If universum is computer emulation there will never be a God proof

a reply to: GetHyped

Show me a single shred of scientific evidence that suggests that the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment has anything to do with consciousness.

What non-conscious mechanism would care about "which path" info being available, or known?

a reply to: PoetryInMotion

It's getting rather tiring seeing you do everything BUT support your claims. You think that attempting to turn the tables onto me means you can make baseless claims without having to substantiate them? LOL. This is what happens when you get your science education fro woo woo YouTube videos and websites.

7th time I've asked now, I won't bother asking the 8th.

a reply to: GetHyped

Damn you are a poor loser, just like all the other "skeptics" here who claim to be all "scientific".

What is stopping you from discussing these results which I have posted and described at least 4 times now.

Do you deny these results? If not, what is stopping you?

Are you maybe unable to compute?

We both made a claim about QM. I went out of my way to back it up and explained my interpretation.

What have you posted.

Nothing but empty drivel. Inept garbage.

a reply to: PoetryInMotion

Hello

Could you please provide citations/link to these experiments you're referring to? I went through most of your posts and have failed to see any links.

Thanks

a reply to: flyingfish

He's citing the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment and concluding "therefore, souls, consciousness and magic!". This is what happens when your induction to QM comes from Woo woo YouTube videos.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: flyingfish

He's citing the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment and concluding "therefore, souls, consciousness and magic!". This is what happens when your induction to QM comes from Woo woo YouTube videos.

Thanks

I see the video he's probably getting these ideas from, "Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment Explained," the you-tube video is making the same claim and asking to support it's ministry through a patreon.

Interestingly there are real, debatable experiments being conducted that may, or may not show the double slit experiment being effected by consciousness.
Link
But, these experiments in no way prove anything is going on with, or without the physical properties of a mind, or if consciousness is the actual property effecting the outcome.
There is much more that needs to be learned in this area.

a reply to: flyingfish

There's been experiments, sure, even interpretations of QM that involve consciousness, but alas there has been no credible evidence to date to suggest that is the case. Certainly not the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment.

originally posted by: galien8
A computer emulation means as-good-as-the-real-thing, how could we ever mathematically prove that we are living in a perfect virtual reality?

What would be the difference?

We're made up of tiny bits; molecules, atoms, quarks. Aren't we are already 'emulations'?

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: flyingfish

There's been experiments, sure, even interpretations of QM that involve consciousness, but alas there has been no credible evidence to date to suggest that is the case. Certainly not the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment.

You say my interpretation is BS, then what is your interpretation. Surely you have an interpretation of your own if you can state that mine is wrong.

Could you now please explain from your point of view why the only factor that collapses the interference pattern is the availability of "which path" info? Why does it matter that such info is available? And why is there seemingly retroactive action going on in the DCQE experiment.

I see the video he's probably getting these ideas from,

Ideas are coming for my own mind, I can think for myself and I don't watch YT vids about Quantum experiments, I read papers, and I have been doing this for quite some years.

Get#ed overthere has no clue what he is talking about and all he can do is make general statements and appeal to mainstream beliefs.

Actual knowledge about the experiments we are talking about.....zero.

As long as I can't post a source that has Neil DeGrasse Tyson saying what I am saying it doesn't even register. The guy is just a scientific poser, like many of the pathetic excuses for what a real skeptic should be, around here.

I have a better question: why does it matter?

Can these brilliant mathematicians and physicists explain why its so important to determine the existence and nature of a godlike being? What sort of critical relevance it has to what we are doing here? I'm still unclear on this point, maybe the answer is out there... *insert x files theme*

originally posted by: loveofneighbor
If...God can prove himself whenever he wants.

I believe so

originally posted by: McGinty

originally posted by: galien8
A computer emulation means as-good-as-the-real-thing, how could we ever mathematically prove that we are living in a perfect virtual reality?

What would be the difference?

We're made up of tiny bits; molecules, atoms, quarks. Aren't we are already 'emulations'?

Yeah, from little computer emulated molecules, atoms, quarks. I believe so than it somehow all makes sense

originally posted by: TzarChasm
I have a better question: why does it matter?

Can these brilliant mathematicians and physicists explain why its so important to determine the existence and nature of a godlike being? What sort of critical relevance it has to what we are doing here? I'm still unclear on this point, maybe the answer is out there... *insert x files theme*

People fear the afterlife

a reply to: flyingfish

But, these experiments in no way prove anything is going on with, or without the physical properties of a mind, or if consciousness is the actual property effecting the outcome.

They do. Why does availability of "which path" info matter? Are there any non consciousness driven mechanisms that spring into action based on the availability of information, that you can think of?

a reply to: flyingfish

I went through most of your posts and have failed to see any links.

Maybe you should try going through all of my posts instead of telling me this while complaining. Maybe you also missed the posts before that in which I named the experiment.

originally posted by: galien8

originally posted by: TzarChasm
I have a better question: why does it matter?

Can these brilliant mathematicians and physicists explain why its so important to determine the existence and nature of a godlike being? What sort of critical relevance it has to what we are doing here? I'm still unclear on this point, maybe the answer is out there... *insert x files theme*

People fear the afterlife

I can think of far more practical solutions to that, not that anyone needs me to.

a reply to: galien8

I dont think the simulation hypothesis is that far fetched. If you look at how far we have come in just 30 years its not hard to imagine what we may come up with 5 centuries from now.

From this:


to this:

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: namelesss

Contingent upon Reality as we know it. At the moment.

This thread is about the future and the way tech is progressing, right?

...and it is progressing.

Yes indeed, 'tech' is still 'progressing'!
Depending on your Perspective, of course! From the Perspective of mother Earth, human tech is hardly a 'progress'.

So you don't think the mind is a product of the brain? Genuine question.

That is correct, I have not seen any evidence in refutation.
Perceiving 'thoughts', or anything else, is like watching a movie, we all watch it from unique Perspectives. It is not a unique movie for us all, it remains the same One Movie, the saame One Reality.
Genuine answer. *__-

All within Reality is Real, and that's everything!

Great! So then you agree with me!

Virtual sandwiches (which as you now say is ultimately part of a greater reality) can feed us.

Isn't it nice to be validated by the agreement of others?
The rubber tyres from your auto are also features of Reality.
They cannot provide human sustenance, either.
Just because something (everything) is Real, doesn't mean that it is nutritious!

a reply to: galien8

This is not a simulation OR emulation, the original architects of such things are long gone, this is the product of them destroying themselves so as to not affect the outcomes, and after quite along time too.

And the various parts of the destroyed pieces have tried many times to reorganize the original form, thought, all the while not realizing that this CAN NEVER BE.