What is the Universe made of? Math says scientist

reply to post by ImaFungi


Yeah... past-present, future are all blended.... thats the "probability" item i stated in the above post by myself...(just another fungi)

St Udio
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

Yeah... past-present, future are all blended.... thats the "probability" item i stated in the above post by myself...(just another fungi)

edit on rd28139146489503012014 by St Udio because: (no reason given)

Im sorry but I never stated that past present and future are all blended. And I dont believe that,depending on what you mean by your statement.

If 2 equals the present, and 1 is the past, and 3 is the future, and now 3 is the present, 2 is the past, 4 is the future, and now 4 is the present 3 is the past and 5 is the future, in this small focus of time, yes you can say there is a blend of sorts as the sequencing of frames and rates of change are fast, as you would say a blender on the fastest setting is more of a blend then a blender on not the fastest setting. But I do not think that right now 5 is blended with 4395089 or 4903890896083 or 9043850943859390593. So in that sense the past is very far away, and so is the never ending future.

lostbook
"If you accept the idea that both space itself, and all the stuff in space, have no properties at all except mathematical properties," then the idea that everything is mathematical "starts to sound a little bit less insane," Tegmark said in a talk given Jan. 15 here at The Bell House.

Sounds exactly what some egghead brainiac math nerd would say. The universe is not math, although it apparently has some (a very few) qualities that can be represented mathematically.

I always thought that the light and dark are similar to Binary Maths .

On a Quantum level , doesn't every piece of matter expresses a ghost-like behaviour ?

If Field* theory is correct , doesn't that make a being/matter a moving location ?


* Field theory according to Epigenetics .

I think the scientist has gone mad. Math is just a way to describe things. Just because math can describe the motions and interactions we observe in the Universe quite well, does not mean the Universe is made of math. That is like saying the Universe is made out of the English language just because I can describe in words how most of the Universe works. Or like trying to say the Universe is made of millimeters because I can measure everything with a ruler.

It's quite simple really. The Universe wouldn't exist without the primal paradox; To exist, or not to exist. Is nothing something, or something nothing. A battle of on or off. Binary. Is it zero or one? A question that was asked before anything existed to ask it, or did it exist? A question so confusing and conflicting, it formed existence as we know it. From this paradox, came forth nothing and something, 0 and 1.

From the paradox of zero and one, came the paradox of more than one. Is zero one? In other words, is zero something? If zero is one, and one is one, then two. If zero is one, and one is one, and two is one, then three? If three is one too, and still two is one, one is one, and zero is one, then... 5.

Then, in a flash, a paradox created the golden ratio. Fibonacci sequence. Golden Spiral of existence.

0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144

From this sequence of logic, based on a paradox, formed everything that exists, in a recognizable pattern. This pattern so beautiful and perfect, it was able to grow large and complex enough to recognize itself. When it recognized itself, it created math, and then it wrote the OP's preposterous article.

From this sequence of logic, based on a paradox, formed everything that exists, in a recognizable pattern. This pattern so beautiful and perfect, it was able to grow large and complex enough to recognize itself. When it recognized itself, it created math, and then it wrote the OP's preposterous article.

Very funny.....yet ultimately true.

Google space engine simulator to see what the universe is doing. Billions of years later, It created a simulation of itself! It's a free program and it has all the know stars charted, and galaxies, plus procedural stars and galaxies. all in a 3D engine simulation. It has billions of galaxies, each with billions of stars, each with planets, and moons. There's comets, real volumetric nebula, asteroids. Clouds on planets, detailed procedurally generated terrain and atmospheric affects. Never in a million life times could you explore all the Galaxies, star systems, and planets in this simulation.


Just simply amazing and quiet beautiful when you realize that the Universe made it. Just like it made us...

These videos barely scratch the surface of what this can do on even a modest computer system.:

Skip to 6:00

From this sequence of logic, based on a paradox, formed everything that exists, in a recognizable pattern. This pattern so beautiful and perfect, it was able to grow large and complex enough to recognize itself. When it recognized itself, it created math, and then it wrote the OP's preposterous article.

What you are actually is beyond words, but it would be not untrue to say you are nothing whatsoever other than pure, infinite, disembodied consciousness/intelligence; a field of miraculous infinite light; God dreaming itself; an infinite point of pure potential; or the infinite implications of nothing whatsoever.

The immediate presentation of this unspeakable actuality is the field of your experience, which is an instantaineously appearing virtual field of Radiant Presence as apparent qualities. This is the actuality of which every/ and any/ thing that you think exists consists. This is inclusive and complete; nothing whatever other than this field exists. In short, the entirety of Reality is the "bubble" of YOUR experience, the field of Radiant Presence, which alone exists.

This is the totality of Reality. This is not theoretical, but is actually, immediately real; always the case right here right now.

theopendoorway.org...

reply to post by Visitor2012


Its amazing too how relatively little energy and space all that data of those engines take up. But when you think about the data of the actual earth, compared to the representations in that engine, every grain of sand is made of trillions of atoms, and think of the amount of energy in one atom. I dont know exactly what im getting at or if anything. Imagine if we develop conscious AI, and we create an engine for them, and separate them in the space (make individuals) and have them interact in the engine? I wonder what they would conclude about their surrounding reality. I wonder if they would be able to make video game engines eventually (maybe put their own AIs in there). I wonder if they would know anything of atoms and electrons. If their true essence/consciousness would be in the computations of electrons on chips, or in the screen where they interact with the world (or is that not correct, multiple Ais in an engine would not be viewing it like we view that engine on a screen, but viewing it from the data space?).

reply to post by ImaFungi

Imagine if we develop conscious AI, and we create an engine for them, and separate them in the space (make individuals) and have them interact in the engine? I wonder what they would conclude about their surrounding reality.

They would probably conclude that they're separate beings. At least during the time they are digitally expressed. Once they digitally disappear, they would realize that they were in FACT, the energy that is surging through the processor chip.

The statement made by this guy reminds me of an old Student/Master story.

After many years of study, the Student approached the Master.
"I have determined that all is an illusion," said the Student.
Without saying a word, the Master kicked the student in the balls.

Blue Shift
The statement made by this guy reminds me of an old Student/Master story.

After many years of study, the Student approached the Master.
"I have determined that all is an illusion," said the Student.
Without saying a word, the Master kicked the student in the balls.

The funny thing is, if you do that in one of your dreams, the same thing can happen to you and you'll feel the same sensation of pain and discomfort...

Visitor2012
The funny thing is, if you do that in one of your dreams, the same thing can happen to you and you'll feel the same sensation of pain and discomfort, So what does that tell us? Don't say stupid things to Master's.

There is no concrete evidence that dreams exist. It's all anecdotal.

Blue Shift

Visitor2012
The funny thing is, if you do that in one of your dreams, the same thing can happen to you and you'll feel the same sensation of pain and discomfort, So what does that tell us? Don't say stupid things to Master's.

There is no concrete evidence that dreams exist. It's all anecdotal.

Like wise, there is no concrete evidence that reality exists. When you're having dreams, they do exist for you. But only because of hindsight and memory do you recognize them. however, during the 5 sensory experience, you can't tell the difference. Evident in the fact that you can go from being a normal person to a gladiator in a castle without you so much as questioning the transition. That says a lot about the reliability of five sense perception and how easily it can fool us.

So right now, you say THIS is real, with virtually the same conviction you have when you are dreaming and enchanted by, what seems to be, a real event however preposterous it is. And if you claim something is real based ONLY on the same senses that hypnotized you into believing that you're that gladiator in a castle) , that's not enough evidence.

Visitor2012
When it comes to seeing, smelling, tasting, touching and hearing, there is NO difference between a dream and what we're doing now.

Go get somebody to kick you. See if you wake up.

Phage
reply to post by lostbook

 

Sounds like circular reasoning to me: If you accept that the only properties are mathematical properties then that means everything is mathematical.

Well, yeah. If you accept that God made everything then that means God made everything.

What if you don't accept that opening premise? What if you accept the idea that math represents those properties rather than actually being those properties? Math works very well in describing and modelling things, that doesn't mean those things are math.

edit on 2/2/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Very well put...however



Numbers and math are getting increasingly GOOD are replicating that which we call "reality" at which point they become the generators of those properties instead of ideas to understand them...I't depends on how you are using them.

We understand that humans have 46 chromosomes. Its a very distinct and important number that if changes or varies...the associated properties of that biology changes significantly. It isn't far off to say that within the context of autosomal chromosomes...the number 46 determines the properties that determine the biology. Within this context it appear that numbers determine properties...not the other way around. 47 or 45 autosomal chromosomes would change the biological properties quite a bit.

Blue Shift

Visitor2012
When it comes to seeing, smelling, tasting, touching and hearing, there is NO difference between a dream and what we're doing now.

Go get somebody to kick you. See if you wake up.

I'm talking about the 5 senses. When using those as a primary tool to determine what is or isn't real, you have to take into account the fallibility of sensory perceptions and acknowledge their inherent limitations. A child can see this, and you witness it every night when you dream. Even for people who have not personally experienced hyper reality (like OBE or transcendental experiences) science also is catching up and they're way ahead of you on this, where have you been?

There are plenty of articles on Quantum mechanics which, among other discoveries, have already concluded that what we call reality, is truly an illusion. When I say illusion, I'm not talking about the kind we dream at night. I'm referring to the hyper-reality which manifests this one. And right now, you are being enchanted by the very same senses that fool you, every night, into believing that what is happening is real. And I'm saying those five senses are completely unreliable.