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

I see a lot of persons minds are VERY limited. You're saying we can't live in a simulation because YOU'RE a programmer and what we live in is much more complicated, thus real.

Has it not occurred to you that we live in much more complicated simulation? A simulation where the simulations aren't aware they are simulations? That they may even create their own simulations?

I've always wondered if the simulations on games I play (xbox) may one day believe they are real? That's right, what if the characters in COD or Gears believe they are living in a real world?

I've given more consideration to this theory due to such things as crypto. If we indeed live in a simulation...we may never solve such mysteries as bigfoot. They may be outside our....code.

I've been thinking about this the last couple weeks just to entertain the thought of it

I keep picturing the invisible UFO in the movie Signs, where it shows birds falling dead from flying into it
Using this fictional scenario from the movie, how can we create a similar situation in regards to the simulation, where when the bird flies into the UFO the UFO will become visible for a second?

I'm terrible at explaining what I'm trying to say.

What I mean is:
What kind of energy, electricity, or our own codes can we use to bring this to light? I'm wondering, what can we do to put a glitch in this to expose the simulated web to prove it's real? Making the invisible, visible to us. We know the science of computer codes and technology, there must be a way to implement this science to our own reality to see what the reality really is.

I don't know !!!

I mean I call myself a sceptic but when it comes to this I feel myself bordering on an old cynic.

In the day and age of computers,internet,mobile phones,facebook,twitter etc,etc it seems somewhat ironicbut highly apt that computer simulation reality and 'new-age interconnectedness and one-ness' have become so popular.

These new beliefs,philosophys or dare I say it religions are just a reflection of our 24 hour,instant access,internet,world-wide-web,online,(inter connected or 'one-ness' computer simulated) modern world.

Maybe I'm wrong,maybe I'm getting old but I prefer a more real,analogue,full fat natural reality.

Aye,that's it I'm just getting old.lol

"I don't believe this is the case, or is even possible, because it conflicts with my existing ideas of reality, and/or makes me uncomfortable."


This is what I see a lot of you saying. Different words. Sometimes seemingly complex arguments, that pretty much all lead back to that same meaning, to me.

Originally posted by Hillarie


Thank you. All this trippy crap is a nightmare with a very dark side. It's like the smile of a demon whose real face is just underneath. But I guess at a certain age, you have to go through this for awhile. I'm glad I'm past it.

Nightmare with a dark side? How so?

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by NJoyZ

 

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)

And how would being one tiny collection of bits and bytes, one day likely to be erased or overwritten mean that the universe "cares" about you? How is that having an "escape hatch?" How would that be any different than the atheistic kind of situation you describe, save possibly having some external programmer?

Originally posted by Toadmund
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.

Their imagination, or lack thereof. Yes, i think you're on to something.

Originally posted by Unity_99
Its a school.

I have often thought about a society so advanced that it births its children into a virtual world which they believe is real.

The children either prove themselves highly worthy of life in the real world by living with intelligence, compassion, strength, love, contribution, and other qualities important to a smooth society in which people don't go killing each other and work together to keep their world in an optimum state for everyone (including continuing to grow and advance assuming there are no limits on civilization's advancement);
OR the children fail to prove themselves and die in the virtual world being continually reborn, having certain events shape their lives and understanding so they can at some point pick up where they left off (though not remembering they have lived other lives) and continue learning their lessons until history for them need not repeat itself.* Then they can be "born again" into the real world outside the simulation having proven through a life (or lives) that they are deserving to be with the best and will perform admirably amoungst the rest of their piers. No killing, murder, harsh treatment etc., it's all left behind in [don't say it] "the matrix".

The people born to the true reality are too far advanced in consciousness to deal with their problems that way (they probably don't have many problems to get so upset about because they have learned to be pleasant and generally treat each other well and more so, --they would pursue truth over all else so investigating claims that counteract their previous beliefs would be a joy to them. They wouldn't get pissed at being confronted with opposing ideas. Instead all opponents thoughtfully evaluate the case and since there can always be only one truth, they must inevitably agree on what that truth is once they have all evaluated the relevant pieces of information.

*Note: If a consciousness within the matrix is truly a failure and never learns and is really suffering in it's life (or lives) then it might simply not get reborn. Because it hated life so much, when it dies it dies and that's their gift to it, freedom from reality (virtual or otherwise) because it couldn't handle it.


This idea does remind me that the world needs all the advanced complexities of holographic reality, it's a very important part of what makes this life so beautiful (and what makes it work at all). So perhaps, even if we were all in such a simulated reality, the real world, the universe itself, is also still an infinitely massive, holographic fractal (but perhaps not necessarily a simulation).

Deleted

Originally posted by mutatismutandis
reply to post by NJoyZ

 

So if this is somehow proven beyond a doubt to be true...doesnt that open the possibility to being able to expose and possible alter this code?

Yes, or maybe utilize to alter our reality, but not necessarily ever "alter" the foundation code itself.

In other words, if this holds to be true we arnt just talking about altering dna but altering our very existence.
In theory, one with enough insight could be able to literally "hack" into their lives and create their whole universal existence how they seem fit.
In a sense, it would be giving mankind to power of the gods...kinda scary given how well we've worked together as a race so far...

No, not necessarily, and in all probability (not that I've done the math) probably not. Transcribing DNA verbatim as we do with the whole genomic databases these days is one thing, that reading and and mapping what we see of it. Writing it to manifest the lifeforms of our desires is an tremendously more difficult challenge. in the same way, reading the code of our our existence in portions is nothing like being able to alter its expression. And DNA is smaller than us, we can work with it and see it all at once (sort of), but reality CONTAINS us, and getting it to accept our new instructions may be somthing that is never possible on more than a localized level.
It's also probably not a good idea, things seem to work pretty well, lets not # them up. God forbid we hit a blue screen and never come abck to reality again

Originally posted by PrplHrt
Is it possible that someone within the simulation cracked the code and interfered with or rewrote the program?

Seems likely and it would explain nested simulations, wouldn't it? Perhaps it's a way for whomever cracked the code to cover his tracks. Endless iterations, like a thief chased through time.

Shhhhhh...

Originally posted by BlueMule
That's why Sigmund Freud didn't want the world to know that psychic ability is real. He knew very well that it is very real indeed. The nature of the simulation is consciousness, and psychic ability is basically what is portrayed in movies like Star Wars and The Matrix. It's described in every mystical tradition. Despite what the orthodoxy of the day would have people believe, psychic ability is in all of us and connects all of us. Like a web. This psychic web is the stuff of the simulation.
"All the Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but the One Mind, beside which nothing exists."
-Huang Po

Love it.

Originally posted by pikestaff
This computer we are living in, it must be fantastically big to hold the billions of 'bits' for each human, bird, fish, animal, insect, plant, volcano, cloud, raindrop, snowflake, leaf, grain of sand, on this planet, I don't think a computer could be built that huge to hold all that programming, who built this 'computer'.? who is 'who'?

Not necessarily read my posts above, the one with the:
"A.
B.
C." points.
You would be surprised to know that even with today's top technology such a computer might be surprisingly little.

Originally posted by AkumaStreak
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?!

I like the emergence thing thanks for your info on that.

Originally posted by Toadmund...
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. ...

We are not saying life is straight out of a Hollywood movie. All were saying is that the imagined reality in the move was reliant on certain underlying concepts that are related to this potentially groundbreaking science. Referring to The Matrix is like referring to anything else in order to assist in explaining a concept. Haven't you ever referred to a story or something that on its own would be ridiculously illogical to assume was true but used some components from with in it to explain your thoughts to someone. It's a standard method of communication, get with it (and relax!
You don't need to hate feel better.).

Not sure if posted already (haven't read all posts):

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...
Physicists May Have Evidence Universe Is A Computer Simulation

Physicists say they may have evidence that the universe is a computer simulation.

How? They made a computer simulation of the universe. And it looks sort of like us.

A long-proposed thought experiment, put forward by both philosophers and popular culture, points out that any civilisation of sufficient size and intelligence would eventually create a simulation universe if such a thing were possible.

And since there would therefore be many more simulations (within simulations, within simulations) than real universes, it is therefore more likely than not that our world is artificial.

Now a team of researchers at the University of Bonn in Germany led by Silas Beane say they have evidence this may be true.

In a paper named 'Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation', they point out that current simulations of the universe - which do exist, but which are extremely weak and small - naturally put limits on physical laws.

Technology Review explains that "the problem with all simulations is that the laws of physics, which appear continuous, have to be superimposed onto a discrete three dimensional lattice which advances in steps of time."

What that basically means is that by just being a simulation, the computer would put limits on, for instance, the energy that particles can have within the program.

These limits would be experienced by those living within the sim - and as it turns out, something which looks just like these limits do in fact exist.

For instance, something known as the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin, or GZK cut off, is an apparent boundary of the energy that cosmic ray particles can have. This is caused by interaction with cosmic background radiation. But Beane and co's paper argues that the pattern of this rule mirrors what you might expect from a computer simulation.

Naturally, at this point the science becomes pretty tricky to wade through - and we would advise you read the paper itself to try and get the full detail of the idea.

But the basic impression is an intriguing one.

Like a prisoner in a pitch-black cell, we may never be able to see the 'walls' of our prison -- but through physics we may be able to reach out and touch them.

After your "?" I have no idea what you are talking about!

Originally posted by dragnik
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 Raelsatu

Originally posted by severdsoul
psss buddy pass that this way....

because im thinkin you are smoking something real strong.

Uh,why's that? Somebody must be taking drugs to consider a theory that's gaining credibility every month now?? There are many scientist, engineers, & people from different walks of life that are beginning to accept this as a possibility. Maybe if you researched it some you'd know that.

chances are that they were on some stuff to get them thinking down that avenue.

Are there any instant, or at least rapid, cheat codes to manipulate this simulated reality?

Besides going the roads of the Christ & Buddha w decades of inner work meditation.

If you understand the code, or meet the programmer, then it all becomes malleable and the rules no longer apply.

I believe it. I've had an inkling of this since was I a wee lad!!!

reply to post by NJoyZ


This is the height of ego.

To assume the things we make are in the same image as our makers.

Almost as bad as thinking the makers would be in any way similar to the made.

Nice one. I have read something similar before. Will watch these later

Turn finger around ear and make a whooooo noise.....

Okay, this needs to be said. I just can't believe the way some of you behave. I am seeing a lot of ridicule here. Mods, do your #ing job. Saying things like "what are you smoking" when someone posts part of a discussion with a world renowned physicist, and a few others join in with ridicule, something isn't right.

Look, if all you have to add to the discussion is "psst, pass what ur smokin lulz", you need to shut the # up and read a few books. Or don't say anything because you aren't contributing. Insulting the OP's intelligence, my intelligence, and blowing off a man's lifelong work in physics with a joke is a despicable, sheepish thing to do. Everyone is entitled to disagree, but you might say

"OP, I think it's a little premature to call this a smoking gun" or something. Now what seems more appropriate? Or maybe I could say "no, I, as a hard-working pimp-lord, do not endorse this thread". Jesus. Look where you are. I thought this was an open-minded forum.

And by the way, unless an opinion is informed, you should probably not take the time to post it for teh lulz.

"uh, well, to me, this seems unlikely. I find it difficult to believe, so I don't believe it." Nice. I think there's probably fewer than 100 people on the planet who can understand the mathematics involved with this stuff and you'll just blow it off with a stunning, brilliant, irrefutable argument like that. And people gobble up the fuzzy pictures of tiny specs in the sky screaming "UFO! UFO!". I really wish stupidity was painful.

OP, thank you for the information. I am finishing up The Holographic Universe and moving on to some more mainstream physics stuff, but I tend to think modern string theory and M-theory are starting to uncover more and more puzzling information on a quantum scale. Quantum optics, especially the way light and matter interact, and the behavior of light as a wave vs. particle, and the fundamental problem with observation and measuring data. DId you know that light behaves as a wave unless we are observing it? Once we try to observe or measure light waves, they behave as a photons. This might have the implication that our consciousness directly affects matter. I hadn't heard this information, thank you again OP.


everyone who contributed without actually contributing, please show some respect to the other members and the physicists doing this work, and remember: Just because you aren't able to understand something yourself, doesn't mean it has no merit or isn't true.

1video dudes start with an OK,in the oven to

Originally posted by pacifier2012
Turn finger around ear and make a whooooo noise.....

This is what I mean, mods. This is not a worthwhile contribution. And I realize my current post also isn't, but only because I am demanding that you stop allow this ^ bull# to continue.

What the # is wrong with you.? He's crazy for posting something a physicist said. And by the way, my father made that gesture to my mother over and over until she attempted suicide, he said it was easier than filing for divorce. Not only is your phrasing a useless remark, it's offensive to me and potentially insulting to people suffering with mental illness. You just have no idea how mindless and uninformed you look.

again, OP, thank you for the post. Are you familiar with Dr. Brian Green's "The Elegant Universe"? a little more mainstream but he is an authority on string theory.

Real is a matter of perspective.

My probably with the simulation theory is, where's the original layer? We're very close to a point (~100 years) in computing technology where we'll be able to run a simulation like our own, while we're in a computer simulation that's in a computer simulation that's in yet another one, where does that start from? And much more importantly, where did that universe come from?

Also, if it's a computer simulation, it's programmed just the way I'd like it too be. Interesting.

Originally posted by DarwinVsJesus

Originally posted by pacifier2012
Turn finger around ear and make a whooooo noise.....

This is what I mean, mods. This is not a worthwhile contribution. And I realize my current post also isn't, but only because I am demanding that you stop allow this ^ bull# to continue.

What the # is wrong with you.? He's crazy for posting something a physicist said. And by the way, my father made that gesture to my mother over and over until she attempted suicide, he said it was easier than filing for divorce. Not only is your phrasing a useless remark, it's offensive to me and potentially insulting to people suffering with mental illness. You just have no idea how mindless and uninformed you look.

again, OP, thank you for the post. Are you familiar with Dr. Brian Green's "The Elegant Universe"? a little more mainstream but he is an authority on string theory.

There's no need for moral crusaders around here telling people what to do. It's as simple as choosing to read it or not. No need to be physically offended by words on a screen. That's your choice.