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 verdict is in objective physical reality doesn't exist

page: 5
47
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 03:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: neoholographic

Right so if we manifest reality then there are large population of total assholes on earth!



if *you* manifest reality and everyone around you is an asshole..... than what is I???




posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 03:54 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

www.sacred-texts.com...




"The Universe is Mental--held in the Mind of THE ALL."--The Kybalion.




Let us now proceed to a consideration of the nature of the Universe, as a whole and in its parts. What is the Universe? We have seen that there can be nothing outside of THE ALL. Then is the Universe THE ALL? No, this cannot be, because the Universe seems to be made up of MANY, and is constantly changing, and in other ways it does not measure up to the ideas that we are compelled to accept regarding THE ALL, as stated in our last lesson. Then if the Universe be not THE ALL, then it must be Nothing--such is the inevitable conclusion of the mind at first thought. But this will not satisfy the question, for we are sensible of the existence of the Universe. Then if the Universe is neither THE ALL, nor Nothing, what Can it be? Let us examine this question.




THE ALL can create in no other way except mentally, without either using material (and there is none to use), or else reproducing itself (which is also impossible). There is no escape from this conclusion of the Reason, which, as we have said, agrees with the highest teachings of the Illumined. Just as you, student, may create a Universe of your own in your mentality, so does THE ALL create Universes in its own Mentality. But your Universe is the mental creation of a Finite Mind, whereas that of THE ALL is the creation of an Infinite. The two are similar in kind, but infinitely different in degree. We shall examine more closely into the process of creation and manifestation as we proceed. But this is the point to fix in your minds at this stage: THE UNIVERSE, AND ALL IT CONTAINS, IS A MENTAL CREATION OF THE ALL. Verily indeed, ALL IS MIND!




And Death is not real, even in the Relative sense--it is but Birth to a new life--and You shall go on, and on, and on, to higher and still higher planes of life, for aeons upon aeons of time. The Universe is your home, and you shall explore its farthest recesses before the end of Time. You are dwelling in the Infinite Mind of THE ALL, and your possibilities and opportunities are infinite, both in time and space. And at the end of the Grand Cycle of Aeons, when THE ALL shall draw back into itself all of its creations--you will go gladly for you will then be able to know the Whole Truth of being At One with THE ALL. Such is the report of the Illumined--those who have advanced well along The Path.


I guess we can wait on modern reductionist science to tell us what we already know... I for one don't need to wait
edit on 13-2-2019 by toysforadults because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:06 AM
link   
archive.org...



Eyerything is Dual; eTerything has poles; every- thing has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled." — The Kybalion.





"Everything flows, out and in; everything has its tides; all things rise and fall; the pendulum-swing manifests in everything ; the measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left; rhythm compensates." — The Kyhdlion.





"Everything is dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled."--The Kybalion.




"Every Cause has its Effect; every Effect has its Cause; everything happens according to Law; Chance is but a name for Law not recognized; there are many planes of causation, but nothing escapes the Law."--The Kybalion.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

it's only appears real to you. think playing VR game and you don't remember you entered into it



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 07:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: neoholographic

Right so if we manifest reality then there are large population of total assholes on earth!



if *you* manifest reality and everyone around you is an asshole..... than what is I???


nO not I but we collectively , we manifest our own realities then surely there seems to be a majority of assholes manifesting a #e reality!



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: AcerM
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

it's only appears real to you. think playing VR game and you don't remember you entered into it


"Entering a VR game" implies that there is some other "real" place outside the game.

I stipulated that I'm not talking about some alien sitting in a lab in some 3D running a 2D game or other simulation that is our holographic universe. I'm talking about the holographic nature of the universe in fact being the natural state of the universe. In that case there would be no "outside" that is more real than what we call reality.

There is no place "outside the game", so to speak.

And if there is nothing at all -- anywhere -- more real than the our holographic universe, than our holographic universe is the definition of reality. It is what it is.


edit on 2/13/2019 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

thats the bit I dont get about the holographic nature, I understand that its a fractal in that it repeats from the very small quantum scale to the very large macro scale

but where is the generator, of the holographic image, or is that consciousness in this case ?



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 11:21 AM
link   
The verdict is in objective physical reality doesn't exist

It's 100% guaranteed.

That if I got hit in the face.

It'd hurt like a muther snipper.

Physical reality doesn't exist?

hahahaaaaaaa.
edit on 13-2-2019 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

thats the bit I dont get about the holographic nature, I understand that its a fractal in that it repeats from the very small quantum scale to the very large macro scale

but where is the generator, of the holographic image, or is that consciousness in this case ?



Yeah. While I find the hypothetical idea of the holographic Universe being an intriguing one to consider, it does make my brain hurt when I try to figure out where this hypothetical 2D information that "projects" as a 3D universe (if "projects" is even the right word) actually "resides" (if "resides" is even the right word).

I suppose it would be in other dimensions? maybe? But then that "place" where the 2D information resides would not be something accessible to us.

Put it this way: If we had a hypothetical spacecraft that could take us to the expanding edge of the universe, I certainly don't think we would be able to see the 2D info smeared across the face of that edge of the universe being projected back into the universe. Obviously it would not be that literal, instead tat @D information ('wherever' it is) would be something deep-set and integral to the fabric of the universe.

So that would still mean that our you, me, and everything else in the universe would be as real as real can possibly get, even if it's holographic.


edit on 2/13/2019 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Aye I get what you mean , what Im perplexed by is that a hologram created on a plate , that hologram then projects whats on the plate. A hologram can be smashed into a million pieces and one tiny shard can still projet the full holographic image ,so how then does that apply to the universe , surely one quantum particle cant contain all the information in the universe or multiverses past present and future ?

I think a hologram like dna of humans, a hologram shard will still give the full image , where as a dna strand can still contain the info of the full organism , maybe we are missing that "god particle" or whatever you'd call it



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 02:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic


Show me the evidence that this measurable amount of water is an objective physical reality in light of the work of Hoffman and the the work of Bekenstein in the holographic principle. I don't want to hear your hyperbole but actual evidence that supports your claim.


Funny. Already explained how this is as objective as we're going to get using mathematics. Ain't my fault you don't understand. The holographic principle cannot exist without mathematics, which is, you know, what you call "hyperbole." Your entire argument is about 2D and 3D (geometry) but you get to claim that the mathematics involved here is valid. But when I bring up mathematics, it is not valid. The irony is off the charts....

The holographic principle (which is a theory, which means it's not been, ah, objectively provable, hello is this thing on? Nope) doesn't apply in the macro, genius. Hello, is this thing on again? Nope. Just like the general theory doesn't fit with the quantum world. This is basic stuff here. Forget the overall philosophy you don't understand - you butcher your own scientific information.

Physicist Niayesh Afshordi, studying the holographic principle:


I would say you don’t live in a hologram

gizmodo.com...


Mic drop.


Now go ahead and post 14 billion (objectively measured) words and pictures to pretend like you're an authority, when all it's doing is covering up your ignorance. And I'll let you in on a little secret: it doesn't cover it up very well.
edit on 13-2-2019 by coloneltravis because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-2-2019 by coloneltravis because: clarity

edit on 13-2-2019 by coloneltravis because: clarity

edit on 13-2-2019 by coloneltravis because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: DEPAOR
Your line about Mars isn’t very accurate


Point out the inaccuracy.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: coloneltravis

What, you explained nothing in your last post or this post. This is what you said:


If the tub is full of water, it has to be a measurable amount of water. Water itself is composed of elements, elements are composed of atoms, atoms are composed of protons and neutrons, etc. All of these components must be represented by specific numbers, or else you won't get this particular amount of water (or any amount of water) in this particular tub. Did human beings invent the mathematical truths represented by what we call numbers? An X number of things can never exist unless humans perceive them? There were no planets in our solar system until human beings figured out there were? Water could never exist without us perceiving something as water?


This was just a hodge podge of nonsense. You didn't provide a shred of evidence. Who said water isn't composed of atoms or subatomic particles?

It's just pure nonsense. You said all of these components must be represented by a group of numbers. List the numbers for each component and explain how this shows an objective physical reality exist.

You're not making any sense.

The concept of "water" exists, whether we perceive it or not.

You make this declarative statements without a shred of evidence to support what you're saying. How to you know water exists whether we perceive it or not?

If the Universe is simulated it could have been done yesterday and you just load up a back history into the simulation. How do you know the universe wasn't simulated yesterday? LOL

The point is, you haven't refuted anything. You just make a bunch of declarative statements backed by nothing. Here's another one.You said:

Did human beings decide what all these numbers would be ahead of time, in order to produce water? No.

This is just asinine. You said No like because you said no it must be true. How do you know fundamental consciousness or conscious agents didn't decide these things? Where's your evidence that consciousness emerges from the material brain?

Answer this, if consciousness emerges from the material brain, how does the material brain tell the material brain which memories it wants the material brain to recall?

You don't provide evidence for anything you have said. You made these statements and what, people are supposed to believe you because you said it when you obviously don't know what you're talking about?

Again, answer this:

You said all of these components must be represented by a group of numbers. List the numbers for each component and explain how this shows an objective physical reality exist.

This is one of your nonsensical declarative claims. Please provide some clarity. List the numbers for each component and tell us exactly how it shows that objective physical reality exists.

Waiting for some evidence..........



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 06:24 PM
link   
neoholographic - You like to bounce from subject to subject and if I had to refute every dumb thing you've typed, I wouldn't have a life. Sorry, I'm not going to waste my time from your inability to not focus.

You have serious fundamental problems with this whole subject.

1.) According to you, the holographic principle is the only objective reality allowed to exist in a world that doesn't allow objective reality. I thought someone into facts and evidence like you could this absurdity from a mile away? Nope. Physicists who advocate this theory do not agree with you.


A mathematical contrivance, as handy as it may be, doesn't necessarily dictate our views of the fundamental nature of reality. If holographic principles are useful for solving problems, it doesn't necessarily mean that we live in a hologram.

www.space.com...

2.) The theory you cling to is just a theory, and it's not even widely accepted by physicists.

I'm just saying if you'd actually go and ask a representative sample of physicists, I guess you'd find that most don't care about the holographic principle and wouldn't agree on any statement about it.

backreaction.blogspot.com...


3.) The holographic principle cannot be explained without mathematics, it can't be explored without mathematics, it cannot exist, period, without mathematics. Numbers exist outside time and space and our mind. This is disputed by no one with a brain except you. You have a problem with mathematics, except when you don't have a problem with mathematics. And the only time you don't have a problem with mathematics is when you get to make the rules.

4.) You say I have to "prove" something exists or existed, when your very rules dictate that my proof can never be anything but a guess, because there's no way to prove anything ever existed, because reality might have only started just yesterday.

I'd ask you to try harder but I'm pretty confident we've reached Peak Neo. You don't even rise to the level of interesting drunk dorm room discussion.

I pass the baton to someone else who wants to waste their time. I've wasted enough of mine.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 06:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: DEPAOR
a reply to: CryHavoc

Does the tree make a sound though? That question can’t be answered. There’s probably a word for that.


Yeah, it's called Philosophy.

It's interesting that nobody ever questions the tree itself falling, tho. Only the sound of it.

Physics doesn't stop happening just because humans aren't looking.
edit on 13-2-2019 by CryHavoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: coloneltravis

I didn't think your post could get any worse but they have. You said:

3.) The holographic principle cannot be explained without mathematics, it can't be explored without mathematics, it cannot exist, period, without mathematics. Numbers exist outside time and space and our mind. This is disputed by no one with a brain except you. You have a problem with mathematics, except when you don't have a problem with mathematics. And the only time you don't have a problem with mathematics is when you get to make the rules.

Can someone decipher this nonsense!

You keep rambling on about mathematics when nobody has said anything about the holograohic principle being described without mathematics. Where do you get this silly notion? You keep talking about mathematics in your post but you haven't explained exactly what you're talking about or how it relates to the thread. You say things like this:

You have a problem with mathematics, except when you don't have a problem with mathematics. And the only time you don't have a problem with mathematics is when you get to make the rules.

What in the Sam Houston is this nonsense?


What does this even mean? This is why I asked you a specific question:

You said all of these components must be represented by a group of numbers. List the numbers for each component and explain how this shows an objective physical reality exist.

I'm not asking for your asinine ramblings about mathematics. You made a specific claim and I want to know how this specif claim shows an objective material reality exist. I don't want to hear this nonsense:

The holographic principle cannot be explained without mathematics, it can't be explored without mathematics, it cannot exist, period, without mathematics.

Who said it could? Are you sure there's not some marijuana smoke nearby because this sounds ridiculous. Who said the holographic principle has nothing to do with mathematics? Again I ask you to clarify your statement with Scientific evidence and not wild ramblings.

You said all of these components must be represented by a group of numbers. List the numbers for each component and explain how this shows an objective physical reality exist.

You then posted from some blog from 2012. Yes, the holographic principle wasn't as popular in 2012 than it is today.

You said:

1.) According to you, the holographic principle is the only objective reality allowed to exist in a world that doesn't allow objective reality.

Where did I say the holographic principle is the only objective reality allowed to exist? Please quote me. What does this even mean? I didn't say an objective reality didn't exist. I said an objective physical reality didn't exist and this is why I talked extensively about fundamental consciousness and conscious agents. You said:

4.) You say I have to "prove" something exists or existed, when your very rules dictate that my proof can never be anything but a guess, because there's no way to prove anything ever existed, because reality might have only started just yesterday.

Where did I say you have to prove anything? This is just nonsense. I asked you to provide evidence that supports your claim. That's all I asked and all I get is a mish mash of incoherent nonsense.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Aye I get what you mean , what Im perplexed by is that a hologram created on a plate , that hologram then projects whats on the plate. A hologram can be smashed into a million pieces and one tiny shard can still projet the full holographic image ,so how then does that apply to the universe , surely one quantum particle cant contain all the information in the universe or multiverses past present and future ?

I think a hologram like dna of humans, a hologram shard will still give the full image , where as a dna strand can still contain the info of the full organism , maybe we are missing that "god particle" or whatever you'd call it





Interesting post and this is something else that points to a holographic universe. Some Scientist today think that when a black hole collapses a singularity never forms and a universe expands. Some Scientist believe theirs a universe in every black hole.

Stephen Hawking: Black holes may offer a route to another universe

www.independent.co.uk...

Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe

www.insidescience.org...

There Was No Big Bang—A Black Hole Created Our Universe, Scientists Claim

www.outerplaces.com...

Why Our Universe Must Have Been Born Inside a Black Hole

www.technologyreview.com...

So you don't need an entire universe to collapse into a black hole in order for another universe to expand. The star that collapsed contains all of the information needed to create a universe like ours. If the universe wasn't a hologram this would be impossible. The information on the event horizon can project every arrangement of what we call "matter" that we see in the universe today. If you don't need all of the "matter" of an entire universe to create an entire universe, where does all the matter come from? The answer is, it's a projection of information not an objective physical reality. David Bohm said this.

“Our brain mathematically constructs objective reality by interpreting frequencies that are ultimately from another dimension, a deeper order of existence that is beyond both space and time” says David Bohm.

This ties into Hoffman and what I said about an organism being tuned to fitness not to truth. We create a reality where we can survive through reproduction and an objective physical truth would stand in the way of our evolution.



posted on Feb, 14 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

You are cherry picking hypotheses and general ideas as fact and ignoring all other ideas. Nobody actually knows that stuff, but you are acting like they are the be all end all. Black hole universe is ONE idea among dozens in science to explain the universe and hasn't been proved in the slight. Instead of cherry picking scientist opinions, give us facts. Holographic universe has been pretty much debunked already.


edit on 2 14 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2019 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

You said:

Holographic universe has been pretty much debunked already.

This is just nonsense. When you say things like this you lose all credibility. You may not like the Holographic universe but you can't just say that and debate it. You have to lie and say it's pretty much debunked when it's not. Hawking's last paper talked about the universe as a Hologram.

Professor Stephen Hawking's final theory: The universe is a hologram

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Watch this recent video from PBS Space-Time. In it he talks about the Bekenstein bound, the Holographic universe and many of the things I've talked about throughout the thread as it pertains to the holographic universe.



The Holographic universe isn't debunked partly because of the Bekenstein bound.


In physics, the Bekenstein bound is an upper limit on the entropy S, or information I, that can be contained within a given finite region of space which has a finite amount of energy—or conversely, the maximum amount of information required to perfectly describe a given physical system down to the quantum level.[1] It implies that the information of a physical system, or the information necessary to perfectly describe that system, must be finite if the region of space and the energy is finite. In computer science, this implies that there is a maximum information-processing rate (Bremermann's limit) for a physical system that has a finite size and energy, and that a Turing machine with finite physical dimensions and unbounded memory is not physically possible. Upon exceeding the Bekenstein bound a storage medium would collapse into a black hole.[2]


en.wikipedia.org...-2

That last part is important because I just talked about it in my bathtub example.

Upon exceeding the Bekenstein bound a storage medium would collapse into a black hole.

You have to show how information is proportional to volume without causing a black hole if you're going to say the objective physical reality exists. If my closet is filled with objective, physical stuff, I have to explain why it hasn't collapsed into a black hole because the volume of space would be filled with information and far exceed the Bekenstein bound.

Here's some papers about the Bekenstein bound and Holographic universe and many are recent.

Holographic Dark Energy and Quantum Entanglement
Submitted on 3 Dec 2018 (v1), last revised 17 Dec 2018


arxiv.org...

Holographic quantum information and (de)confinement
(Submitted on 18 Oct 2018)


arxiv.org...

A proof of the Bekenstein bound for any strength of gravity through holography
Submitted on 2 Mar 2009 (v1), last revised 9 Jul 2010 (this version, v3))


arxiv.org...

Black hole entropy and the Bekenstein bound
(Submitted on 3 Oct 2018)


arxiv.org...

Pixelated Dark Energy (Submitted on 29 Jan 2019)

arxiv.org...

Cosmic acceleration from holographic information capacity (Submitted on 19 Oct 2018)

arxiv.org...

On the holographic bound in Newtonian cosmology (Submitted on 2 Oct 2017 (v1), last revised 23 Jan 2018 (this version, v2))

arxiv.org...

If the Holographic universe is debunked somebody needs to tell Physicist and Cosmologist who keep submitting papers to places like Arxiv that talks about Holography and the universe.

Here's another recent article:

Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe
Published: 31 January 2017


www.southampton.ac.uk...

My point is, you don't have to lie in order to debate. There's no need for the hyperbole that the holographic universe has been debunked when it hasn't. In fact, it's hard to find Cosmologist today that don't accept some form of Holography as it relates to the universe.

This reminds me of that line from the movie Friday. "You ain't gotta lie, Craig, you ain't gotta lie."




A little levity on an early Friday



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: toysforadults
Ecclesiastes 12:12

As for anything besides these, my son, be warned: To the making of many books there is no end, and much devotion to them is wearisome to the flesh.

Greek philosophy will not make you wise, nor will it enlighten you or improve your insight and understanding of reality. Entertainment and supposed intriguing insights designed to 'tickle your ears' (2 Timothy 4:3,4) doesn't help with either true wisdom nor beneficial knowledge nor proper understanding nor useful insight.

Just like this thread come to think of it.
edit on 15-2-2019 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join