Is Our Universe Fake (Space.com 31.7.15)

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

But if we really are in a simulation, then it begs a question no physicist is willing to broach. And I've yet to read about it or even hear it discussed. Ehm...God. Not the Abraham god or anything, but some type of creator. Evolution I can get behind, but I can't see black holes evolving into film projectors of the universe.

a reply to: FlySolo

Aww man, nobody was dorky enough to decode my binary message.

I guess I am the dork.

a reply to: bananashooter

Not many people can read binary. Would love to know what it meant though.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

I don't read it either, I just converted it.

It just said: Your welcome universe.

a reply to: bananashooter

That's Awesome

originally posted by: blacktie
it might be a fake or copy of real one I suppose however seems 'real right now

Hilarious , the Universe running on a pirated copy of Windows 3.11 Windows For Workgroups. I can see that .


I know you meant a real universe versus a fake one, but that statement got me thinking

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

But if we really are in a simulation, then it begs a question no physicist is willing to broach. And I've yet to read about it or even hear it discussed. Ehm...God. Not the Abraham god or anything, but some type of creator. Evolution I can get behind, but I can't see black holes evolving into film projectors of the universe.

Why not? If you inject some form of interference based projection from any 3 locations 90 degrees apart on the event horizon of a sphere, it would work just like lasers. Except obviously the mechanics are a bit different as you're working with the building blocks of quantum reality. Or in the alternative, Kaku's idea of hyperspace or a quantum substrate as the generation point.

Both concepts are workable, it's just a quantum substrate model requires less energy to maintain and produces sufficient surplus energy in a closed system to account for expansion.

Cheers - Dave

The universe is like a video game, its only written in to look real but you cant actually go there.
Thats why nasa has to fake everything.

a reply to: sophie87

Please tell me more of this.

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

But if we really are in a simulation, then it begs a question no physicist is willing to broach. And I've yet to read about it or even hear it discussed. Ehm...God. Not the Abraham god or anything, but some type of creator. Evolution I can get behind, but I can't see black holes evolving into film projectors of the universe.

Bostrom touched on that almost 20 yrs ago.

a reply to: bananashooter

The universe only goes to a certain extent, the rest is holographic reflecting the mind of God. Why else would the concept of a vast universe get pounded into our heads since we were toddlers. They really want us to be very informed about the universe don't they.
Nasa is part of the same people who try to control how we perceive reality and mislead us away from Gnosis. I believe nasa is simply cgi fakery, underwater diving and zero point gravity simulators in airplanes.
One theory is that everything on earth is mirrored from the mind of God which is located in the Orion Nebula. Danny Wilten does great work on this. Some food for thought, not saying its truth only my opinions.

Personally, I feel this whole "data" thing is beyond idiotic. All 'data' is, is a way of describing something and is always derived from (stored in) physical systems. It doesn't 'exist' in the truest state of the word and nothing is lost with it's destruction.

Data can be represented an infinite number of ways. The placement of a rock, the waving of your hand, or even taps in morse code... it's all data, and can only be interpreted by someone/something that has a way of interpreting it meaningfully, otherwise, it's just one configuration of an infinite number of configurations.

Technically speaking, every single atom could be used to generate an infinite amount of data, tracking something as simple as it's position.

Simply put, data is only data if both an interpreter, and a source to be interpreted exist.. otherwise, it is meaningless.

a reply to: thoughtforfood

Well I am glad that you have it all figured out.

I guess I am an idiot for sharing an opinion.

I will now run all of my ideas through you before I make a fool of myself.

Be sure to check your messages often.

Thanks again.

Bananas.

I'm of the opinion that if the universe is a simulation, then what is the problem it is trying to solve?

Since experience is the only real thing in here that doesn't have to be proven, either way you slice it, Isn't "To be, or not to be..." the only real question and the only thing left unsolved?

That is, if the simulation is an attempt at a feasibility study on the physical manifestation of a real universe.

Perhaps heaven/hell is built out of the things we collectively reject or accept about this place.

PS: Perhaps the galaxies we see in the NASA photos are parallel tasks or maybe even snapshots of our galaxy at different "times". After all, TIME-SPACE!