Do we live in a computer simulation? researchers say idea can be tested!

page: 11
50
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
Our DNA is a unique numeric code that gives us our build or defines the shell we exist in in this reality, but most of us know that there is another us that communicates from what we believe is within, but may indeed lie elsewhere.


Awesomely written




posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by deepankarm
reply to post by 0bserver1
 


OP,bad news is that no one who is in the simulation can escape it.


What's wrong with that if we like the party?



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by LiquidAsh
ETA Maybe we are the simulator?


Maybe! Our brains are phenomenal parallel processors.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by PrplHrt
With respect to the size of the computer, there only need to be so many files. One file for every element in the periodic table. Everything in the universe would be rendered from just a handful of files and a few .exe's.


Hmm. I doubt it's Windows. We'd of blue screened halfway through this thread.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ooYODAoo
my question to this "simulation" theory is WHY?



why would someone want to "play" as me and go through a boring un fulfilling life filing and shredding papers in a gray office cubicle? why?

why not use "cheat" codes and make me rich with fun exotic cars, and all sorts of women?:...why not make it a fun simulation,

if i were playing a simulation of my life...i would have turned the game off and got my money back...

can anyone answer this?


Ever used cheat codes in GTA? Fun at first, but shortly a new level or boring emerges. Also... perhaps we are to learn lessons in this life within the rules/confines of the simulation. Seems to me that higher-level beings might have a lot of power/influence (maybe even the capacity to change the world with thought alone). Would be unwise to trust that kind of power with just anyone (vs. souls who have shown themselves to be compassionate/fair/ethical/uncorruptable/etc.).

And p.s. no refunds, you opened the box!
edit on 12/13/2012 by AkumaStreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by AkumaStreak
 

The thing with the power is as corrupt as corrupt gets.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by ooYODAoo
my question to this "simulation" theory is WHY?



why would someone want to "play" as me and go through a boring un fulfilling life filing and shredding papers in a gray office cubicle? why?

why not use "cheat" codes and make me rich with fun exotic cars, and all sorts of women?:...why not make it a fun simulation,

if i were playing a simulation of my life...i would have turned the game off and got my money back...

can anyone answer this?


Also... we have cars and women. It's your player choice to work In a cubicle.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by digitalf
Just following on from my post above, how could you prove such a theory - how could you break out of the simulation and see the world for what it really is. If we're just lines of code, you have to wonder what the purpose of the simulation is.

Takes me back to some of the original simulation games, anyone remember Populous ?
www.kickstarter.com...
edit on 12-12-2012 by digitalf because: (no reason given)


So eager to see what's behind the door. Might be very boring or undesirable vs the sim.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by PrplHrt
 


Sorry, I meant post (reply), not thread. It's been years and I don't see it.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by AkumaStreak
 

Okay. Can you recap what you wrote about?



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
So because electrons seemingly don't obey locality with some of their physical interactions and processes, the Universe cannot be real? Just physics. If you think you understand quantum theory...



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by AkumaStreak
 


Exactly. I see players in our own simulations stuck at a particular level / quest / objective for hours, days or weeks at a time before quitting in frustration. Many never ask for the right kind of help. I fail to see much of a difference here.

I can imagine that while our lives seem long here, there is a time differential at play. 70 years here might represent 600 "hours" of "game" from a different point of view. It's impossible to say, but consider how much time even the best of us spend on autopilot, or completely unconscious anyway.

Consider also that IF we are in a simulation, it is likely that the one we are playing is being run at a time of maximum simulations, in the farthest "future" we can imagine. If that is the case, perhaps our "real universe" has already begun to experience its "heat-death" or something similar. These simulations might be the only reasonable way we have left to experience any kind of "livable reality."



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by 0zzymand0s
 

The majority of us are not meant to progress past a certain level. To do so would upset the balance.

We are the worker bees, the drones. The rich don't want us at their level of the simulation. That would give us access to the mainframe.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   
As far as I understand non locality, the Aspect test, and a holographic universe are not the same per se. It's the holographic plate that contains all info not the projection in other words the hologram produced.

Non locality according to Bohm suggest an underlying reality which we can't access and which is the source of all.

Anyway Aspect showed non local action within our reality which you might also see as a quality of the holographic plate and thus the projection we live in.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
itresting....but i dont think it is a literal computer simulation, maybe more of an energy based computer



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrplHrt
reply to post by seamus
 

You're full of more crap than a whale. You don't know what I've been through. You don't know what's been done to me.

Incredible. I give you credit for balls and take it back for lack of brains.
You're alive, aren't you? Why are you whining instead of taking back your power? Because it's easier to blame someone else than to take responsibility as the god-being you truly are.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Baddogma
reply to post by seamus
 


Oh, and that idea that we are all one, or God splitting itself to regard itself from all perspectives to understand what He is, is scary at some level to me.

Being stuck alone in a masturbatory room of mirrors for eternity... off-hand I can't think of a worse hell. How alone and insane such a being might be. I (being this being of course) would crave company (and a universe) that had the ability to surprise me - be other than myself... but that's just my social ape-ness expressing itself.

Infinity has no peers. Get used to that idea.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by AkumaStreak

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
Our DNA is a unique numeric code that gives us our build or defines the shell we exist in in this reality, but most of us know that there is another us that communicates from what we believe is within, but may indeed lie elsewhere.


Awesomely written


The question would then be... If you are given a choice upon the start of this "game" or "simulation", why choose shells with "defective" code that cause the simulation to end early?

Or could it simply be that you don't have a choice in regards to shell, other than overlying traits such as parental background, maybe haircolor.... social status etc.

Or maybe, it could be as simple as us as controllers sign up for a specific amount of gametime like you would in an internet café and the shell then dies at the end of that time.

I hope I stacked up on gametime



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrumsRfun
reply to post by 0bserver1
 


I am not sure I believe it or not but I will add this video as my contribution to your thread.



I thought this video was interesting.

At about 3 minutes 50 seconds is the interesting part.
edit on 11-12-2012 by DrumsRfun because: (no reason given)





Thanks for sharing this. I have seen this before, and find the idea fascinating. I'd like to share a post I made in another thread here, as I think it kind of relates (both to the idea of a simulation, and to the idea of writers tapping in to a higher reality).

This was posted in a thread that talked about how both "Aurora" and "Sandy Hook" were referenced in the last Batman, Dark Knight film. Here's what I wrote:





And this is something I've found myself wondering about. Let's assume for a moment that these are somehow legitimate connections that go at least slightly beyond coincidence. The next logical question, I think, would be something like "what does this mean?"

Could it mean that "the elite" understand some things about the connection between thought, fantasy, intention, and the manifestation of reality that most of us don't... and so they're purposely inserting things like this into films to kind of "seed them" into the public consciousness, to gain more power for whatever events they're for some reason planning (events like sandy hook, the aurora thing, etc)?

Or could it be that writers and artists are somehow tapping into a collective unconscious, and that's where we pull our creative material from, and so, we occasionally end up with debris from "reality" littering our art in unexpected ways?

Or could it be a third, or fourth option I'm not thinking of?

Maybe on the 21st someone proves that we've been living in a computer simulation, and these are strange "easter eggs" left by the programmers. Does that mean we get bonus points for finding them?


Sorry. Just speculating. It's a past-time of mine.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375



under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them.

I'd love to see how they did this experiment...(rolls eyes)
It sounds nice and all, but I doubt they did it. What does it even mean for electrons to "communicate with each other?" and how would you measure it?
It's impossible with our technology. If someone would care to show me the details of the experiment and prove me wrong, go for it.




I'm almost not sure whether to be more astonished, or amused. You "skeptics" never fail to do either, for me.

What you are here, trying to eye-rollingly debunk, is called "entanglement" and has become accepted among mainstream physicists. Just because you may not be well-read or intelligent enough to have heard of this before, does not mean it doesn't exist.

Awesome job, though, trying to debunk accepted science. If you want to keep going, I know a big scary windmill that needs some slaying.

"skeptics"


To be fair, your questions about the technology required are not bad ones. They're good, in fact, IMO. But your lack of understanding does not invalidate it. If you're curious, perhaps looking up the information might be better than making derisive-sounding comments.

And on a more serious note, another experiment was done, where one single particle could be seen in two separate points in space. Physics seems very strange, the more we learn and experiment. But I'm sure you would consider that "nonsense" since you've neither heard of it, nor seen it. Perhaps you should look it up-- it's interesting stuff.



Originally posted by Aleister
What happens if it's tested and they find out that yes, we do live in a computer simulation. I say someone could then go in and do a hack job, fixing the Chicago Cubs, getting Anne Hathaway the Best Actress award she deserves, and making everyone vegan so we can finally save the simulated planet. Viva la simulation.




An interesting thought, but if all the animals are simulated, does it really matter as much? Likewise with any death, or all of life's tragedy, etc? Is it truly meaningful in any way other than the symbolic, or temporary (in this theory, simulated) emotions?




new topics
top topics
 
50
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join