Scientists Discover "Universe is Giant 3D Hologram"

reply to post by Absence of Self


No its just not vaild .. its simple

I dont mean to mince my words here

the holographic theroy is bull'shizzle

It has many things We understand yes but its not showing anything new...

I mean its like putting a mirror on the floor and looking at the stars thru this miiro

its compleat balls.... its a loop same as the matrix movie

its A understing of a question a loop a nothing a something we do not understand,, hence why its tripe...

I do math all the time but this is so basic even a kid would understand a "holographic" = its means is self projecting..."of something"

we dont know what that something IS but it does show its a loop

fractals.. stupid things that they are " Are REAL" its just as real as the other side of your face...

but then again thats A- symmectric lol..

Gah its not real i stand my postion

ITS BULLs#ht

reply to post by theresult


Why are you still saying that? If you think iot's a loop it fits in with the math. Have you seen my postulation about when the loop would start over?

reply to post by Absence of Self


Beginning with the presumption that the universe is infinite what quantity of information is contained within half of that and from there what is a centimeter?


presumption that the universe is infinite

yes Presumption : i think its not... next?

what quantity of information is contained within half of that and from there what is a centimeter?


this makes no sens...

what quantity
information
contained within half of that - meaning infitiny?

and from there what is a centimeter? = in what? we are the only people things that use that as a measuerment of distance between 2 objects..

5MILLIMETERS is half a ..

or do you like to speak in riddles?

point is this theory is flawed...

reply to post by TH3ON3


I dont think you understand the 2 aspect of this theory...

one is in mathmatical terms a LOOP

the other is the question who made us..

that gives another stupid loop....

Loops here there and everywere!!

point is i SEE THE LOOP i dont care if it does becouse if i did i would still be going round in circuls ...

Point is ITS REAL the loop, or we would not have words like infinity or the so called caluclation of P.I

PI in maths is a constand ITS NOT A LOOP its constant but in that it does become a loop becouse there is NO end...

Now with this holo ting its looping us via the universe.. and thats a load of tripe...

if you said symmerty theory it would make more sens for people to be able to read

Hologrpahic is a repesentation of a source and WE ARE NOT THE SOURCE
we only ocupy the space in the projection~

understand???

you cant project what you dont understand.. its simple

reply to post by theresult


Exactly my friend. You may have found out a truth without even having the clues. I could show you, but it might confuse you even more. It doesn't confuse me, because I have seen the end to the mean.

I will if you like. Let me know.

reply to post by TH3ON3


i dont mean to sound dumb here But yes show me..

what i understand is humans need to get to grips with the loop and stop asking about it

we are inside one how many stupid theorys do we need to understand it???

ITS ALL A BIG LOOP or shall we keep asking untill we fall of that cliff like TREX did...

its totaly pointless... Stop asking who made and start worring about staying here.

and i can show you that in math just like the matrix just like string theory just like m theory just like any stupid theory that is based on math becouse

MATH LOOPS aswell.,.. look at my sig..

1+1=3 why? becouse we know ITS 2 when we add one apple and another apple

do you stop to think WHY we add things up? no you dont.. i did

its becouse we are asking a question and we want a response its called 2

1+1 is you asking me 2 is me telling you the outcome...

1+1 = the universe

3 is me asking ... the universe

its SIMPLE we dont understand the basic reason why we are here

ITS TO BE HERE.. jeeezus im so screwed lol

reply to post by theresult


It's a bit long, but the basic theory does work out to Pi using the very clues I mentioned. It also depends on whether or not you have the ability to merge science and ancient writing. My theory is in This thread.

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
reply to post by mikesingh

 

A good book on this sort of stuff was written by Fritjof Capra titled "The Tao of Physics". Good stuff. I highly suggest it. Near the beginning of the book there is also a commentary on a discussion between Albert Einstein and an unknown Buddhist Monk.

Good post and thanks for the info, Jay! Seems I'm not too far off track! I'll try and get hold of that book you recommended!

Cheers!

reply to post by franspeakfree
Teri maa ki . Why dont you just asuume the sun goes around the earth.

reply to post by YourForever


In a way it does have to do with holograms because you are right. The flaw in scientific discovery is that we have to try to identify and explain the unknown with a known. I will try to clarify. If you look at something that you have never seen before your mind will immediately start to search its data bank and will attempt to match it to something that is known. Our mind will attempt to reject anything that our eyes relay that it can not classify. What we see is on a delay and numerous factors can play a part in how our mind makes the adjustment. Memories, smells, mood all can be factors that affect what we think we see. So surely a holographic image may have degrees of distortion and view ability depending on a variety of factors.

I think there can be things that are so foreign to our psyche that though our eyes may be able to pick it up our brains will reject it all together; just my opinion.

reply to post by NightSkyeB4Dawn


the hologram lacks one thing

a constant...

its the same as nassims theory of a fractal universe.. infact IT IS THE SAME THING

i dont know how people cant see it

Yeah, this is an excellent topic.
The thing that INFURIATES me, and I'm sure many others, is the idea that our current scientific method has been degraded to the point of "what do we need to know and when?"
We politicize our findings. (See the "life on Mars") thread that is currently in disussion

In this respect, one could potentially argue that religion could take the foreground. However, religion is heavily politicized, also...

The opinions of a select few, who are paid by the many, should ALWAYS be held accountable to the people who pay their wages!

But this is a topic for another thread.

reply to post by Jay-in-AR


agreed

its not alot to ask to be humble and be happy with the fact

we dont know how we got here...

that alone makes holgram whatever just a theory of GOD

Pointless and endless

its a fancy way of saying i know what god is... when infact we dont..

IF i dont know wtf god is im sure the rest of the 6.x billion people dont

even tho some like to think they do ofc..

but hey thats why we still go to war...

reply to post by SS,Naga


Sorry, I just had to revisit this a bit.

Are scientists your gods? *Snip* these emotionless, unconscionable people?

Woah, woah, woah... hold up. These aren't some alien beings who are somehow fundamentally different than you or I. They are human beings. They are your neighbors, your family members, your friends. They go to work every day worrying about their bills, their children, their loved ones. They worry about the future, their jobs, and the economy. They go hiking, hunting, and give to charity.

(SNIP)

How DARE you make such a crass and sweeping generalization about such a broad and diverse spectrum of humanity based solely on the occupation that keeps them warm and fed.

Emotionless? Unconscionable? And you say that I am out of touch with reality?

They haven't even been able to theorize the beginning of creation

Nobody has, not based on evidence or anything that has to do with reality anyhow. Science, at least, generally has the intellectual honesty to say "I don't know" and make their uncertainty known. Which is more than I can say for you've been driveling out so far.

And about all the wonders they've developed for society: tell that to the Third World cultures. Cash n carry. What they do best is presume their 'smarter.' Uh-huh.

And what, pray tell, exactly has the suffering of third world countries to do with scientists and the scientific method? Not a damned thing, so don't pretend that it does so that you can try snatch up the position of moral high-ground. Those are problems of politics and economics. Not of science. If anything science has done more to alleviate the poverty of the third world in the last 50 years than the last 2,000 years of politics. At least they provide the means for increased food production, such as the Haber process, and for clean water. What those countries need, and what ours (presumably yours as well) employs to facilitate the enjoyment of these amenities of science, is a solid infrastructure.

That has nothing to do with science, and don't even pretend that it does in some vain attempt to thumb your nose at the scientific method.



Mod Note: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.


Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 17-1-2009 by asala]

reply to post by Lasheic


lash dont miss understand what naga is trying to say

she/he words it in a manner that does not agree i admit but i also word things some peolpe dont agree with.. but that ats

From what i read she/he is saying we cant prove it becouse we still have the question of god..

I could have flamed just like you but i read it and undertand what he/she is saying

god will always be our problem no matter what we theorise

why? becouse we are wating for god to tell us the answer

hope that helps..

But asking god is an infinate question to me so i dont ask it

I do belive in god but its not some guy in a toga...

and i do respect the views of others even tho it makes my life hell

reply to post by theresult

From what i read she/he is saying we cant prove it becouse we still have the question of god..

God is irrelevant to the equation though, because science can only ever describes what occurs in the natural world. It has nothing to say on the matter of the supernatural. You're free to believe whatever you want about the supernatural world, but you cannot argue a position from assertions of it because there is absolutely no evidence for it. Science, of course, being a field of study based entirely on evidence backed claim (be that evidence physical or mathematical) There is no rational reason TO believe in claims of the supernatural. However, if you assume that the supernatural has an effect on the natural world, then you must logically accept that supernatural intervention can have a cause and effect relationship with the natural. THIS would leave evidence... and the startling lack of this evidence is extremely telling.

I, personally, do believe in god. I accept that it is not a rational belief. But then again, I challenge anybody to find a thread in which I've posted my views on this being as fact, as an explanation for any of the mysteries in science, or even tried to shoehorn this being in as a first mover in classic "God of the gaps" style. My views are my own, and I fully concede that if such a being DOES exist - then my preconceived notions about such a being may be fundamentally wrong. Knowing this doesn't shake my faith in that being, but does prevent me from telling others that "My Individual Truth" (pfft) is in any way the right one.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by Lasheic]

reply to post by Lasheic


its very relivent to any question!!!

I dont know if god is real or not just like the next person "unless your a nutt"

but the point is the theroy is based on something only we understand..

its not GOD..

its flawed.. i mean sure you can measure a rock and its a rock kinda thing..

but saying the universe is a holgoram is totaly bonkers why? becouse we still dont know what god is

very big paramater is out god figure in all this

How can one say life is a hologram if we dont infact know what life is?

we dont know how we got here or who made us

so our hologram theroy is based on a pretence..

its kinda simple really and its flawed beased on its very own concept of

US being god?

correct?

Originally posted by Common Good
WOW!!!!!! Ijust read the whole article, and asI am siting here typing, I am thinking that there is another me out there in a 2dimensional form causing me to do so. this is a little hard to get my head around. i saw a post on the article page andit said "Does that mean I am like homer simpson? doh!"

I couldnt help but think, what will this do in termsof religion, and how religion is seen throughout the world?
Im starting to get a little creeped out to tell you the truth.
At least I know the 2 Dimensional me likes to participate on ATS within the Terms & Conditions.

Mod Edit: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: The Discussion Of "Illegal Activity" On The Above Network Sites (ATS, BTS, AP). – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 16/1/2009 by Mirthful Me]

people dont beleive in god but your going to beleive in something like this?


and i thought i was a fool...

reply to post by gate13

people dont beleive in god but your going to believe in something like this? and i thought i was a fool...

You both may be right. What they see may be an image of the universe reflected off God's glasses.

reply to post by NightSkyeB4Dawn


hahaha

witty