We Live in A Computer Simulation!!!? Code of Reality Found, Same as Used in your PC!

reply to post by TheSubversiveOne


I don't think you get the idea of simulation. You are thinking of simulations on a similar scale (or maybe even lesser) to what we have now. It's a little more complicated than that.

Yes, code found in nature...is very interesting. Did you know that the universe and the materials within actually have pixels also? A high ranking NASA scientist has jumped on board the "simulation" theory. I actually think the whole theory holds a lot of water. It has been going on for some time, yet cannot be disproved. Evidence actually leans in favour of this theory.

It’s an idea that every college student with a gravity bong and The Matrix on DVD has thought of before, but Rich is a well-regarded scientist, the director of the Center for Evolutionary Computation and Automated Design at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and is currently writing an as-yet-untitled book about the subject, so we’re going to go ahead and take him seriously.

He gets interviewed and goes on to say:

The other interesting thing is that the natural world behaves exactly the same way as the environment of Grand Theft Auto IV. In the game, you can explore Liberty City seamlessly in phenomenal detail. I made a calculation of how big that city is, and it turns out it’s a million times larger than my PlayStation 3. You see exactly what you need to see of Liberty City when you need to see it, abbreviating the entire game universe into the console. The universe behaves in the exact same way. In quantum mechanics, particles do not have a definite state unless they’re being observed. Many theorists have spent a lot of time trying to figure out how you explain this. One explanation is that we’re living within a simulation, seeing what we need to see when we need to see it.

Our world does seem to act like a video game...

Further:

Q: Which would explain why there have been reports of scientists observing pixels in the tiniest of microscopic images.

A: Right. The universe is also pixelated—in time, space, volume, and energy. There exists a fundamental unit that you cannot break down into anything smaller, which means the universe is made of a finite number of these units. This also means there are a finite number of things the universe can be; it’s not infinite, so it’s computable. And if it only behaves in a finite way when it’s being observed, then the question is: Is it being computed? Then there’s a mathematical parallel. If two things are mathematically equivalent, they’re the same. So the universe is mathematically equivalent to the simulation of the universe.

www.vice.com...

Its a simulation but its highly interactive, and what is happening here is done by free will. Those who are committing and organizing events do so to prevent our progression. Its a school.

reply to post by NJoyZ


Oh heck, well what does that remind one of?

Remix

reply to post by NJoyZ


Dude, computers are retro engineered from nature, meaning we have copied nature to make computers, we are not living in a simulatiom simply because we can see code in the universe, a simulatiom is a human created concept, we have no clue who or what created the universe, but our technology has evolved from our copying the universe.

The truth is nobody has any clue whats goong on at all, and the truth is most likely faaaaaaar away from anything we have imagined, anyone telling you differently is only trying to make you associate them with intelligence and mystery.

Give up already its more fun that way, the answers can be found in plants my friend, you just have to learn how to communicate with them.
Ive been trying to post info on that matter but apparently thats not allowed by ats because it involves certain substances.

But im sure you can google your way to this info.on your own

As a programmer.. this thread makes my brain cry.. especially at "Same as Used in your PC!"

God I hope not .... or the world would be hiccuping every time there was a revision of the .net framework

Hence the necessity of grokking the nature of mystical metaphors such as this. Too few can do that, many people have a sort of blindness... so they jump to a shallow literalism like a certain silly vampire programmer is doing...staring at the finger as it points to the moon like enthralled fools...

reply to post by NJoyZ


From the video:

"Fear, and the wholes of this manipulated society, globally, is structured to make us fear, to make us have stress, to make us worry about tomorrow, to have guilt about yesterday... and forget about now..."

What an amazing revelation/quote.

reply to post by Xoanon


I've posted some simulation threads/replies around here recently too, as I am fond of the theory. In regards to string theory, though, hasn't it pretty much been thrown out the window as of the last few years/more recent results from super colliders?

Originally posted by miniatus
As a programmer.. this thread makes my brain cry.. especially at "Same as Used in your PC!"

God I hope not .... or the world would be hiccuping every time there was a revision of the .net framework

edit on 12/22/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)

Also a programmer, and I disagree with your point (at least wrt the future). Elegance/simplicity rule are two of the most powerful notions in software, but also some of the least prioritized in today's world. Basically... the problems with our technology today, particularly in software, are that we aren't good at it (yet). We're still happy to type our programs character by character, with massive potential for errors, we're still not collaborating as we should be, we have very little practical solutions in the validation department, etc. I could go on and on. Imagine iterative/evolving AI or AL writing computer code... they would suffer from few of the problems we do, and they would progress exponentially faster. We'll get there... :-)

This is theism cloaked as science. Sure, there is some 'creator' writing code behind the holy computron.
You gotta fart? Well there was code written for that, why did he write the SHART code then, what a joker!

And if you take drugs and alcohol, it's like adding bad code one could assume, I like to mess with the code!
Yeah, sure.......

Sorry, I don't buy these fancy theories, it's really unbelievable how some of you think we are living in a computer simulation, balony, we live in reality, things are the way they are because they fit that way, not because it's all a simulated computer program. That is assuming things are already programmed out, nothing is random, unless you think of it like a video game.

Sometimes I wonder if there is a limit to how much of peoples imagination becomes their idea of reality.

No, I do not subscribe to this theory.
Wishful thinking new age, believe in a higher power type theory that we a controlled by a deity disguised as science stuff.
A new age excuse for theism.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by NJoyZ

 

I know you have good intention, but really? Do you really believe it? My take is all this Matrix BS is just a computer scientist's version of religion and/or philosophy. It's swiss cheese for brains.

Everybody wants to believe that this reality isn't as it seems because they're afraid. Afraid of suffering, death and the absence of divine justice. They want to have purpose. The idea that this universe doesn't care about them and their mind is not eternal is just too much. The idea that we're just another creature and just as forgettable and insignificant is just too much.

And I'm a computer programmer. Not professionally, but I've programmed thousands of hours. So I have plenty of reason to let my programming habits color my perspective on the world. And I do. The difference is that I choose not to believe in an escape hatch. I choose not to believe in a God. We're as we appear to be. We're mortal creatures that live for a time and then disappear forever.

edit on 21-12-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

This is becoming the solid foundation for my thinking. In my life right now I am stripping away all superstition and I believe that what I will have left is the truth.
We are insignificant in the Universe and the Universe does not care about us.

That is why god or Zeus does not answer prayers, we invented them.
Zeus! Pretty ridiculous to believe in Zeus ain't it!
Those crazy ancient Greeks and their ancient imaginary friends, ridiculous!

Originally posted by Toadmund
This is theism cloaked as science. Sure, there is some 'creator' writing code behind the holy computron.
You gotta fart? Well there was code written for that, why did he write the SHART code then, what a joker!

And if you take drugs and alcohol, it's like adding bad code one could assume, I like to mess with the code!
Yeah, sure.......

Sorry, I don't buy these fancy theories, it's really unbelievable how some of you think we are living in a computer simulation, balony, we live in reality, things are the way they are because they fit that way, not because it's all a simulated computer program. That is assuming things are already programmed out, nothing is random, unless you think of it like a video game.

Sometimes I wonder if there is a limit to how much of peoples imagination becomes their idea of reality.

No, I do not subscribe to this theory.
Wishful thinking new age, believe in a higher power type theory that we a controlled by a deity disguised as science stuff.
A new age excuse for theism.

Sorry to upset your world view. First, we are discussing this as a possibility, not starting a new church. Second, most things in such a simulation would be emergent (emerging from simple/elegant rule-based initial code). In other words, the simulation has coded physics rules, genetic evolution rules, etc., but most likely no one specifically wrote a shart function. Happy?!

Originally posted by Toadmund

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by NJoyZ

 

I know you have good intention, but really? Do you really believe it? My take is all this Matrix BS is just a computer scientist's version of religion and/or philosophy. It's swiss cheese for brains.

Everybody wants to believe that this reality isn't as it seems because they're afraid. Afraid of suffering, death and the absence of divine justice. They want to have purpose. The idea that this universe doesn't care about them and their mind is not eternal is just too much. The idea that we're just another creature and just as forgettable and insignificant is just too much.

And I'm a computer programmer. Not professionally, but I've programmed thousands of hours. So I have plenty of reason to let my programming habits color my perspective on the world. And I do. The difference is that I choose not to believe in an escape hatch. I choose not to believe in a God. We're as we appear to be. We're mortal creatures that live for a time and then disappear forever.

edit on 21-12-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

This is becoming the solid foundation for my thinking. In my life right now I am stripping away all superstition and I believe that what I will have left is the truth.
We are insignificant in the Universe and the Universe does not care about us.

That is why god or Zeus does not answer prayers, we invented them.
Zeus! Pretty ridiculous to believe in Zeus ain't it!
Those crazy ancient Greeks and their ancient imaginary friends, ridiculous!

Even if our world is exactly as it seems, there is plenty of room for a less gloomy outlook. You have consciousness atm. Doesn't everything that happens once happen again, give enough time? Or are you bold enough to claim that experiencing sentience is the one thing that skirts this general rule. If you strip the ME/SELF (as a concept) down to sentience, I believe we'll likely know only sentience, even if our next instance of it is a trillion years from now (and if death as you so put it is nothingness, then you won't perceive the wait period, in fact, you would only know LIFE and BEING as a direct byproduct of the nothingness you are trying to argue makes being a short, single event).

Where did you come from? Sperm and egg? Why weren't you your brother or sister (in the case of siblings who come from sperm and egg of the same genetic makeup)? OK, maybe it's down to the molecules in them. What was special about the molecules in the sperm and egg that formed you that led to your being?

If every molecule has the potential for life, should we be mourning every potential being who is not?

There's more to life than your local daily life. :-P

Not believing in God can free you from having to believe in the established religions of the world or in an omniscient/omnipotent/eternal creator, but unfortunately you're still not free from the wonders of what you call "the real world", which has plenty of mystery still unexplained. Sorry!

wrong thread, please remove

reply to post by Toadmund


Sounds like you need to read some Joseph Campbell.

www.amazon.com...

Originally posted by AkumaStreak


Sorry to upset your world view. First, we are discussing this as a possibility, not starting a new church. Second, most things in such a simulation would be emergent (emerging from simple/elegant rule-based initial code). In other words, the simulation has coded physics rules, genetic evolution rules, etc., but most likely no one specifically wrote a shart function. Happy?!

edit on 12/22/2012 by AkumaStreak because: (no reason given)

I'm not upset, I just don't believe what the Matrix movie portrays, and some people can't separate hollywood from reality, that movie messed with a lot of minds I think.
Anyway, if it's a simulation, how can you separate the 'shart' from the code, you can't have something in the code and not write a code for it, and using the washing machine afterwards would that not also become part of the program? You have to fit the accident into the code.

I see what you are saying though, if a code created a robot, the code would not be needed to create a squeek in a joint, but you can't leave information out of a program either.
Sorry, we are a simulation? Some people buy it, I don't.

reply to post by NJoyZ

Matrix inspired? You a realy deeply in highest sphearas. This is nice place for such and similar, near second side...

Originally posted by Toadmund

Originally posted by AkumaStreak

Sorry to upset your world view. First, we are discussing this as a possibility, not starting a new church. Second, most things in such a simulation would be emergent (emerging from simple/elegant rule-based initial code). In other words, the simulation has coded physics rules, genetic evolution rules, etc., but most likely no one specifically wrote a shart function. Happy?!

edit on 12/22/2012 by AkumaStreak because: (no reason given)

I'm not upset, I just don't believe what the Matrix movie portrays, and some people can't separate hollywood from reality, that movie messed with a lot of minds I think.
Anyway, if it's a simulation, how can you separate the 'shart' from the code, you can't have something in the code and not write a code for it, and using the washing machine afterwards would that not also become part of the program? You have to fit the accident into the code.

I see what you are saying though, if a code created a robot, the code would not be needed to create a squeek in a joint, but you can't leave information out of a program either.
Sorry, we are a simulation? Some people buy it, I don't.

I also don't believe that we are batteries existing in pods -- suns would make better batteries.

You don't have to hard-code the robot, the squeeks, or any of that (depending on the particular simulation). If a simulation was created that accurately mirrored our big bang (and the emerging matter/etc.), and could model/calculate resulting interactions, well then you could end up with everything we've got in our universe. Your views on consciousness or the practicality of that might stand in the way of considering this theory (the former is more of an issue imo).

We are amateurs in the software dept. Emergent gameplay fascinates me, and it kind of addresses your questions about what must be hard-coded vs. what emerges from other rules/interactions in the simulation. Here is a simple (as I said, we're new to this) example, from the game Left 4 Dead. One time I was playing this game, and this beast called the tank hit a tree trunk into the air. The tree trunk landed on the roof of a building. Everyone inside the building continued shooting the tank, and when the tank was dead, they headed back outside. Now this game has hard-coded base rules. Objects have mass, objects with mass and velocity can harm players/enemies. Objects also have physics modeling.

As the people ran outside, I saw from the 3rd person (was waiting to respawn at the time) camera that the tree had started to tip on the roof. It proceeded to roll down the roof, off the edge of the roof, and landed on the survivors as they came outside (killing them/ending the round), who were thinking things were safe because the tank was dead.

This is in the realm of emergence. No code specifically said "today I am going to create code to make a tree balance on a roof for half a minute, then roll off, then crush the survivors when they run out of the building", making a fun water-cooler story for someone at work the next day to tell his gamer buddies.

Nor did whatever is above our level of reality code your sharts... heh.

I think people interested in this thread might be very interested in what Thomas (not Joseph) Campbell has to say about our reality as a simulation. I suggest googling "My Big TOE" (my big theory of everything) and perusing his forum, books, or videos.