Does the physical world exist?

reply to post by john_bmth


You're really making yourself look bad. It's because you're ignorant of the subject matter and you don't want to admit it. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant of a subject. I had the same problem when I first started debating evolution. The bad part occurs when people who are ignorant of a subject don't stop to try and learn about the subject instead they keep showing their ignorance.

When people in the articles you post talk about create or made they are talking about building a machine (quantum computer) that holds superposition long enough in order to scale up and avoid decoherence.

When they say create or made they are writing for an audience that already understands things like superposition, entanglement, decoherence and probability amplitudes. They're not going to waste time explaining the basics of quantum mechanics in an article about quantum computing.

So when they say make a qubit, they are talking about things like putting an electron in superposition. They're not going to spell this out in an article because it's basic quantum mechanics. I'm sure they don't think anyone reading their articles doesn't understand superposition or decoherence.

Here's a good book to read. It's called Decoding Reality.

WHAT is the universe made of? Matter or energy? Particles or strings? According to physicist Vlatko Vedral's appealing new book, it is made, at bottom, of information.

Any system that has two distinct states can act as a bit - even an individual elementary particle: "electron over here" represents zero, "electron over there" represents one. When the electron goes from here to there, the bit flips.

In Decoding Reality, Vedral argues that we should regard the entire universe as a gigantic quantum computer. Wacky as that may sound, it is backed up by hard science. The laws of physics show that it is not only possible for electrons to store and flip bits: it is mandatory. For more than a decade, quantum-information scientists have been working to determine just how the universe processes information at the most microscopic scale.

Starting in 2000, in a series of papers published in Nature, Science and Physical Review Letters, my colleagues and I were able to quantify the exact information processing capacity of the entire universe. Indeed, many of Vedral's arguments closely, and no doubt unconsciously, follow those of my 2006 book Programming the Universe. Unwitting rediscovery is the sincerest form of flattery.

www.newscientist.com...

Maybe you should start with the basics though.

reply to post by Matrix Rising


I notice you haven't even attempted to refute what I posted, I wonder why that could be?

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by Matrix Rising

 

I notice you haven't even attempted to refute what I posted, I wonder why that could be?

He has a different perspective to the physical reality and is entitled to it, just as you are.
However the physical reality may well be more different than what you both can ever imagine.

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by Matrix Rising

 

I notice you haven't even attempted to refute what I posted, I wonder why that could be?

He has a different perspective to the physical reality and is entitled to it, just as you are.
However the physical reality may well be more different than what you both can ever imagine.

It's not a matter of perspective, he's simply wrong when he says things like "when you use a computer, you're just getting bits to compute what you want instead of what they're already computing" and "computers and quantum computers simply use the computation that's already going on in nature. We couldn't have computers and quantum computers if the universe didn't compute".

Anyway:

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
So when they say make a qubit, they are talking about things like putting an electron in superposition.

I think you're starting to grasp the difference between physical property and conceptual function! An electron in superposition is the physical property and qbit is the conceptual function. An electron in superposition is not innately a qbit any more than silicon is innately a transistor, as both qbits and transistors are designed and engineered by humans to exploit the physical properties of their respective materials to perform their conceptual function.

reply to post by john_bmth


Again, you keep sounding silly because you don't understand the subject matter. You keep going on about a conceptual function and it sounds silly. Show me one paper on quantum computing that uses the term conceptual function of the qubit. How are qubits a conceptual function? How are qubits created or made? Can you explain the process?

Qubits are created or made when an electron is put in a state of superposition. In a lab you try to figure out how to scale up so you can avoid decoherence and maybe have a quantum computer with 30 qubits vs 12 qubits. You can hopefully keep scaling up.

You haven't listed one scientist that mentions anything about qubits being a conceptual function. Just one article about qubits being a conceptual function.

Where do you think the idea for parallel universes come from? I was recently watching a program where they asked a room full of renowned physicist do they accept parallel universes or some version of Many Worlds and they all raised their hands.

It comes from superposition. When an electron goes into superposition. Qubits calculate these different states. Some people say this calculation is limited to a quantum level but some people say everything is quantum so it extends into the classical world and you then have parallel universes. Nobody says this quantum computation is a conceptual function.

A quantum computer is a machine that will allow humans to use these calculations that already occur in nature. This is what happens when superposition occurs. Calculations of different probable states.

For instance we see quantum computation in photosynthesis.

When It Comes to Photosynthesis, Plants Perform Quantum Computation

Plants soak up some of the 1017 joules of solar energy that bathe Earth each second, harvesting as much as 95 percent of it from the light they absorb. The transformation of sunlight into carbohydrates takes place in one million billionths of a second, preventing much of that energy from dissipating as heat. But exactly how plants manage this nearly instantaneous trick has remained elusive. Now biophysicists at the University of California, Berkeley, have shown that plants use the basic principle of quantum computing—the exploration of a multiplicity of different answers at the same time—to achieve near-perfect efficiency.

Inside every spring leaf is a system capable of performing a speedy and efficient quantum computation, and therein lies the key to much of the energy on Earth.

www.scientificamerican.com...

I want you to show me on scientist that says Qubits are a "conceptual function." Look, you're just trying to fool people into thinking you know what you're talking about and you're only fooling yourself. There's nothing wrong with not knowing and then learning.





Here are people who work with quantum computers telling you the same thing. I want to hear one scientist say that "Qubits are a conceptual function."

Nope, quantum eraser experiments have pretty much done away with materialism.



Well yes it 'exists' but not as tangible out there 'stuff.' It's just information, there's nothing behind our perceptions.

Actually this makes sense because if quantum gravity is ever to be explained we will have to go below space-time (in order to explain space-time.) And physical units vanish when you don't have space-time. Whatever it is that explains space-time can't be physical by definition:



Of course information fits the bill for a "more primary, and non-physical stuff" nicely. And as it turns out the "It from bit" ontology is quite popular among quantum gravity theoreticians.

reply to post by PhoenixOD

You ask how a real physical world could exist. I ask why the need for a real physical world.
Start with the Matrix
Replace a population sleeping in their individual tubes with non-physical consciousness' all existing in the same non-place (since space is part of the illusion).
Replace the computer that sends the messages to the sleeping people's minds with a collective consciousness. Everything perceived as reality are just images in your consciousness. They are NOT input through your senses as you have no physical body to possess any senses.
Each individual creates his own reality. The collective keeps them all matching to a certain degree. This is why two people who believe they are entering the same room will see the same red couch.
We are all just minds sharing an imaginary reality produced by the collective consciousness.
A simple idea but it matches reality as I keep hearing science describe it. Matter, time and space are illusions, however we all think and we all therefore know consciousness exists.

reply to post by truthinfact


I can not understand why you would assume such a reality would be unknowable
If this world is illusionary then that implies there is another underlying reality. Why could this not be experienced directly? You know something I don't?

I believe we are able to comprehend different levels of reality. Its like the same way a computer is able to recognize different software. A video game console able to play different types of games. I believe we are like a video game console that is hooked on one software(game) and we have so many other choices of software(games) to play or see, we just choose to role with this one cuz we maybe forgot about the other ones. If you play a race car simulator on playstation all the time, the playstation is only producing races, cars and driving physics with world like scenarios. Even though the playstation is just doing those things, it can also produce sci fi scenarios, super natural character models, fictional realities and other mechanics based on what game you put it in. Just like the human brain, during the day we are in this reality only able to perceive and live in this state of being with set scientific laws, but when we sleep... Our brain is telling us it is capable of producing other types of realities, and scenarios if it wanted to. But when we wake up, we pop that same old tired "reality" game back in. since there is no physical disc and we arent machines, that should tell us that if we had the ability to control what we subconsciously perceive as real, than we could create those imaginative world and states of being at any given time.

reply to post by Xcal2k3

Now the real question becomes 'how do we access the source code?'
And if we figure that out will we have discovered the underlying cause of what people call magic?

reply to post by Puck 22


What you mean like hacking the source code like this?



aka, what is normally called "Hermetic Magick?"

reply to post by Matrix Rising
Recently I watched a program on the holographic universe and i tell you nothing made more sense to me in years than did this. One of the final comments was, so something is broadcasting all the time, if it stopped broadcasting/creating then BLINK, just like a hologram its gone. The science behind this is not (crackpot) it involves multipul diciplines that all validate oner another. I hope soon enough that this becomes irefutable and that all the arrogant scientists have to throw out the window most of what they thought they knew!

reply to post by Puck 22


To access the source code is as simple as putting a stop to your daily routine in life. You would literally have to force yourself to foget society as is, your friends, family, responsibilities and such, thats why mystics, monks, shamans and such go to secluded locations away from typical society to meditate and reconnect with the true self.. Your sub conscious feeds off the stimulation of whats being brought in by how you live and what you do on a daily basis. If you have nothing outside to stimulate the sub conscious, you then have to turn to conscious thinking as another means of stimulation for your new sub conscious. The key ingredient to unlocking the true nature of the conscious mind is to rid the self of the existence of the impossible. Impossible must not exist, and the amount of faith you believe in such determines how quickly, if ever, your able to breach the system. Your dreams show us just how much potential human beings have. Just think... When you sleep, how do you know your not waking up? When you wake up, how do you know you didnt just fall asleep?

Since the underlying reality exists in and is operated by consciousness it follows that the source code will also be found there as that is all that is 'real'.
The collective consciousness producing the matrix/illusion attempts to merge the belief systems of all seven billion individuals taking part to produce the general background we all act within. Earth, sea, sky, trees, squirrels, etc.
Quantum entanglement, like all the laws of physics, is part of the illusion and has as much influence in 'this world' as it would in a dream. In a dream gravity may or may not work, forces may or may not have equal and opposite counterparts and all the laws of physics including quantum entanglement are followed only if the dreamer dreams it that way.
In our case it is a collective dream and accessing the source code would mean understanding how the belief systems of individuals can influence the form of the collective dream. This is what has generally been labeled as 'magic' in the past and in our time has shown up in science as the idea that the experimenter's beliefs influences the outcome of the experiment.
Since this is a conspiracy site I offer the idea: It follows then that those who know this know that by influencing the belief systems of large numbers of people through control of the media one can influence/control reality. Now is that the ULTIMATE conspiracy or not?

This is a facinating thread.

How do you answer an unanswerable question?

What was before the big bang? Does god exist? Are we real? What is the perfect Chili recipe?

If everyone had to give an answer, and we went on the supposition that "majority rules", would the prime answer be accepted by all as total fact?

Not in a million years.....

reply to post by twinmommy38

Why the assumption that majority rules?
Try this...
Everyone gets to create their own world
The purpose of the collective is to make those worlds mesh, not agree
In your world there are UFOs
In your friends world there are not
You very clearly see a UFO. Your friend sees an unidentified light or a new plane the military is testing.
Where you see a ghost he sees only a shadow made by a cloud passing in front of the moon.
When you see an elf he sees a movement in the bush he is sure was a raccoon.
People always assume we must go to another planet or a different dimension to experience a different world but what if there are a million worlds co-existing right here? You saw that prehistoric creature lift it's head out of the lake. You even got a picture of it. Others will either see a log, a beaver or CGI. Whatever it takes to keep THEIR world intact.
Majority wins? I don't think so. It's not necessary

This all revolves around the concept of information. The more I think about it the less I actually get what information is. I know some of the definitions, but it almost seems as if everything is information and therefor the term has no value anymore.