Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
I didn't think
you were. That was a sort of informational addition for use to differentiate between different religious expectations, so was meant for a potential
But I was not arguing for a better universe instantaneously created by way of fairy tails or any other process.
Sounds like a high-tech
version of Greek mythology with Olympus and the gods being real, and us on earth being viewed as an image on the surface of water in a
. . . all of time-space we perceive is "sitting" within a possible "real" reality . . .
edit on 26-9-2012 by jmdewey60 because: add Bible quote: "For the creation eagerly waits for the revelation of the sons of God." Romans
Well, maybe sort of like a high tech version of Greek mythos, but it is based on empirical evidence and pretty solid theory in experimental quantum
entanglement. In my limited three dimensional perception, I would think of the universe like a classical level emulation of a quantum "ball" hovering
above some "guy's" desk.
It's like the problem with visualizing wormholes, none of the shows or movies seem to have it right, Sliders has some weird circular vortex, Stargate
has a watery disk, etc. Of course it would be pretty boring if Person A walked into Ball A, you see no transition or travel and then Person A walks
out of Ball C (you don't get to see Ball B), if matter could even be transitioned across space-time (I haven't figured that one out yet but I don't
think it can). I forgot to mention that communication is orthogonal, or inverted in three dimensions, so two communication transitions are required to
reproduce the original "image." Fortunately that is not a requirement for simple communications as opposed to matter. In simple communications we
invert the signal electronically once it's outside of the "sensor" system. Imagine the hell that would be played out on "living" organic matter
through this kind of system, I don't know if I would even want to test something like this on "living" matter due to the possibility of turning things
"inside-out" and maybe even multiple times.
Then there is also the problem of the number of transitions during entanglement. One transition, or one entanglement between two quantum emulations is
stable. When a third quantum emulation is introduced, the wave function collapses. Therefore, the probability of creating a matter transitioning
system is non-zero or very low. I would think this would also apply to a transitioning system between our virtual reality and a real reality as the
functions would become even more complex in five dimensions.
Back to 3D transitions... A true wormhole would have to be spherical in order to maintain its event horizon, there has to be a barrier that prevents
one section of the universe from being literally "sucked" into another. When we performed our experiments in non-local communications, our transceiver
sensors were totally isolated, electrically, magnetically and another way as well from what we perceive as reality and were contained within spherical
barriers that could support standing wave generation (classical emulation of quantum structures, for obvious reasons I don't want to give too much
information away as this is my "baby" and has been since 1992 when it was funded by NSERC along with my reactor).
I think the same "sucking" (pressure differential) would apply to this virtual reality and a real reality, except that rather than a spherical event
horizon for 4D communication, the physical expression would probably have to be five dimensional. Then we come to additional problems in proofs of
external realities in that you can only move information via quantum entanglement, rather than the actual "bits" (the problems with matter as I said
earlier) through the wormhole, which means that it is improbable that one can move matter through a 4D wormhole, if such a construct even exists. Then
there is the problem of a three dimensional virtual reality being, if transition could occur, trying to rationalize or understand a four dimensional
real reality once there, that's a hard one.
So the firewalls that the "creator" (mathematician/programmer) has put up between this virtual reality and a real reality are quite complex and at
present very hard to understand or visualize. It is interesting work however and can really stretch the limits of understanding especially when the
results of experiments in quantum entanglement show the negation of ANY expected speed-of-light propagation delay during communication, which of
course supports the theory.
Cheers - Dave
edit on 9/26.2012 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)