|
 redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,173
|
|
i like laugh at yourself. that's good.
--------------------
 _  🧠_ 
|
 lostintimenspc
Stranger
Registered: 03/13/20
Posts: 227
Last seen: 10 days, 19 hours
|
|
The universe might not be much of anything. Beautiful, strange, but ultimately something that has a resolution in consciousness and doesn't require much attention.
--------------------
LSD, mushrooms and DMT are different structural levels within the same magically simulated mystery sometimes blandly called 'life'
Your life, your call.
|
Warrk
Registered: 06/02/17
Posts: 1,644
|
|
Quote:
thealienthatategod said:
i’ve challenged my consciousness, testing the furthest limits of what should be impossible and have experienced: astral travel, medium abilities, bilocation, precognitive dreams, and remote viewing. i’ve walked thru walls, died and came back to life, seen the birth of a universe thru a black hole, wrote a book that predicted the future, and built a simple quantum computer that gathers interdimensional information.
Joseph Campbell says maybe a mystic is a scientist from inner space.
I have admittedly lost sight of the core of Campbell's teachings unfortunately and had to listen to some of his more recent presentations on YouTube to reconnect. It ultimately isn't about what reality is or what we believe in. I think the hardest lessons are the longest ones and I keep finding myself stumbling and having to pick myself up again from my stupidity and ego.
The Simulation Hypothesis is a tiny part of Tom Campbell's big picture and maybe I have placed too much of an emphasis on it by using it in the subject line.
What I admire most about Campbell is his humanity and his guidance on how to become a better person. I get what he is saying but I guess putting it into practice is another thing and this is where I struggle.
Using the concept of entropy and explaining our life's purpose in entropy terms makes sense to me. Developing the quality of our consciousness, being a better person (instead of acting or pretending), also makes sense.
I have to keep reminding myself that it doesn't matter what we know, what we believe in, how much we have, what we can do and what we have accomplished in our lives that matter... it is how we treat each other.
I get nudges from the larger consciousness system from time to time that gives me confidence that I am not a total lost cause and that I should try harder...
|
nooneman
Registered: 04/24/09
Posts: 14,700
Loc: Utah
|
 Re: The Simulated Universe  [Re: Warrk]
#26979407 - 10/11/20 03:03 AM (3 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I think it might actually be possible to prove mathematically that the universe is not simulated (assuming that it isn't, which I think it's not).
The main thing is whether or not you could efficiently compute everything that the universe does. If the universe does things that can't be efficiently computed, or that can't be computed at all, then that would be proof that the universe is not a simulation. Not all things can be efficiently computed. The traveling salesman problem is the classic example of something that has no efficient solutions. Some things can't be computed at all. If the universe does any of these (especially efficiently on a very large scale), then it cannot be a simulation.
|
laughingdog
Stranger
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,830
|
Re: The Simulated Universe [Re: nooneman]
#26979512 - 10/11/20 06:15 AM (3 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Seems to me what is not realized by the question or the theory: 'that the universe is simulated', is that the question is itself, based on assumptions that may not be true.
For example it assumes we are all in the same 'reality' or 'simulation'. But Mozart's inner world was completely different from Einstein's, in fact all inner worlds are unique.
It also assumes, that we have a handle on our 'reality'; but as full of shit as Freud was, he did teach us about self deception or in psychological terms the 10-15 ego defense mechanisms. What this means is that most folks are a bit kooky anyway, so it makes no difference...
This is delightfully portrayed in the movie "King of Hearts".
Bob Dylan: "With a time-rusted compass blade Aladdin and his lamp Sits with Utopian hermit monks Side saddle on the Golden Calf And on their promises of paradise You will not hear a laugh All except inside the Gates of Eden" *
The more seriously the theory is taken the more I doubt it. And writing a book about it is pretty serious.
*https://songmeanings.com/songs/view/3530822107858531098/
interestingly the first comment (at the site linked above) on the meaning of the song "the gates of Eden" relates the meaning of the entire song to the folly of attaching to 'one size fits all' answers.
It seems an interesting take on it. Apparently Dylan was much more literate than most hippies.
Edited by laughingdog (10/11/20 06:39 AM)
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,173
|
Re: The Simulated Universe [Re: Warrk]
#26979564 - 10/11/20 07:37 AM (3 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Warrk said:...
I have to keep reminding myself that it doesn't matter what we know, what we believe in, how much we have, what we can do and what we have accomplished in our lives that matter... it is how we treat each other.
I get nudges from the larger consciousness system from time to time that gives me confidence that I am not a total lost cause and that I should try harder...
yes "how we treat each other" including ourselves is important, ergo enjoy those nudges, but rather than "should try harder" simply begin again when you find it is suitable. (i.e. become aware of suitability and context, and less pushy to yourself eg. not so much "should"-ing). be fresh.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
1drop
Stranger
Registered: 10/11/20
Posts: 28
Last seen: 3 years, 5 months
|
|
Interesting ..
The world might infact be a simulation .
Computer games are often simulation . Somebody had to conceptualise different elements for the game mechanics to work.
What if there are a handful or even one architect programming this whole thing .
To me the greatest result of creating such simulation would be for the generated components to acknowledge the architect on their own free will .
Imagine having programmed GTA to then realise the in game character is addressing you the programmer, personally in real time .. previously un programmed to do so ..
And that my friends is the game we might be placed in . To see if we could be the AI .. we are trying to emulate via technological advancements . Anybody seen Rick n Morty 
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,173
|
Re: The Simulated Universe [Re: 1drop]
#26989637 - 10/17/20 06:32 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
you would have to believe that proto-cells could not form naturally out of primordial soup; but we have seen the necessary elements combine naturally in laboratory settings, so the presumption of architect would have to go all the way to sub-atomic particles and fields.
I see no evidence of god-architect just because we can create a game, a flight simulator, or a warfare simulator.
it is not simulation, this is happening naturally. yes, it is hard to simulate this in your own mind, and your mind can imagine a more powerful mind achieving simulation - but that is not the issue.
the issue is one of creation. proposing a creator, we may be able to stop looking for the secrets of composition scientifically, and return to the good old days of sacrificing goats to achieve favor from the gods.
the whole concept is a cloud of scientific fake news.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
Rahz
Alive Again
Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,336
|
|
Indeed. A thought experiment that's entertained as truth because humans have difficulty with not filling in the blanks.
But a God or Creator that would create all this, it's difficult to conceive that any sentient being would create so much suffering. There is joy too, but from such a supposed omnipotent source joy cannot justify the suffering IMO.
--------------------
rahz
comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace
"Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free."
~Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head
Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,859
|
Re: The Simulated Universe [Re: Rahz]
#26989963 - 10/17/20 11:35 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
There is the possibility that a putative Creator is fabulously powerful, but not truly omnipotent.
--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,173
|
|
that would be us
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
Rahz
Alive Again
Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,336
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
There is the possibility that a putative Creator is fabulously powerful, but not truly omnipotent.
Not omnipotent enough to make the decision to not do it?
I guess there are various ways of looking at the moral issues involved in creating a universe such as this one, but it seems pretty whack.
Fair point in mentioning that a creator may not be omnipotent, but there's no vector for suggesting why suffering is unavoidable due to lack of omnipotence.
--------------------
rahz
comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace
"Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free."
~Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head
Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,859
|
Re: The Simulated Universe [Re: Rahz]
#26990656 - 10/17/20 08:42 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Perhaps the degree of control to prevent all suffering is lacking. Or perhaps suffering is necessary for unimaginable reasons. 
Just speculating.
--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,830
|
|
A creator explains nothing ! I don't get the fascination with the notion -- no one can imagine a time before time existed ! One cannot imagine a beginning to time.
The only explanation for such fantasies are psychological - its nice to have someone to pray to, or my god is more powerful than yours, or I have a special insight into how it all works, or I now feel loved knowing god is watching over me.
Or I can't stand mystery, or uncertainty, or not having an explanation when others have one. Or it disturbs me that the universe is so amazing, and big and I am so little -- so now
that I know it has a moral purpose I won't feel lost.
In any case whatever the emotional reason(s), I consider trading one's rationality for very questionable and flimsy comfort to be a very bad and regrettable bargain .
And as regards simulation, we all have different distorted models of external & internal reality, in our minds & brain anyway, to far greater degree, than we are aware of or even want to acknowledge, IMO.
Edited by laughingdog (10/17/20 11:07 PM)
|
Warrk
Registered: 06/02/17
Posts: 1,644
|
|
Noble Prize winning physicist George Smoot on the Simulation Hypothesis:
It is not a very good presentation imo and the title misleading.
This one is better, Neil deGrasse Tyson is always great to listen to and is one of my favourites:
The American Museum of Natural History even had a debate about this which was fun:
But really it is all entertainment and for the most part it doesn't matter whether we are living in a virtual reality or not, bacon still tastes good and sunsets are amazing...
|
laughingdog
Stranger
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,830
|
Re: The Simulated Universe [Re: Warrk]
#26993703 - 10/19/20 09:29 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
The question (re simulation or not) pretends to be profound - but is not IMO.
2500 years ago Buddha undermined the fantasy that there is a self that is unified, stable, & autonomous; and today one can verify this by tripping.
Given the illusory nature of the sense of self, as a proof of a more or less tangible self, theories as to the nature of "ultimate reality" sort of lose their charm.
So he focused on what matters: the subjective experience of suffering /stress/anxiety.
But of course folks being folks want to have their cake and eat it too.
Everyone wants a nice new sparkly attractive self image. and a deep insight into "ultimate reality" , so they can maintain 'a leg up' on it all.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,173
|
|
if we were insects we would have more legs up.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
Malkuthian
Fetus
Registered: 12/06/15
Posts: 670
Loc: 
Last seen: 2 hours, 40 minutes
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
The question (re simulation or not) pretends to be profound - but is not IMO.
2500 years ago Buddha undermined the fantasy that there is a self that is unified, stable, & autonomous; and today one can verify this by tripping.
Given the illusory nature of the sense of self, as a proof of a more or less tangible self, theories as to the nature of "ultimate reality" sort of lose their charm.
So he focused on what matters: the subjective experience of suffering /stress/anxiety.
But of course folks being folks want to have their cake and eat it too.
Everyone wants a nice new sparkly attractive self image. and a deep insight into "ultimate reality" , so they can maintain 'a leg up' on it all.
No, the question, or rather the idea, does not pretend anything...
Maybe there are some people who delve into this concept and pretend it's a super duper innovative thought, to portray their worldview as more profound than it actually is, but the idea itself is just a simple idea. It makes no claims what so ever. It is a valid question, and it is a question that is very similar to religious questions of old, but in a modern context.
It seems like you want to deny the question its worth just because some pretentious lost souls uses it wrong?
Personally I find it somewhat intriguing to entertain the notion. The same way it's intriguing to image the size of an infinite universe, or similar thoughts.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,173
|
Re: The Simulated Universe [Re: Malkuthian]
#26994471 - 10/20/20 12:21 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
that's true, however,
as a question, it is subject to answering,
even if it is not that kind of question,
and as an answer, 'no' seems more right than 'yes' does.
it is a similar question to the one about being a butterfly and dreaming you are a person.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
laughingdog
Stranger
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,830
|
|
ok Malkuthian ... you make good points: "No, the question, or rather the idea, does not pretend anything.." etc
But in a dream our dream self is a simulation...
or is it?
if on a metaphorical level 'the deep' psyche is working out issues
then is there even one 'real' self?
The waking self does not know the deep issues or how to solve them, and may not even know of the dream self;
and the dream self, is not the same from dream to dream and only lasts for minutes, and has no awareness that there even is a separate physical/"waking" state (that also exists concurrently or that it itself is only a fleeting simulation).
All of what we take to be 'reality' is only a mental construction, of these partial selves, in their corresponding different 'realities'.
So it seems you, Malkuthian, find the simulation question interesting, while I find life to already be much wilder or freaky than the question, and thus the question less interesting, and I have no problem with this.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale 
Red Vein Kratom 
Cultivation Supplies
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
kaiowas
ralphserket
Sclorch
Cognitive_Shift
HagbardCeline
poke smot!
deCypher