The Universe Solved

 


Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Programmed Reality Explains a Mind-bending Quantum Mystery Options
jim
Posted: Tuesday, July 8, 2008 7:47:49 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 968
Points: 2,910
Check out the latest blog.

Physicists in Vienna prove that reality doesn't exist until you observe it.

Other researchers show evidence that cause doesn't always precede effect.

Programmed Reality offers an explanation!
Neo
Posted: Tuesday, July 8, 2008 3:36:24 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/21/2008
Posts: 571
Points: 1,713
Location: Ireland
Jim, I feel that more clarity is needed (I speak for my self as a mere mortal), as I read it it certainly seemed exciting, but somewwhat shrouded in mystery. Over to you, Jim!

There is no spoon.
jim
Posted: Tuesday, July 8, 2008 11:13:39 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 968
Points: 2,910
thanks, Neo, for the request for clarification. i've updated the blog with a couple examples, which, hopefully, clarify my intention a bit. let me know what you think!
sambuca
Posted: Tuesday, September 9, 2008 9:39:18 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/15/2008
Posts: 114
Points: 257
Location: nyc
stick a needle into the tip of your finger--that is reality---don't think about the pain ---reality doesn't exist----
jdlaw
Posted: Tuesday, September 9, 2008 8:11:50 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2008
Posts: 435
Points: 1,132
Location: USA
This observation precedes reality thing is nothing new. You have Thomas Young's double slit experiment with light in the 19th century; you have the Schroedinger's Cat; the Copenhagen interpretation ... and so forth. The bigger question -- does this prove programmed reality?
GodIsWearingBlack
Posted: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 1:38:27 AM
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member

Joined: 9/9/2008
Posts: 6
Points: 18
Location: Ireland
jdlaw wrote:
This observation precedes reality thing is nothing new. You have Thomas Young's double slit experiment with light in the 19th century; you have the Schroedinger's Cat; the Copenhagen interpretation ... and so forth. The bigger question -- does this prove programmed reality?


The problem is, if we are part of a programmed reality, there would never be a way to prove anything, for or against, outside of that which the program wants us to know/see/hear/believe.
Everything we perceive would be part of the program, including the "glitches" that might give us a clue as to something isn't right. Those glitches themselves, like coincidence, deja vu, etc, might be programmed too, in order to make us feel that way.
sambuca
Posted: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:21:08 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/15/2008
Posts: 114
Points: 257
Location: nyc
Applause well put giwb Applause i agree--
jim
Posted: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:25:27 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 968
Points: 2,910
i too tend to agree. it may not be a falsifiable theory. however, i also believe that there are no absolutes. and saying that a theory is not falsifiable is an absolute. so i prefer to say that it appears to not be falsifiable. then again, there was a time when it was thought that teleportation was impossible, that time travel was impossible, that the detection of parallel realities was impossible, that nothing could escape from a black hole, and that no experiments could be conjured to prove or disprove these ideas. however, as any who follows cutting edge science realizes, such experiments were developed.

i also have to say that while the idea that observation precedes reality is not new, there have always been alternative explanations to double slit and Schroedinger's cat; hidden variables and the Everett interpretation of QM, to name 2. what is new about these experiments is the strong support (aka near proof) that observation precedes reality.

and for a final thought, how many theories of reality are truly falsifiable. creationism? no. evolution? no. solipsism? no. programmed reality? join the club.
GodIsWearingBlack
Posted: Thursday, September 11, 2008 8:37:03 AM
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member

Joined: 9/9/2008
Posts: 6
Points: 18
Location: Ireland
jim wrote:
i too tend to agree. it may not be a falsifiable theory. however, i also believe that there are no absolutes. and saying that a theory is not falsifiable is an absolute. so i prefer to say that it appears to not be falsifiable. then again, there was a time when it was thought that teleportation was impossible, that time travel was impossible, that the detection of parallel realities was impossible, that nothing could escape from a black hole, and that no experiments could be conjured to prove or disprove these ideas. however, as any who follows cutting edge science realizes, such experiments were developed.

i also have to say that while the idea that observation precedes reality is not new, there have always been alternative explanations to double slit and Schroedinger's cat; hidden variables and the Everett interpretation of QM, to name 2. what is new about these experiments is the strong support (aka near proof) that observation precedes reality.

and for a final thought, how many theories of reality are truly falsifiable. creationism? no. evolution? no. solipsism? no. programmed reality? join the club.


Just out of interest, do you think absolutes might be possible in the "other" world, ie. where the architect resides?
I've been toying with some ideas, just because i have time on my hands and i find the whole theory very interesting, but i came up with a few little ideas.

What if where we are now, is an attempt to "save" data/history, etc. So the "real" life, isn't that different from what we're doing now, but rather than us being real, and living it, we're data saved from real living beings. Stored on a harddrive somewhere and playing around in a looping simulation, until such times as they come up with the technology to make us real again. A bit like the many heads that reside in warehouses around the globe, frozen until such times as the people can be resurrected.
So maybe I died 500 years ago, in the real world, and i'm floating about some huge intranet until i can be returned to a real flesh and blood body.
Could even be a case of our world is dying, not enough resources, or something, and all of the data in our world is merely a representation of our civilization, including its religious beliefs, morals, etc, all of which being given their place.

So, while we may in fact not be real, the beliefs of this world might well be. That being within the game itself, doesn't mean that everything around us and outside of our understanding is just nonsense formed in the mind of a programmer, but is in fact based on the real beliefs of real people. That would be really ironic. We could end up with Programmed Reality being the truth, AND Christianity (or any other religion) being the truth too.

sambuca
Posted: Thursday, September 11, 2008 8:57:12 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/15/2008
Posts: 114
Points: 257
Location: nyc
speaking of 'playing around in a looping simulation' [giwb] --i have somewhere in this forum mentioned that we are in a left spinning universe and feel that there must be a right spinning universe like ours much like a reflection in a mirror that also exists--an extension of the jin/jan philosophy possibly----Think
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Universe Solved Theme Created by Jim Elvidge (Universe Solved)
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.2 (NET v4.0) - 9/27/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.