String theory maniplating the code of the universe

Ok so I will address the information I have collected on this topic and other topics. However I'm not a scientist in these fields so I could very well be wrong about some things, this would be where experts here at ats could help out.

If string theory is correct it defines that we may be a holographic image, furthermore I know some people have put out threads on this topic interesting enough a computer simulation of our universe is eerily similar to a brain cell here's a link to the photo sprott.physics.wisc.edu...


Im trying to draw a conclusion between both the brain cell and the computer simulation of the universe in relation to string theory perhaps we are a biological computer here is a link to what I'm talking about phys.org...

here is code found in string theory : is reporting that certain string theory, super-symmetrical equations, which describe the fundamental nature of the Universe and reality, contain embedded computer codes. These codes are digital data in the form of 1′s and 0′s. Not only that, these codes are the same as what make web browsers work and are error-correction codes! Gates says, “We have no idea what these ‘things’ are doing there”. heres the link www.transcend.ws...

now what I'm trying to get at is highly unlikely but lets say if we are a biological computer simulations and our universe is actually a brain cell. If our universe is the size of a brain cell then planets must be the size of atoms within the brain cell. therefore how would an atom of a brain cell collect information from the whole brain cell? This theory depends on A: that earth is an atom in a brain and b the environment "universe" isn't just a simulation in its self. How do you break free?

reply to post by digital01anarchy


You are trying to apply what happens quantumly to what happens on a macro scale... Which is a direct misuse of quantum theory that specifically states that nothing on a quantum level can describe what happens on a larger scale. Now I will admit that there are interesting correlations, but nothing calculably conclusive...

About your thread... not to rag on you... but I would offer a few suggestions like uploading the pictures you want shown and put them directly into a thread. Pull some quotes for your articles to directly show people what they need to get from the article to help your point along. A few clean up things could make your thread, and your point, more... palatable...

reply to post by digital01anarchy



Cool thread! It's my belief that the correlation of life to the universe and the scale of life as we know it has many comparable qualities. The symmetries are too evident to dispute that everything is random. Now, sizing the symmetries to relate to specific forms of life as we know it is a daunting task, as being limited to 3 dimensions in our life forms makes it nearly impossible to relate to each's similarities.

As an example, I look at the milky way galaxy as a life form... as a possible artery or organ in relation to the universe... that would leave humans and other lives to operate as cells in the organ's function. Meaning an earthly life form could be a red blood cell or a white blood cell... one meant to help save the ongoing of life, and the other meant to die to ward off the infection of life. This is just theory of course, as a limit of 3 dimensions limit the ability to see things as they are in reality.

The symmetries are no doubt a reality, and that should make the coding of it to be readable... not so much programmable though. The programming opportunities would become more so realities themselves if we could tap into higher dimensions though I believe.


media-cache-ec5.pinterest.com...

This link shows the dance/orbits of Earth and Venus over a period of 8 years. I find it hard to dispute that they 'randomly' orbit as such.

Upon learning of the flower of life, and later certain findings of similarities between earthly life and life in the universe, I have come to be fascinated by the likenesses. Now, we just have to wait for access into higher dimensions to have access to the knowledge.

reply to post by digital01anarchy


There is no such thing as breaking free of the system you are a part of, are made of, and depend on. It created you, you would never exist as your self with out, you would have never been, you would have never experienced anything. Perhaps; to not be, is when you break free.

Originally posted by digital01anarchy
now what I'm trying to get at is highly unlikely

We can almost agree on that though I'd say that's a huge understatement.

If quantum mechanics has taught us anything is that "As above, so below" and vice-versa doesn't really work, yet your idea is an extrapolation of that very concept.The list of problems with the idea is extremely long, but just to pick an obvious one, the speed of light constrains information transfer as far as we know and parts of the universe are separating from other parts of the universe faster than the speed of light, so they can't communicate with each other, no matter how much you want them to.

reply to post by digital01anarchy

Universe having its own brain ia a load of sheites.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
but just to pick an obvious one, the speed of light constrains information transfer as far as we know and parts of the universe are separating from other parts of the universe faster than the speed of light, so they can't communicate with each other, no matter how much you want them to.

What about entanglement?

If information cannot transfer faster then the speed of light. how can the information contained in the parts of the universe that are separating from other parts faster then the speed of light, travel faster then the speed of light?

reply to post by ImaFungi

I repeat: "they can't communicate with each other, no matter how much you want them to."

How Does Faster-Than-Light Quantum Communication Work?

No matter how far apart they are, when the polarization of one photon is determined by a measurement, somehow the other photon instantaneously “knows” the outcome and will always be found to be vibrating in a perpendicular direction.

Now, that’s pretty cool – but it can’t really be used for faster-than-light communication purposes for the simple reason that we cannot control the polarization of the entangled particles.

reply to post by digital01anarchy


Lets say the universe actually does look like that. If it does it shouldn't be a big shocker. There is only so many ways energy could move on a 3 dimensional plan - so there should be something else that looks alike. It would be more weird if it didn't look like anything else.

As far as manipulating the code goes. I don't see that happening. At least not to any effect that would be problematic. I think if they actually have found error correcting code then it is just variable correcting and any attempt at changing the error correcting qualities would be caught and dealt with. I think it definitely isn't any major function that could mess up anything. What they have found is probably just there so we don't see ghosts of ourselves every time we take a step. The main functions aren't going to be ran locally.

What kind of fear porn do you have about string theory code manipulation? I do love doom.

String theory is based upon certain sacred geometries of major religions - both known and - shall we say, "never revealed until now"? This astounding isomorphism between mystical knowledge and the hard logic of a scientific theory has now been proved as rigorously as any theorem in a mathematical textbook, hard though this may be for you to believe. To confirm this claim for yourselves, you will have to spend several months in sustained study - that is, if: 1. you have the necessary mathematical ability to understand the Lie group theory underlying superstring theory, 2. you know enough about Kabbalah and Pythagorean number philosophy, and 3. you can correlate all the analyses. If you think you may be up to it, look here. Then graduate to the sublime section here. However, I advice you to start at the beginning here.

During this journey of discovery, you will encounter sublime evidence of transcendental intelligence. I won't tell where to look as you have to inform and train your mind for the experience. You will know when you find it! But you will need to work hard so that you can appreciate what you are looking at. You will not see this anywhere else.

reply to post by digital01anarchy


The universe-is-a-brain is beaten topic. According to all the data available, I don't think it can work.

How about; a brain is the universe.

reply to post by micpsi


Could you at least summarize, wt you have learnt from these religious texts
and what exact subsequent experiences, you are talking about.

Originally posted by micpsi
String theory is based upon certain sacred geometries of major religions - both known and - shall we say, "never revealed until now"? This astounding isomorphism between mystical knowledge and the hard logic of a scientific theory has now been proved as rigorously as any theorem in a mathematical textbook, hard though this may be for you to believe. To confirm this claim for yourselves, you will have to spend several months in sustained study - that is, if: 1. you have the necessary mathematical ability to understand the Lie group theory underlying superstring theory, 2. you know enough about Kabbalah and Pythagorean number philosophy, and 3. you can correlate all the analyses. If you think you may be up to it, look here. Then graduate to the sublime section here. However, I advice you to start at the beginning here.

During this journey of discovery, you will encounter sublime evidence of transcendental intelligence. I won't tell where to look as you have to inform and train your mind for the experience. You will know when you find it! But you will need to work hard so that you can appreciate what you are looking at. You will not see this anywhere else.

Thank you for pointing me in the right direction the subject matter will probably be hard to learn/understand but I do have the math skills needed. Math really isn't the issue, time would be the issue kids,college,work,wife ect thats why I'm here the subject is extremely interesting to me I just wish i had the time

Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by digital01anarchy

 

The universe-is-a-brain is beaten topic. According to all the data available, I don't think it can work.

Cool it's understandable considering how much I don't actually know but could you please provide data/source to back the claim up, just so I know I'm headed in the wrong direction kind of like the first responder to this thread did by explaining things at a quantum level don't apply to things larger.

Originally posted by Bleeeeep
reply to post by digital01anarchy

 

Lets say the universe actually does look like that. If it does it shouldn't be a big shocker. There is only so many ways energy could move on a 3 dimensional plan - so there should be something else that looks alike. It would be more weird if it didn't look like anything else.

As far as manipulating the code goes. I don't see that happening. At least not to any effect that would be problematic. I think if they actually have found error correcting code then it is just variable correcting and any attempt at changing the error correcting qualities would be caught and dealt with. I think it definitely isn't any major function that could mess up anything. What they have found is probably just there so we don't see ghosts of ourselves every time we take a step. The main functions aren't going to be ran locally.

What kind of fear porn do you have about string theory code manipulation? I do love doom.

No fear porn, humans evolved to manipulate things this would be the next logical step in evolution.

Originally posted by Twix404
reply to post by digital01anarchy

 

You are trying to apply what happens quantumly to what happens on a macro scale... Which is a direct misuse of quantum theory that specifically states that nothing on a quantum level can describe what happens on a larger scale. Now I will admit that there are interesting correlations, but nothing calculably conclusive...

About your thread... not to rag on you... but I would offer a few suggestions like uploading the pictures you want shown and put them directly into a thread. Pull some quotes for your articles to directly show people what they need to get from the article to help your point along. A few clean up things could make your thread, and your point, more... palatable...

notes taken lol thank you for your input next time i post I will embed images and use quoted materiel in the thread to give a better understanding instead of just a link. Damn posting on here is like turning in a college thesis paper ps thanks for just not telling me to read a book and get educated before I posted about the topic, I know its stupid not to but i just wanted to see if I was wrong or if my simple little theory might have something to it.

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
but just to pick an obvious one, the speed of light constrains information transfer as far as we know and parts of the universe are separating from other parts of the universe faster than the speed of light, so they can't communicate with each other, no matter how much you want them to.

What about entanglement?

If information cannot transfer faster then the speed of light. how can the information contained in the parts of the universe that are separating from other parts faster then the speed of light, travel faster then the speed of light?

what you wrote= mind blown lol in a good way

reply to post by digital01anarchy


Okay here it is.

One of the main reasons why quantum theory doesn't apply to large bodies is because of gravity. As you know, Newton came up with the maths for the movement of large bodies. Newton predicted everything from matter elasticity to celestial bodies (like planets) orbits. But when we discovered the atoms, and found out that there were electrons orbiting in there, Newton's equations didn't work anymore - obviously something else than gravity was holding the atom together. So Bohr came up with a quantum model of the atom, which was specially designed for atoms. Not large bodies, because they are different forces:

Quarks, in protons and neutrons, are held together by the colour force.

The hadrons in a nucleus of an atom is made of quarks.

Electrons stay in orbit around the atom's nucleus because of Weak interaction. You can't use Colour force to do that - Colour force is so small in size that it does not interact with electrons, no more than your voice is strong enough to be heard all the way up to the Moon.

Objects are made of atoms.

Objects attract and repel each other because of Gravity. You can't use Weak interaction to do that - Weak interaction force is so small that it does not interact, not even interfere, with large body movements.

That's why laws for atoms, at the quantum level, don't work for large bodies - we are referring to different forces, with different equations specially designed for these events.

Where quantum forces stops matching the behaviour of large bodies, Newtonian classical physics takes over.



Another reason why quantum don't apply for large bodies: we can watch large bodies. BUT we can't watch particles. Here's why. When you look at a large body, may it be a planet, a cell, anything, you can send light to it - and when this light is reflected by the body, you get an image of the body. Remember that to see a body, you have to light it up in the first place. That works even at the microscopic level. You can even send an electron beam, just like electron microscopes do, to watch molecules. BUT, as Werner Heisenberg showed, that doesn't work anymore when you try to observe small particles. The reason is because light itself carries energy. If the particle is too small, and you shine a light on it, this light will collide with the particle and kick it in some unpredictable direction. That's why Heisenberg introduced his Uncertainty Principle: past a certain point, your microscopes (and any other equipments that sends a beam of light or a beam of electrons) will become useless - thus you'll never be able to really know where the particle is. That's why quantum theory was introduced: to predict where this particle COULD be. To do that they use an equation which they call a probability wave function. This equation basically guesses where the particle is more likely to be.

Where Newtonian classical physics stops working for small particles, quantum takes over.



The Universe is a super large body. Thus most concepts of quantum, which were designed to predict nothing larger than an atom, stops working once you talk about galaxy clusters and all that.





There are many attempts to merge Newtonian, large-scale classical physics with Quantum, particle-scale physics. New Agers, which believe that you can make large-scale bodies appear and disappear simply by looking at them (not even shine a light on them, just looking! Obviously they don't understand that to be influenced, the particle needs to RECEIVE something from the observer, like light ) are very eager to find such merge in science. Some of New Agers simply dismiss Newton's equation and firmly believe that Quantum can explain it all. They find comfort in believing that they can influence matter around them simply by staring at it. Some New Agers merged that with meditation techniques and gave rise to the Quantum Buddhism movement, in which if you just meditate enough you'll gain quantum superpowers like dimensional teleportation and other things like that.