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.

 

The Universe is not a computer simulation

page: 3
44
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

What difference does it make whether its addition or subtraction? The result is the same difference.




posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Yours is the best post of the thread. People are just not thinking about the problem like you have done.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: spacemanjupiter

This is a really good thoughtful post too. The question becomes if the Universe is "math" then what about all the math that does not in any way shape or form represent nature's behaviors?

And then there's the question of does the math we used to represent nature's behavior actually mean something. The language we use to represent nature's behavior requires a very narrow context for it to have any meaning. The tunnel vision aspect of it makes me think there most likely exists meaningful parts we are ignoring.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Boomy327

RE: "There is order to the madness"

Or there is no order to the madness but only the delusion of order. Unless our physics explains the origins of experimental error or why the laws of physics are exactly the way they are then I think we really haven't said anything altogether meaningful about reality.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: jjkenobi
This is a fun hypothetical conversation.

It's pretty silly to argue for or against it since it's not possible to prove either way.

We're basically a "pocket universe".


I don't think it's hypothetical. I think most people are ignoring the wave nature evidence about reality because they want to believe in a clockwork universe. So it's more like people are flippant in their responses because they are clinging to their dogma.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: dfnj2015

I think the mistake is assuming the universe would use the same "computer" as we do. If we are indeed in a simulation, it would be far too advanced for us humans to even comprehend.



This.....

Just like ants cant comprehend us, we wont be able to understand the next levl.

Might just be that we ourselves are from the next lvl to begin with and this is a dumbed dowk version of it for the purpose of entertainmemt. Just like we entertain ourselves with fx MMOs etc.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:26 AM
link   


My main point in the OP of this thread is the fabric of reality is a much different animal than computer memory which is discrete and predictable to perfection.


mankind cannot be sure that if our knowledge of he structure of the universe increases then that fabric might not also be "discrete and predictable".



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: frenchfries
Good post !

Well Yes and no , of course isn't the universe a (von Neumann) 'computer' simulation.

First people thought universe was created by God then it was a clockwork then a matrix and now a computer. See the pattern technological advancement is projected on what is assumed the universe is.

Yep, the whole simulation fad is just the creator concept in disguise. And it is just as stupid.




Well just read between the lines and it becomes clear that this universe is a simulation done some kind of Device. And the whole gist of the message is that we all are 'in' it (),

Our bodies just like avatars experiencing the universe and it's simulated space and time whilst our 'souls' are connected to a higher reality.

Believe it or not 'computer' or not is not really important , but knowing that this show is simulated is.


But you don't know. You can not know. All you can do is pretend that you know to make yourself feel more special...



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:36 AM
link   
This seems to be an argument that the universe cannot be a simulation based on the facts of a universe that mankind doesn't completely understand.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:49 AM
link   
WINAR!


a reply to: Abysha




posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

CP/M-80 was before that, but IBM/Bill Gates confounded the languages at the tower of Babel.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Plotus

Who's to say the simulation would need electricity; perhaps we keep the simulation going in a symbiotic relationship with our masters; think Gnostic Archons or Hubbards Thetans...



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Abysha

Play any game and your computer breaks down through wear and tear; no EMP required.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I really doubt the hardware,organics, etc platform that a simulation of the universe runs on would be a Windows 10 OS on a machine built in China.




edit on 9/12/2017 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 11:14 AM
link   
A computer is a human being, particularly good at mathematics, hired by a government to do things like process ballistics and rocket science equations or nuclear physics equations. A computer, was typically female. If the universe is a computer simulation, then it would be the byproduct of an intelligence particularly good at mathematics, probably female. This appears consistent with theological arguments.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Plotus




Wouldn't an EMP shut down any artificial reality ? And why would people still remain ?


Let us take Grand Theft Auto as the simulation that can run on a computer. If a player sets off an EMP it will not affect the world outside the simulation. If you set off an EMP in this reality, you will affect the computer running the simulation, probably destroying it along with the simulation. So yes to your question if you take in account that we (EMP's) can shut down artificial reality's created in this world. I doubt anything can affect the realities higher up in the simulation level, the one proposed that we are running in.
Personally, I'm happy existing in a 10-dimensional computer simulation.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well to be fair our universe is probably more lightly to be a simulation, of a simulation, of a simulation........You get the idea.
edit on 12-9-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel



My main point in the OP of this thread is the fabric of reality is a much different animal than computer memory which is discrete and predictable to perfection.


mankind cannot be sure that if our knowledge of he structure of the universe increases then that fabric might not also be "discrete and predictable".


Obviously you can't prove a negative. But if you ignore the implications imposed by the limitations of quantum measurements then you are just being hopeful and superstitious.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well to be fair is our universe is probably more lightly to be a simulation, of a simulation, of a simulation........You get the idea.



It's turtles all the way down... But even then it seems to me reality is not solely discrete in nature. The evidence to the contrary is being ignored.



posted on Sep, 12 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

My understanding is that leading edge math and physics do indeed seem to suggest the holographic principle may indeed hold weight.

And apparently, once we are able to measure the individual unit of Planck(the energy in one quantum photon of electromagnetic radiation) we may indeed be able to determine if said theory is correct.

Tech to accomplish such is possibly only 5-10 years distant.

But aye Turtles all the way down, or up for that matter, just about covers it.

edit on 12-9-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
44
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join