in your words the 'holographic' The Nature.

The problem that most people can't swallow the Red pill is that most people tend to think in terms of space and time and it is hard to imagrin that space and time are simulated too.



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 05:11 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries

The question begs through, if indeed our universe is a simulation, then who or what is doing the simulating?

And if its a simulation, is it the only one, or are there an infinite amount of different simulations?

This short video touches on some interesting aspect pretending to the simulated universe theory.




posted on May, 26 2016 @ 05:12 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake




What do you think the implications would be regarding humanity and our place in the cosmos?


1 I more or less think that humans did not only Evolve 'on' Earth alone
2 Every human is a compound of Consciousness and a Physical body.
3 The physical body is part of The Construct but Consciousness did Evolve somewhere else... (The Existance ?)
4 If the theory of 'Holographic' Nature/Universe is generally accepted then humanity becomes aware of her place in the 'cosmos' (meaning->The Existence).The Implications are that history of the humanity will be rediscovered. And the true Nature of Existance will be rediscovered... Awakening.



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 05:20 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake




The question begs through, if indeed our universe is a simulation, then who or what is doing the simulating?


I really don't know , But it/he/she/they have to have Consciousness because the Device on it's own does absolutely notting but creating a lot of Entropy.




And if its a simulation, is it the only one, or are there an infinite amount of different simulations?


I'm sure that there are many different simulations. But Infinite ? I don't know. And In a way each Consciousness see's his/her/their own simulation... A bit like the double split experiment.

Thanks for the film ...
Greetings.



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 05:23 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries

I can't believe someone gave you s&f for this!? Wtf is wrong with you people? This is on an idiotic level equal to creationism, but you can't see that because you wrapped it in a futuristic cloak, right? Utter bs!
Why?
1. It's not provable to be right or wrong
2. It doesn't matter at all, because you can't apply this theory
3. If time and space is created by the device, where does it exist? Who built it, or where did it come from?

And how the hell does one apply maths to consciousness?
Besides the biggest crap probably is 4.1! The uninhabited galaxies we don't see exist! Get over yourself, a #ing rock doesn't need a dumbass observing it to float through space!
This # really #ing pisses me off!

Do you want to know the truth? Then stop dressing up thousands of years old myths in Hollywood dresses!



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 05:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

I get your point you're angry you find it BS ...ok.


3. If time and space is created by the device, where does it exist? Who built it, or where did it come from?

You dont get it ... you ask where (place) and (where did it came from) time I explained that The Device created space and time. The problem is that you cannot think outside spacetime.



Besides the biggest crap probably is 4.1! The uninhabited galaxies we don't see exist!


It's called the copenhagen interpretation ...

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, physical systems generally do not have definite properties prior to being measured, and quantum mechanics can only predict the probabilities that measurements will produce certain results. The act of measurement affects the system, causing the set of probabilities to reduce to only one of the possible values immediately after the measurement. This feature is known as wavefunction collapse.

So what is the Truth big guy ???



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 05:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

Lighten up, it's the philosophy forum. I gave him a star because reading the OP and ensuing thread gave me a cool idea for a short story. I only mention because you asked WTF was wrong with me, so I guess what's wrong with me is having an imagination.



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 05:57 AM
link   
I was just looking at some of the TV shows that seem to have appeared in my reality. The probability that I would have no knowledge of any of them is nearly zero. I was a cartoon junkie growing up. I loved The Brady Bunch too. I loved Happy Days, Laverne and Shirley, Mork and Mindy, and almost all cartoon shows growing up.

There seems to be a common theme with all of the shows below. They all seem to be from a kinder, gentler alternate reality than the one I'm from. I'm getting the feeling that there is probably a continuum of alternative realities that range from heavenly to hellish. My guess is that the reality I'm from is more on the hellish side and the reality that the TV shows below come from is more on the heavenly side. Any thoughts on that?

Mandela Effect - The Brady Brides? WTF??? lol

Mandela Effect - Brady Bunch Hour

Mandela Effect - Brady Bunch Parallel Universe Proof (Must See)

Mandela Effect - Jackson 5 Cartoon? Parallel Universe Proof

Fonz and the Happy Days Gang Opening

THE MORK & MINDY/LAVERNE & SHIRLEY/FONZ HOUR (Opening/Closing Sequence) - 1982

LAVERNE & SHIRLEY IN THE ARMY - (Opening Sequence, 1981)

The Brady Kids [Opening Theme]

The Berenstain Bears - The Green Eyed Monster [Full Episode]

Sanford, SFD 1-10 - The Ring
edit on 26-5-2016 by Profusion because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries

The probabilistic nature of particles at a quantum level becomes predictable at a macroscopic level.
Get your facts straight, it's like you're saying what's true for a string is also true for a planet, which simply is not the case.
For the Copenhagen interpretation to be true you need things tiny enough to show a wave particle duality. Apples and oranges.

And no one can imagine a place outside space and time, because there is none.
Not that it matters, but don't call me big guy I am a lady.

a reply to: MiddleInitial

Sorry, sure if you approach it as purely fiction... But as a writer: doesn't it bother you when someone writes a rehash of a thousands of years old story using not existing words like existance and exisistence?

edit on 26-5-2016 by Peeple because: Add



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 06:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

Look, you are obviously very smart. I'm going to be honest, I don't contribute often to threads like this because they are a bit out of my depth, and I have what you'd probably consider to be a pathetic education. Yet, these threads are the ones that I enjoy reading most because they not only challenge my thinking, but they inspire me, as I mentioned. That being the case, I often overlook things like spelling; I'm trying to understand the basic idea. (Sure, this has limits.)

Still, all things considered, I think I can understand the basic feeling behind your frustration.
edit on 26-5-2016 by MiddleInitial because: Autocorrect screwed me



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple




it's like you're saying what's true for a string is also true for a planet, which simply is not the case.





And no one can imagine a place outside space and time, because there is none. Not that it matters, but don't call me big guy I am a lady.


Facts

place = a space dont imaging a place / What about abstact numbers ? Lady...

Lighten up Lady What I postulated are paradigms (you do know what this means lady ?)



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 06:38 AM
link   


Still, all things considered, I think I can understand the basic feeling behind your frustration


Look I'm not english so make writing mistakes. just wanted to give my 2 cents with this notting more. And to learn from reactions of fellow ATS'er. Yes I don't regurgitate MSM and MSS but isn't that what ATS is all about.

Just unflag me or whatever I dont care



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries

I will stop observing your nonsense hopefully it will go away.
A theory is not a fact.
edit on 26-5-2016 by Peeple because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 06:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

(English is not my native language)

Sorry this is off topic , I don't know any of the shows ... But I do believe that there is something more about the ME whether it's confabulation or somethingelse. I also noticed that the kinder alternatives tend to change...

To be on topic this is my opinion: I think that something in The Construct has changed.

1 Change is Recent.
2 Change is Accelerating.
3 Change is towards a less kinder reality.
4 Change is more Prominent in the USA than in Europe


Anyway I'm going to watch the movies now...



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 06:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

Such colourful language to be coming from a lady, tut tut.


The guy is just attempting to express his ideas and opinions in a forum entitled philosophy and metaphysics.

Just a thought but it might be an idea to give him a break or at least attempt to explain why you disagree without being so condescending and rude.

You are obviously not stupid so i cant imagine why you would adopt such a hostile attitude.

Edit: Notice you corrected the profanity.

edit on 26-5-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 06:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

ok... you said that. that wasn't nice Lady....

Let's be honest ,
I don't want to fight people . I'm presenting a theory and you disagree , calling me an idiot , dumb prick , BS etc. You wanna be a writer ? BE ORIGINAL, BE ON THE TOPIC. BE INFORMATIVE. and don't post in the wrong forums.





new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join