God is real

>>2183537

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jGaio87u3A

Simulations within simulations within simulations within simulations.

>>2183537
why are you reposting this thread, goy?

File: tumblr_mgy4t8BYXW1rd02zoo1_1280.jpg (241KB, 1280x853px)

241KB, 1280x853px

>>2183539

Why are Jews in Brooklyn burning the Israeli flag?

>>2183537
>. The properties aren't loaded until a human observes them because designing it that way is infinitely more efficient.

You're wrong and do not understand the observer effect. Observation in the physics sense of the word has nothing to do with humans per se. It can be a computer recording the event, or the event affecting some other particle in existence, and so on. No humans or living things are necessary to observe an event.

Thus, the "our simulation" narrative falls apart, right there at the beginning.

https://youtu.be/NgnnQAxTz8g

>>2183541

Yes we know you like to argue, your points still don't make sense, it doesn't matter if a human or a machine observes it. Humans use machines to observe things all the time. What is a thermometer.

Please, just go back to your bag of Doritos and let the big boys talk.

>>2183537
We don't see any other players because of the simulation lag and instancing in the ayyypooinloos' no man's sky style """net code"""

>>2183541
>It can be a computer recording the event, or the event affecting some other particle in existence, and so on
It is true that within the simulation that a computer or say a video camera can resolve uncertainty, but if their were no human the look at the recording, then the recording would not have to be rendered, and would remain Indeterminate.

>>2183542

Incoming "no your a fucking faggot you retard" followed by a bunch more bullshit

>>2183537
You're on the right track, but you're still thinking in terms of computing jargon.

We aren't literally running on a computer. There is no objective physical reality, the only thing that exists in consciousness and perception. It's a dream, not a simulation.

>>2183541
Doesn't change much, the question is still what hosts the universe/multiverse.

Duh God is real you fucking retard. It's only something the majority of mankind has known for the majority of our existence. This is why creativity is dying because of lack of belief in the creator.

>>2183547
Doing psychedelics today with the purpose of finding out the answer to that question. Thank you.

>>2183548

You believe an interpretation of dozens of different books, put in a specific order by an organisation that dug up a dead pope and put him on trial, and who is now full of paedophiles. This is why people don't believe in your God. You take something spoken as a parable as literal words. It's just a joke.

>>2183549
Pure consciousness springing forth from the void

>>2183541
you're a fucking idiot lol

>>2183537
Quantum systems still evolve without something there to measure them, so the idea that somehow its computationally cheaper to simulate is wrong.

In software design these decisions are trade offs, you trade away accuracy of the simulation with lossy optimisations like that, and you can in theory do experiments to test if that is occuring or not.

So you drive into one road in GTA and observe a car enter the highway, then you take a fast car, travel a completely alternate route to the other end of the highway, and observe to see if that same car is simulated along the road, or if once out of view it disappears. What you find is that because it's an approximation it will disappear, it's not obvious to causal observers because we don't keep track of small details that closely. But it can be revealed with carefully constructed experiments.

None of which have been done to prove this occurs in what we consider to be reality.

Quite interesting OP, let's saw that's pretty much like the DRAW DISTANCE in game like GTAV.

>>2183551

Yeah if I run a magnet across my monitor I can see crazy shit too but I don't try to play it off as a spiritual experience. Folks like you are retarded.

>>2183537
You piece of shit. To observe something you must reflect photons off of it, aka you have to fuck with the object you wish to observe inorder to observe it making the observation a pointless endeavour.

We should all look into microscopes and telescopes at the same time and break the RAM of our simulation

>>2183555
that has to be the most preposterous strawman argument I have ever seen

>>2183537
It's not "just like a video game", the video game is like the reality is exists in.

>>2183556

Light bounces off the screen and hits your eye so you can read this. There is no energy added to the screen to accomplish this. Just stop, you don't know what you're talking about and you use words like faggot to fill holes in your explanation.

>>2183537
Fifteen reasons why we live in a virtual reality

Fifteen reasons why we live in a virtual reality

1. Had a beginning. All the distant galaxies are receding from us at known rates, so it is possible to calculate back when our universe started up13 about fourteen billion years ago, in a first event that began not only our universe but also its space and time. Yet a complete physical universe can’t begin, as by definition there is nothing outside it to create it and to create itself, it would have to exist before it began. This leaves physics speculating on D-branes, alternate universes, wormholes, teleporting worlds, quantum tunneling, big bang-big crunch oscillation theories and other steady state variants. In contrast, every virtual reality has a boot up that creates its pixels and its space-time operating system, based on nothing within itself

Has a maximum speed. In our world, a light shone from a spaceship moving at almost the speed of light still leaves the ship at the speed of light, which is impossible in an objective reality. Einstein proved that the speed of light is a maximum, but gave no reason for it. The equations increase an object’s inherent mass as it increases speed relative to other objects, which works but doesn’t really explain anything. In contrast, every screen has a fixed refresh rate that no pixel-to-pixel transfer “speed” can exceed

>>2183561
3. Is digital. Everything at the quantum level is quantized, including time and space, but field theory assumes continuity, so it has to avoid the infinities that implies by a mathematical trick called renormalization. We think our world has no gaps but actually Planck length and time are irreducible and calculus implies infinitesimals. In quantum realism, pixels and cycles are expected (see 2.2.2).
4. Has quantum tunneling. For an electron to suddenly appear outside a field barrier it can’t penetrate is like a coin in a perfectly sealed glass bottle suddenly appearing outside it. Again, this is impossible for an objective reality although quantum theory permits it. In contrast, a digital reality allows “cuts” between one probabilistic frame (quantum state) and another (Ch5).
5. Entangles entities. Entangled photons maintain opposite spins no matter how far apart they go because quantum collapse works instantly across the universe. An objective reality limited by the speed of light can’t do this, so Einstein called entanglement spooky action at a distance. In contrast, a program can instantly alter any pixel anywhere on a screen, even if the screen is our universe. In this view, entangled photons just merge their processing until the next processing reboot

>>2183537
[citation needed]

>>2183562
6. Space curves. In Einstein’s vision, the sun keeps the earth in orbit by “curving” the space around it, but what exactly does space curve into? Space needs another dimension to do this, but string theory’s extra dimensions are “curled up” in our space, so they don’t allow it. In quantum realism our 3D space is a just a “surface” that can curve into a fourth dimension (see 2.3.5).
7. Time dilates. In Einstein’s twin paradox, one twin travels the universe while the other stays on earth, and the first twin returns after a year to find his brother an old man of eighty! In an objectively real world time is fixed but in our world it slows down as we go faster. Likewise, every gamer knows that the frame rate of a game slows down if the server is busy (see 2.4.1).
8. Randomness occurs. In our world, radioactive atoms emit alpha particles randomly, i.e. in a way that no prior physical “story” can explain. Randomness implies a physically uncaused cause that isn’t possible in a complete physicality. The many-worlds fantasy, or today the multiverse, was invented solely to deny quantum randomness. In contrast, the processor of a virtual construct can choose which quantum state becomes a physical state in quantum collapse

>>2183564
9. Empty space is not empty. An objective space should be nothing but our space exerts a pressure. In the Casimir effect, flat plates in a vacuum placed close together experience a force pushing them in. Current physics attribute this to virtual particles created by the vacuum, but space as null processing is a simpler explanation (see 2.5.5).
10. Waves are particles. In Young’s two-slit experiment, one electron goes through two slits, interferes with itself to give an interference pattern, but still always arrives at one screen point. A particle can’t do this but a program can spread instances of itself like a wave but still restart at a point (quantum collapse) to arrive as a particle in one place (see 3.3.5). Processing can spread like a wave but reboot like a particle.
11. Every electron is identical. In our world, every photon, electron and quark is indistinguishable from every other one, just as if the same code generated all of them

>>2183537
>In quantum mechanics there is a strange phenomena where particles seem to have no properties until it is measured

You might wanna read up on that one again. You clearly haven't understood the topic.

>>2183561
>>2183562
>>2183564
>>2183565
>>2183565

Thanks

>>2183537
M theory proves God is real. When all possibilities are tangible, the one thing that isn't is the subjective truth.

>>2183544
Dude, a photon bouncing off something is an "observation" that will can waveform collapse. If you think particles interacting with each other is predicated on humans existing, you might be retarded.

>>2183566

Actually, you might wanna read up on that one again. You clearly haven't understood the topic

>>2183561

Whoa, whoa bud. Something can come from nothing. Lawrence Krauss even says so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EilZ4VY5Vs

If the smartest physicist in the world says something can come from nothing than I believe him. The universe didn't need to come from somewhere else. It just popped into being.

Same with evolution - we've never found a single answer to how biology first created not only itself but the DNA code to bring it into first being. Which says that the DNA just like the universe came into being from nothing.

File: wut.jpg (312KB, 1528x1920px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1528x1920px

>>2183537
>the universe is a simulation.
Conan the Barbarian solved this shit like 60 years ago. Why are you still worried about it?
"He shrugged his shoulders. "I have known many gods. He who denies them is as blind as he who trusts them too deeply. I seek not beyond death. It may be the blackness averred by the Nemedian skeptics, or Crom's realm of ice and cloud, or the snowy plains and vaulted halls of the Nordheimer's Valhalla. I know not, nor do I care. Let me live deep while I live; let me know the rich juices of red meat and stinging wine on my palate, the hot embrace of white arms, the mad exultation of battle when the blue blades flame and crimson, and I am content. Let teachers and priests and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content.""

File: 896d835a63ee582676bcf932eb4a14e201de056a7593a0bdd93f4849aa73593e.jpg (324KB, 1583x2048px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 1583x2048px

>>2183537

>>2183569

You haven't proved a point and you still think adding 'retard' or 'faggot' to your arguments gets you anywhere. You have no power here.

>>2183565
12. Quantum superposition. In quantum theory, currents can simultaneously flow both ways around a superconducting ring (Cho, 2000), and an electron can spin both up and spin down – until observed. Such combinations are not physically possible, so in current physics quantum states don’t exist, but in quantum realism an electron program can instantiate its code to explore both options (see 3.6.1).

13 Non-physical detection. Imagine a bomb so sensitive that even one photon will set it off. It should be impossible to detect, but scientists

14. Retrospective action occurs. If the future can affect the past, causality fails and with it physics. Yet in delayed choice experiments, an observation made after a photon takes a path defines the path took before the observation. This has led some to speculate that all time, like all space, already exists, allowing time travel and all the paradoxes it implies. In quantum realism program instances take all paths and the observation picks the physical event (see 3.6.3), so there is no time travel.

15. Anti-matter. Quantum equations predicted anti-matter, but no reason has ever been given why matter that inherently exists needs an inverse, of the same mass but opposite charge, at all. In Feynman diagrams, an anti-electron colliding with an electron goes backwards in time, but how it can enter an event in reverse time not explained. In contrast, processing by definition implies anti-processing, and if time is the processing sequence, anti-processing implies anti-time

>>2183568
>inb4 theory proves a fact

>>2183572

This is exactly the same philosophy of Diogenes. The Greeks were right too. Basically the philosophy is 'fuck it', virtue through action not knowledge. I tend to agree with it.

God is literally a meme

>>2183537
Or you know, the electric current to measure that particle...actually affected it too.

>>2183566
Prove that uncertainty is resolved before measurement is made. All experiments so far have shown the opposite.

>>2183537
bait

File: images (9).jpg (44KB, 465x316px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 465x316px

>>2183537
>"oh look I'm forming a philosophy based on what (((science))) fed me"
>"oh wait I heard this on my social media feed. it's not even my own"

why are you parroting what kikes tell you? especially on 4chinz? the illusory nature of this reality were already known throughout the ages almost in every fucking single teaching/tradition. the movie matrix was a symbolism for this, not literally. that was what plato meant by his cave allegory

don't be so lazy and try to look beyond what you're fed

>>2183567
No prob., it's by brian whitworth. It's called quantum realism. I don't agree with him on everything, but most of it compelling.

http://thephysicalworldisvirtual.com

File: IMG_5420.jpg (102KB, 1024x494px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1024x494px

How do I hack the system?

If this is all a simulation, then laws can be bent or broken.

How do influence this simulation to my will?

>>2183537
Without going back to read the thread
A) This guy (OP) is amazing and right
B) don't just go to muh matrix in your minds, use origional thinking and you'll see what he means.
What OP says is scientifically likely (it's where humanity have arrived by utilising science to the degree we can simulate universal construction, we are Gods AI. AI is dangerous, God's testing it)
Whilst muh evolution is an anti scientific zealot cult that warps truth to fit religion.

>>2183582
"the more I see the less I know."- Red Hot Chili Peppers.

>>2183584
Spicy memes are a glitch in the matrix

>>2183537
This seems like a lot of claims with no evidence supporting them.

>>2183584
Virtual realities still have a rule set. Ours we call the laws of physics. You can modify future possible outcomes though based on intent. This is what is commonly called meme magic. This is why something like an ethnostate is possible if everybody simple focuses intent on it happening.

File: _proof_of_god.png (658KB, 759x1135px) Image search: [Google]

658KB, 759x1135px

>>2183537
Good thread.
Sad that there are people in 2017 who still don't understand these ideas.

>>2183584
your will is God's will. Everything is predetermined.

>>2183537
So what you're saying is that God needs to upgrade his PC

>>2183541
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnpCH9VRvPg

>>2183584
Can't be done. Our behaviour will be limited by the extent of our intelligence routines.
Think of us as AI in games.

File: 1505019016569.jpg (33KB, 329x450px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 329x450px

>>2183542 >>2183544 >>2183552
Here a real physicist explains it at 1:50 mark, although I recommed watching the whole video since it's extremely important regarding this subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs

Also basically what this guy said >>2183569
It's an incredibly arrogant and anthropocentric view of the world to think that stuff just stops existing if a HUMAN isn't looking at it. There is zero evidence that that's the case, and seeing as the we can map out events that happened in the world before any humans existed it's totally bonkers to suggest so

File: LT.jpg (71KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 800x800px

>>2183537
> In quantum mechanics there is a strange phenomena where particles seem to have no properties until it is measured, then all the properties manifest immediately upon observation.

I'm a theoretical/computational chemist. This is wildly incorrect. When defined through Schrödingers wave-mechanics or by application of Heisenbergs density-matrices, a problem arises where certain particles don't have singular eigenstates when defined in relation to complementary observables. In these cases we describe the observable through means of a weighted linear combination of eigenfunctions. This allows us to determine the probability of an observable (When viewed in the context of it's complementary property along the same axis) being in a given state when a measurement is taken. Measurements of a physical particle will of course reveal a singular physical eigenstate. Therefore adhering to the Copenhagen interpretation the measurement must force wave-function collapse into a definite state... That being said an understanding of basic linear algebra and differential equations can purge a great deal of the mist surrounding QM, even for the layman. If your interested in such concepts it's well-worth your spare time. Additionally other interpretations, particularly the conjecture of pilot-waves allows for a much greater, yet still incomplete deterministic view of the subject matter.

>>2183574
His point is very pertinent, retard or not at the end, he has a point.

Explain to me what's the role of the Fly in this universe ? If it was supposedly created by an unseen force...

>>2183596
LT

>>2183540
more orthodox jews protest the state of israel because they belive the jews can only return to israel when god returns due to their past transgressions

Le bump

File: Screen Shot 2017-09-16 at 12.43.12 PM.png (90KB, 193x304px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 193x304px

>>2183537
There Was An Extinction-Level Event In 2012: And We All Now Live In A Simulation

>>2183593
Yeah, basically our consciousness resolves uncertainty by taking a measurement, just like in double slit and delayed choice. When we chose to look to the right, we resolve uncertainty and are rendered what we need to see, but every thing we are not looking at returns to an indeterminated state until we look at it again. It's a more efficient way to run a simulation than rendering the whole universe at full detail at all times.

>>2183538
We are a dream of God, inside a dream, inside a dream, etc. It doesn't diminish the beauty of the Creation the slightest

>>2183601
All sorts of mystery and wonder open up when you realize that we are not just a bunch of atoms. This is why the primacy of consciousness is down played and denied.

>>2183537
imo the double slit experiment proves that "reality" is a simulation

>>2183605
For those of us who didn't graduate high school, what is the "double slit experiment"?

>>2183537

That is how the brain functions not the universe

>>2183537
>The speed of light. As you approach the speed of light, time slows down for you, but your perception of it does not. This is happening because the computations of the simulation are not occurring fast enough to update the reality around you. It is literally a bound on the I/O. It is just like in a video game with lag. Your perception of the game's time remains constant, but the game is unable to process the calculations fast enough to make it real.

It's hilarious to hear retards talk about the effects of special relativity while completely losing sight of why it's called "relativity" to begin with.
You're asserting that there's some privileged frame of reference from which the simulation measures speed, and when your speed diverges enough from that speed the simulation starts to lag. Yet I could say the exact same thing about everything else - whoever is measuring my speed is actually the one who is travelling at close to the speed of light, and you'd have no grounds to say that I'm wrong.

>>2183596

Only vaguely understood what you said, but how does it relate to the delayed choice quantum erasure?

>>2183596
Post experimental evidence which shows uncertainty resolved before measurement

>>2183541
> It can be a computer recording the event, or the event affecting some other particle in existence

the first thing is human interference, the second can only be measured by a computer

Seperating light via a slit: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/light/Lesson-3/Young-s-Experiment

Double Young's Slit Experiment Basic: http://www.studyphysics.ca/newnotes/20/unit04_light/chp1719_light/lesson58.htm

Kike-pedo-ia : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

Of course none of this actually explains about the whole quantum thing, which is basically stating by measuring/observing a particle you have changed it, or rather it's properties aren't fixed until you measure it.

File: image.jpg (266KB, 500x525px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 500x525px

Didn't I see this here yesterday? Did I finally die in my sleep and enter the purgatory that is I visit /pol/ every day but the threads are the same?

>>2183571
DNA didn't come from nothing though, it formed from inorganic molecules over time

File: George Berkeley.png (33KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x500px

>>2183537
We are indeed in a simulation, but not within a computer. But a mind.

/ig/ Idealism General

QUICK RUNDOWN
>Dr. Godehard Bruentrup: What Is Idealism?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDR5i6z4L8c

>In philosophy, idealism is the group of philosophies which assert that reality, or reality as we can know it, is fundamentally mental, mentally constructed, or otherwise immaterial.

ENCYCLOPEDIA ENTRIES
>Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/idealism/
>Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy
https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/idealism/v-1

ACADEMIC ARTICLES
>Eliminating the Physical
https://philpapers.org/rec/ELLETP-2
>A New Epistemic Argument for Idealism
https://philpapers.org/rec/SMIANE-2
>How To Avoid Solipsism While Remaining An Idealist
https://philpapers.org/rec/HENHTA

BOOKS
>George Berkeley-Principles of Human Knowledge
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4723/4723-h/4723-h.htm
>George Berkeley-Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4724/4724-h/4724-h.htm
>John Foster-A World For Us: The Case for Phenomenalistic Idealism
http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=0DB12BBA4A197862E272211B7A059880

YOUTUBE
>The Introspective Argument:
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l1lQMCOguw
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4DyfIsj8FU
>Dr. David Chalmers explains why materialism is false
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdbs-HUAxC8
>Why substance dualism is roundly rejected in contemporary philosophy of mind
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVbG90kr1B0

>>2183605
How so?

>>2183537
>In quantum mechanics there is a strange phenomena where particles seem to have no properties until it is measured
t. Deepak Chopra

Bullshit, anon. That's bullshit.

>>2183537
>universe is a simulation
this is an unfalsifiable claim that is nice to ponder but not too healthy to keep obsessed with

>>2183616
tide goes in, tide goes out... you can't explain that.

God exists.

>>2183614

>DNA didn't come from nothing though, it formed from inorganic molecules over time

So inorganic molecules created a code before they were assembled into anything that remotely became life? Unless I'm unaware there isn't a single organism on earth that isn't written in DNA.

What came first, the DNA, or the means to create it? You can't just bind 100 pages without the knowledge to do so, much less just have words suddenly appear, and in the correct order to have a novel.

>>2183615
This. Computers in a mind will always seem more likely than minds in computers to me. The mind creates the computer.

>>2183621
Isn't the difference largely semantic?

>>2183596
You sound smart but you used "it's" and "your" improperly so now I can't trust anything else you say.

>>2183537
Meh, You should read Kant and Spinoza dude. Kant's Transcendental Idealism explained all this already. "Particles have no properties until measured" because you never directly observe things in themselves. You only ever see how things are for you; we can prove this just from noting how some people are color blind; that colors aren't intrinsic properties of matter, colors are generated by the mind processing reality.
The mind mediates reality. Space and time are CONCEPTS that the mind imposes on reality to make it sensible. Space and time are not realities in themselves. The universe is not a big box you move around in. And we cannot know things in themselves directly because we can't get outside our minds to see how things would "appear" if our mind wasn't processing the the stuff.

All that is knowable to us is the empirical, because we can't use our minds to observe anything nonempirical, and the empirical is always already conditioned by our minds. What this means is that any investigation into the soul or free will is impossible to disprove since these are not empirical topics. Everything we can observe APPEARS deterministic simply because everything our mind processes has already been processed TO APPEAR deterministic. We can only observe things AFTER the mind has imposed order on things.
So YES, in a sense, the "WORLD" is a simulation, A SIMULATION GENERATED BY YOUR MIND after it has processed the information available to it in the UNIVERSE.
But NO, the universe as a whole is not a simulation, it is just reality as it is in itself, before any mind has processed it to observe it. Incidentally, the Kantian theories are what enabled to development of broadcast televisions and even the nuclear bomb. Think of it like this: Your mind is tv set that processes the broadcast signals to form a world of experience in the images and sounds of the tv show.

>>2183596
You have Bogdabots inside your body at this very moment.

>>2183620
The means to create it came first. Not sure what your point is.

>>2183596
what the fuck are you talking about nigger ? tl;dr

File: Father of Quantum Theory.jpg (70KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 850x400px

>>2183622
Not at all.

Describe to me an object without describing your sense experience. Go ahead, give it a try. You'll soon realize you can't.

An object minus what it looks like, feels like, tastes like, etc is an object that is indistinguishable from nothing.

Mind>computer

>>2183537
God is real because morality is real, and without God morality would be incoherent. But morality is not incoherent, therefore God is real.

The counterargument to this is something like evolutionary psychology, that we "evolved morality" for species survival or some bullshit. But that is obviously ridiculous, and EPs have to weave these absurdly complex narratives just to avoid accepting that God is real. Cockroaches, obviously have survived forever and they don't have any fucking morality.

>>2183622
Depends if you believe the mind is immaterial or material. If you believe it's completely material, then it's just semantics. If you believe the mind is immaterial, then its much more than semantics.

>>2183629
>But that is obviously ridiculous
Go on...

>>2183626
>>2183626

>The means to create it came first. Not sure what your point is.

It's really self-explanatory. Something can only come from something. DNA was written by an intelligence, not the sum of a series of protein combinations. My belief for this is that all life, or anything that is biological on earth is coded in DNA. There is no former language.

Compare DNA for instance against something like C. And ask yourself how long did it take a sentient civilization with modern technology to come up with such a fantastic thing. Then contrast that against a pool of essentially mud and enantiomers. Furthermore why hasn't this happened again since. You would think that if something inorganic could make something so incredibly complex why couldn't it make multiple languages?

File: Idealism.jpg (183KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1920x1080px

>>2183621
Exactly.

The idea that we are in a computer only leads to an infinite regress. If we are in a computer, and by that we mean one like the ones we know of, then those who simulate us would exist in a world like ours which would then have to be explained by another computer and another computer ad infinitum. It just makes no sense.

Consciousness is one and we can make sense of the idea of there being an ultimate architect in like Inception and we are all within the dream of this architect.

>tfw our entire universe is simply a battery in ricks space car

>>2183594
If this is a simulation then the most efficient and therefore probable extent of it based on available evidence (what you have experienced) is what you experience. Ergo, you are probably the exclusive subject of the simulation. Possibly it arcitect. >>2183595
Therefore possibly effectively god

>>2183634
kill yourself rick and morty faggot

>>2183632
>DNA was written by an intelligence, not the sum of a series of protein combinations.
How do you know?

>>2183537
the true redpill is projective geometry. Duality is the unifying concept.

File: 0hsNJpL.png (88KB, 244x378px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 244x378px

>>2183636
Lick lick lick my balls!

>>2183635
>Ergo, you are probably the exclusive subject of the simulation

False. See: >>2183615

>How To Avoid Solipsism While Remaining An Idealist
https://philpapers.org/rec/HENHTA

>>2183628
I don't question that aspect of it in the slightest-- I believe you are absolutely correct.

When I ask about semantics, I am asking what the difference is between a mind and a computer. This is not to suggest that 'our' minds are comparable to our current computers but rather to inquire as to what the real difference between the two would be.

If a computer devised a computer would it then qualify as a mind? Where is the hard line at which one becomes the other?

>>2183570
Who is watching us then and for what reason?

If you name any of the "Earth" gods or religions you are objectively false.

>>2183637

I can't know for sure, I can just take the information that is available and infer that is what I believe to be correct. Doesn't make it so but is the most probable in my mind based on my experience.

Can you name a single instance of where something goes from simple to complex without an input from an intelligent source? Simple question, but hard to answer.

It's the equivalent of 1000 monkeys on typewriters.

>>2183641
What do you mean by a computer? If a computer is something that you could open up and see the correct electrical connections that would give rise to the screen that you see right now, then there is a clear difference.

A "thought" in a computer can be mapped out materially.

However, if you picture a red car in your mind and we were to dissect your brain, as far as current knowledge in neurology, we could not find the electrical and chemical synapses that would give rise to that specific picture of a red car in your mind.

The only way we could be able to compare our minds to computers is if actual, self-aware AI was created. Then the conversation would be different. To me barriers to generating conscious AI are philosophical, not scientific.

File: Hard problem_of_consciousness.png (111KB, 800x719px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 800x719px

>>2183641
There is "what it is like" to be conscious, there is not "what it is like" to be a computer.

There is some subjective way the world seems or appears from our experiential point of view from the first person. Computers are objective, they are 3rd person, there is no unified 1st person experiencer to the data they just shift around through algorithms.

>Dr. David Chalmers on the hard problem of consciousness
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdbs-HUAxC8
>The Chinese Room - 60-Second Adventures in Thought
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TryOC83PH1g

The tools and principles and whatever to simulate us would have to be something completely otherworldly to the point our definitions and understanding just couldn't be applied to it, calling it a 'computer' and 'simulation' would not make sense. You're not answering anything. Things are way behind our comprehension. The answers to the most fundamental questions of our existence can't make sense to our animal brains no matter how you look at it.

File: Frans_Hals_-_Portret_van_René_Descartes.jpg (151KB, 817x1000px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 817x1000px

>>2183537

Descartes proved it since 500 years.

Read "Meditation III. of God: that He exists."

>>2183571
Equivocation. He's just redefining what nothing is. He's still appealing to the laws of physics(ruleset). Where did the ruleset come from which govern quantum fluctuations/ fields, etc? The laws of physics are still SOMETHING and the pre-date the quantum vaccuum or else they wouldn't govern it's behavior. Where did the quantum info come from?

>Where, for starters, are the laws of quantum mechanics themselves supposed to have come from? Krauss is more or less upfront, as it turns out, about not having a clue about that. He acknowledges (albeit in a parenthesis, and just a few pages before the end of the book) that everything he has been talking about simply takes the basic principles of quantum mechanics for granted. “I have no idea if this notion can be usefully dispensed with,” he writes, “or at least I don’t know of any productive work in this regard.” And what if he did know of some productive work in that regard? What if he were in a position to announce, for instance, that the truth of the quantum-mechanical laws can be traced back to the fact that the world has some other, deeper property X? Wouldn’t we still be in a position to ask why X rather than Y? And is there a last such question? Is there some point at which the possibility of asking any further such questions somehow definitively comes to an end? How would that work? What would that be like?
https://archive.is/D2jxE

>>2183643
Self-organization. Optimization occurs in the presence of constraints.

>>2183572
apathy is for fags

>>2183563
Simulations are cancelled, no refunds will be issued

>>2183537
God is real, because he is the universe.

>>2183643
>Can you name a single instance of where something goes from simple to complex without an input from an intelligent source?
How do you define "complex"?

Uder complexity theory, a bos full of inert gas at a stable temperature with all the atoms lined up in a ordered grid will naturally become complex over time due to entropy and quantum fluctuations.

There's also stuff like chemical evolution. But I'm not sure if that counts to you as something "complex"

>It's the equivalent of 1000 monkeys on typewriters
... how?

>>2183643
Self-organization. Optimization occurs in the presence of constraints.

Your arguments and deductions have more holes than the middle east after American intervention

>>2183569
>a photon bouncing off something is an "observation" that will can waveform collapse.
I wonder how unobserved it's possible to cause something in this world to become.

>>2183653
A box* full of intert gas rather

>>2183537
Humans do not care about your robot God.

>>2183655
What?

>>2183648

I was being sarcastic. The something from nothing should of given that away. The guy is somewhat a laughing stock in his own field because of that very statement. Hawking believes the same.

>>2183618
If it has better explanatory power than the objective reality model than it is quite useful to ponder, and also it is important in that it changes the whole reality of our existence.

>>2183649

>Self-organization. Optimization occurs in the presence of constraints.

Give an example...

And like I said using inorganic material.

>>2183537
> 2017
> Still accepting the (((Copenhagen))) interpretation
> Not studying the based pilot wave theory
Hurry up, lads, we need more people working on this

>>2183659
Alles klar

>>2183548
Why woukd god creat people who can question his existance? And if life is a simulation, why would the creator make us able to suspect that it is a creation?

>>2183661
Formation of snowflakes

>>2183653

>How do you define "complex"?

As having information as a part of it's design.

>Uder complexity theory, a bos full of inert gas at a stable temperature with all the atoms lined up in a ordered grid will naturally become complex over time due to entropy and quantum fluctuations.

Do you not understand that if it takes an intelligent being to do an experiment it's not organic. I understand the point of recreating an experiment to prove an organic rise.

For instance google biologies version of that experiment to create enatiomers. Even with technology you can create proteins and "complex" chains but you've done nothing more than created a type of soup.

The same process' that created the original life is still in work today - why don't we see anything new - just rehashes of DNA?

Do you not understand the inherent contradiction in all of that? If the smartest person living today with all of today's technology cannot create something better than DNA - you still believe it's a product of the right conditions, and with a few organic compounds at the right time?

>>2183537
All is one. Reality is an illlusiin because the only real thing is unity.
>lawofone.info
From Ra, a 6th density social memory complex who evolved on Venus.

>>2183665

Snowflakes don't contain information. And they are a process that is easily explained by natural means. Are you even trying?

>>2183666
>As having information as a part of it's design.
Absolutely all matter has information. Not sure what you mean by design here.

>>2183574
>14. Retrospective action occurs. If the future can affect the past, causality fails and with it physics. Yet in delayed choice experiments, an observation made after a photon takes a path defines the path took before the observation. This has led some to speculate that all time, like all space, already exists, allowing time travel and all the paradoxes it implies. In quantum realism program instances take all paths and the observation picks the physical event (see 3.6.3), so there is no time travel.

wait is this real

>>2183537
>In quantum mechanics.... the properties manifest immediately upon observation.

The properties of everything manifest once they have been observed. That's why we observe things, to know what they are.

>....As you approach the speed of light, time slows down for you....

No it doesn't. Only the observable time slows down. Speed is relative between object and observer. If two objects move away from a point the relative speed of the objects are object a + object b.

>The existence of other aliens..... Where are they?.... You don't put more than one sample in a petri dish if you only want to study 1 sample.

Space is big. It's really really really REALLY fucking big. It's so big you can fit every single thing that exists in to it and it's considered to be empty.

The reason we haven't met another alien race is numerous. Space being what it is is probably the most likely reason.

>By every definition of our word 'God', God exists, God exists because the universe is a simulation, and there are creators. The most profound part is that...even if you get out of 'this' simulation. The next one is a simulation too. Ad infinitum.

No. You do not understand anything which you have posted. You have given in to the hype you hear on TV about science and it's discoveries.

The most important question I have is why is a god not required in all the explained phenomena.

>>2183661
The world is a projection not a simulation. If you really want to know the truth then look at the geometry of physics.

Duality is the key that points to the existence of higher dimensions. thats what physicists do man why do you think we got to the number 11. They kept merging dual objects into one.

Quantum mechanics was based to wave particle duality. Relativity is based on space time duality.

>>2183669

>Absolutely all matter has information. Not sure what you mean by design here.

I think you're now left the field you're so far outside of anything resembling a coherent arguement. Not everything has information, but descriptors. For instance is the chemical organization of ammonia information? Do you not understand the difference between words on paper, and the paper itself?

File: Sir James Jeans.png (580KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

580KB, 800x450px

>>2183662
We can conclusively arrive at Idealism independent of quantum mechanics.

see:
>>2183615
>>2183628

File: AIColonel.png (40KB, 135x196px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 135x196px

>>2183645
>There is some subjective way the world seems or appears from our experiential point of view from the first person. Computers are objective, they are 3rd person, there is no unified 1st person experiencer to the data they just shift around through algorithms.

Which is easy to say when you see a computer, our computers, as nothing more than a box with some circuits in them. For the sake of argument consider that you yourself are a computer. A very complex biological one with an immense capacity for processing assorted data, but a machine nevertheless. Does this somehow change what consciousness is? Even among ourselves, there are multiple 'computers' and no unified 1st person experience. Is a mind simply a computer sufficiently complex to consider its own existence? Most human behavior is, after all, very predictable. It is a comfort to consider ourselves as masters of our own environment/destiny/fate/whatever, but we are indeed very predictable.

>>2183644
>A "thought" in a computer can be mapped out materially.

I know this is quoted intentionally, but it needs to be said that this is possible because our computers do not think.

>However, if you picture a red car in your mind and we were to dissect your brain, as far as current knowledge in neurology, we could not find the electrical and chemical synapses that would give rise to that specific picture of a red car in your mind.

Suppose a day comes that our technology becomes sufficient that we can map out our thought of a red car materially. Does this change what constitutes a thought, consciousness, a mind and/or a computer?

>>2183668
>Snowflakes don't contain information. And they are a process that is easily explained by natural means. Are you even trying?
t.Burger Education

Snowflakes form fractals A fractal is a complex pattern which is a recurrent relationship of a simpler pattern.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexity

Educated yourself fool

>>2183671
Yeps, Quantum mechanics/theory doesnt give you carte blanche to shorn horn in a sky God and disregard maths

Learn physics then come back to us lad

who created the creators creator?

>>2183666
Haven't seen such an attempt at sounding smart in a long damn time. Nice shit post man!

Bang!

And now I have a doobie of weed

>>2183537
>life is a simulation
>goy is close to finding out the truth about existence
SHUT IT DOWN

>>2183676

Holy fuck bud.

Does the composition of the h2o in the form of a pattern increase information? If so what is being said. I can't wait to hear this.

I don't think you understand what it means to be complex.

By the way from the wiki had you read more than the introduction...

>"Complexity is generally used to characterize something with many parts where those parts interact with each other in multiple ways, culminating in a higher order of emergence greater than the sum of its parts. Just like there is no absolute definition of "intelligence", there is no absolute definition of "complexity"; "

>>2183666
millons and billions of years is a long time. I know that you are probably the center of your own universe, but have a sense of perspective, for just a moment, and see that life is no "great creation," just another thing that happened. The conditions for life were purely coincidental in a vast universe filled with a potentially infinite variety of different situations and building blocks. Man developed advanced sentience and intelligence as a simple response to evolutionary pressures; and it has led to the wonders of civilization and culture we know today. It's the same thing, really. Some protein soup was boiling on a rocky magma sphere in space and it eventually got zapped by some quantum charged interdimensional once every 3 million years space lightning, and the proteins started moving on their own

>>2183678
perhaps the creator existed before time and thus always was just there. either nothing would exist or something would exist, apparantly something existed and it created this.

>>2183679
I remember my first quantum mechanics doco

That 'moment' when you get it

then it goes away, its too much for me to get my head around desu. Freaks me out

So the moon is only there when we look at it?

whats this we shit, i thought this was my simulation REEEEE

>>2183684
Something like a big bang from when there was nothing to somthing

>>2183683

>The conditions for life were purely coincidental in a vast universe filled with a potentially infinite variety of different situations and building blocks.

Can you prove to me that inorganic material has the ability to code for information - or can you prove to me that even just life on earth started from something other than DNA?

Simple saying give something enough time and things will happen isn't an adequate answer.

Do you believe given enough time 1000 monkeys on typewriters could write all the works of Shakespeare?

>Some protein soup was boiling on a rocky magma sphere in space and it eventually got zapped by some quantum charged interdimensional once every 3 million years space lightning, and the proteins started moving on their own

There is a point where you can smoke too much weed, and this is that point.

>>2183537
you're wrong. In quantum mechanics, particles don't have any properties at all

>>2183684
>>2183683
>>2183675
This is a good entry level documentary, he really dumbs it down for plebs like me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6k6BuYK_PwQ

File: bros.jpg (91KB, 435x327px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 435x327px

>>2183537
thank you for this OP, have a bump.

File: resizedimage638365-1-mpu-goldeneye-splitscreenMPU-id1379321681-343178.jpg (157KB, 638x365px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 638x365px

>>2183675
> no unified 1st person experience
You fucking nigger.

Wavefunction collapse is nothing like computer algorithm design

>>2183689
Well worth dedicated an hour to if you've not seen it.

>>2183549
Kill yourself, degenerate

hey OP how can i apply this on my daily life?
Does that mean that all comes down on my intepretation of happenings?
I have no doubt that being positive has a better impact in my life, just like being in love makes everything easier.
But i cant see myself avoiding the bad times too, are we bound to this yin yan imperative that we need to deal with or is there another way?

>>2183682
No it decreases information (entropy) which is what you need for life. You gain order at the expense of energy.

>culminating in a higher order of emergence greater than the sum of its parts

Isn't that what you wanted? Isn't this intelligence? We put something in one end and we got something that is greater than the sum of its parts.

ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW OF THE SCOPE OF TRUTH AS TO HOW LONG WEVE BEEN
HERE IN THIS BULLSHIT REALITY

https://youtu.be/ml23xywL8yc

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5e_gcTGEpPo3LqUxQz9IH7_TOMVAhYCy

>>2183687
>Simple saying give something enough time and things will happen isn't an adequate answer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincaré_recurrence_theorem

File: 1504981265771.jpg (110KB, 600x378px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 600x378px

>>2183623
thank you, fuck. this dude can't spell and he claims to be some kinda rocket man? he's prolly a uber goober.

>>2183553

You pose an interesting question. I cannot think of an experiment right now.

But on your example, the path of the car is computationally cheap to propagate, while rendering its whole course (and of all non-player related objects), while no-one is looking might be prohibitive. So, the simulation can understand if you cross the path and manifest the car at the place where you would expect it to be.

This is also an approximation, but could explain things such as fate. Nodes, that are inescapable because the problem demands them. While you are free to roam around in the between.

>>2183670
Yes.
Everyone seems to be enamored with quantum entanglement but this has was the thing that really blew my mind.

>>2183686
>Something like a big bang from when there was nothing to somthing
no, nothign to something implies the flow of time. i'm saying something existed before time and thus didn't need something to create it

it's not nothing from something.
it's nothing or something. and apparantly it was something.

>>2183697

the first video
falls short because
theres a quark cube in
NEW JERSEY thats
HOLDING US ALL HOSTAGE
THE 2ND PLAYLIST
IS OF UTMOST
IMPORTANCE

File: vory.gif (802KB, 245x245px) Image search: [Google]

802KB, 245x245px

>>2183537
>tfw you're just an NPC

>>2183687
Usually I know, this isn't how it works, but can YOU prove there is not some kind of exception out there in spase? Some kind of mineral that IS capable of processing information in some odd, true to the word, alien display? Just a few centuries ago Heliocentrism was a form of heresy. All we've found thus far in space is more of what we already have on Earth. We are decades, if not possibly CENTURIES from discovering anything that will allow us to theoreticize anything but pure conjecture about all this crazy shit.

>>2183702
>it's not nothing from something.

meant to say it's not something from nothing.

>>2183553
True. This is why string theory attempts to explain these missing bits of info with extra dimensions.
I don't like it when people try to make conclusions about the nature of reality when we're missing a huge part of physics (that being, what's between relativity and the quantum). Until we can resolve the disparity between the two I don't think it's safe to make conclusions about the nature of reality like some "quantum spiritualists" do because we don't have enough info.
As they say, "you find God in the unexplained" and these quantum spiritualists are literally sticking God into the section of physics that we still haven't figured out.

>>2183624
Best post ITT
Brainlets take note

>>2183698

>If I throw enough mud at the wall for long enough it will stick.

You have 0 arguments and have probably had 0 thoughts on the actual subject. After this just everyday walk up to your window when you wake up and throw money outside. And given enough time the money will root into the dirt and you'll have a money tree. Magical thinking is great for writing science fiction or fantasy, but isn't practical for philosophical conversations.

Last night I had a nightmare that I was hit by a Truck and sent to hell, this hell was a never ending set of rooms and in each a room a new monster to face.

>>2183613
you must be new to hell. Make yourself comfortable.

>>2183537

God is imaginary. The gallows His fanatics will drag unbelievers to is real.

I never understood why so many people equate "imaginary" with "harmless."

>>2183624
Fuck I understood that, thankyou Burger

>>2183569

you have understood nothing of the implications of the quantum behaviour of the universe. If what you said was sufficient then reality would not exhibit a quantum behaviour, it would be classical since this is what particles would do constantly: waveform collapse when interacting with each other.

you really have to think anon, you have to think deeper, not harder.

God is real and you will live forever. Better yourself and treat others the same you want to be treated. Positivly and always change yoirself before others

>>2183595
the past could be created when you try to figure it out

>>2183675
>Suppose a day comes that our technology becomes sufficient that we can map out our thought of a red car materially. Does this change what constitutes a thought, consciousness, a mind and/or a computer?

Yes it would. However, the QM experiments suggest that consciousness is fundamental and matter is emergent. Thus, we have this thread that we are living in a computer.

But if consciousness is fundamental and matter is emergent, how could we create consciousness out of matter if it is fundamental. The computer simulation argument implies that we would most likely be simulations of simulation. It's an infinite regress or chicken or the egg back and forth if you believe the computer simulation hypothesis.

If you keep the idea that consciousness is fundamental, then it logically leads to the eventual conclusion that a mind simulates everything. Then why pose the levels of computation? And there's something to be said about objective vs. subjective morals that gets into religion that relates to this.

>>2183537
The earth is flat

>>2183704
lol

vendor buy
bank
GUARDS, I PAY MY TAXES!

>>2183624
interesting. Good post.

>>2183541
He's right, people attribute too much "magic" to quantum mechanics. It truly is a description of electrons which exist in clouds, and go through excitation and orbit levels which we can predict mathematically. Yes they are more than one place at one time but there are concentration maps. The observer does not create reality, as exciting as that would be.

>>2183709
Well if the stick is being thrown at the mud over said period of time whilst also being exposed the wide variety of variables that exist in reality, or more specifically regarding this example, the varying atmospheric conditions of our planet, who are you to say an intense gust of wind to dry the mud/hold it in place combined with an glare from the son, or better yet, a jet of geothermal gas having been developing unseen for thousands of years will not see the stick stuck on stick-toss attempt #5748374?

Let's say we assume the universe is a simulation. What changes? Nothing. You're not going to change anything about your life just by believing this.

>>2183584

why would you do something so naive if you really get so deep as to be able to manipulate the secrets of the reality. If you accept that this can be done what is the purpose of wishing to use it for a goal that it might subvert your very capability of using it.

You should not try to mentally detach yourself from the effects of your actions.

>>2183723
>t. Cleatus

>>2183537
THE FUCK YOU BE SMOKING!!

McDonalds Cheese Burger Mmmmmm

Two of them MMmMmm so good, oh they are so good. God i love mcdonalds

>>2183573
God must exist.
The christian God is still a heap of bullshit.

>>2183550
God created the simulation dude. Be blessed and try to see the hints..

>>2183721
>The observer does not create reality
Depends on what you mean by reality. The observer creates the color blue by pinching a useful part out of the chaos of the underlying quantum reality. The properties that make up our reality were already there before we perceived them but so were an infinite number of other properties.

File: BORG.jpg (582KB, 1400x1057px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 1400x1057px

>>2183723
>curriosity is irrelevant
thanks borg hivemind but we're not robots programmed for maximum productivity and we don't want to be. you do irrelevant shit every day i'm sure of it. you're just butthurt because this sort of talk is over your head and it makes you mad. human beings ask questions, we have philosophies and ideologies and ideas and things, it's human, chill out.

>>2183722

>Well if the stick is being thrown at the mud over said period of time whilst also being exposed the wide variety of variables that exist in reality, or more specifically regarding this example, the varying atmospheric conditions of our planet, who are you to say an intense gust of wind to dry the mud/hold it in place combined with an glare from the son, or better yet, a jet of geothermal gas having been developing unseen for thousands of years will not see the stick stuck on stick-toss attempt

Not seeing the irony from the last post of confusing the simple for the complex. In the case of the stick being thrown in the mud there is a series of assertions to be made and including someone throwing the stick in the mud.

Just a question do you understand the level of complexity in difference from something like say a computer language like C, vs something like DNA?

Just as a primer do you understand that DNA codes in 4 dimensions? Just that distinction alone sets it apart by leaps and bounds. And although it might seem like a correct parallel to be compared both languages are essentially performing the same function. But one is millions of years ahead of the other. DNA is your OS if distilled all the way down to it's simplest terms. What would you consider more complicated - your (assumed) windows OS, or that which animates you?

And what did it take to give your computer that OS, and then imagine what it will take for humans to get to the level of being able to design something like DNA.

>>2183729
my favorite bible quote

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6HLjpj4Nt4

>tfw the universe is absolutely a simulation

the worst part is, it means there's a chance this might not end when I die. How awful.

>>2183537
>god is real
>everything is a simulation

Nigga, are you serious right now? Contradicting yourself at the first point you get?

Get the fuck outta here.

Hell i'd prefer respawn rather than the non avoidable emptiness which will be once the lights go out.

File: hipster.jpg (71KB, 476x576px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 476x576px

>>2183537
>We live in a simulation.
Fuck off back to plebbit fucking hipster.

>>2183733
I didn't quote anything? Oh god is god testing me ? I might have to look closer into the bible. Any tips for beginners?

>>2183537
I'm all for whatever you say as long as atheists suffer from that and are in a massive conflict about what you said.

God is real, deal with it, you cringeworthy fedoracuckeroonis.

>>2183537
ITT, people not understanding quantum phenomena, and therefore apply it to the macrocosmos

>>2183684
It has to be that he was always there, or you get an infinite regress, (who created the creator, who created the creator who created the creator), etc. The creator of the finite system(our universe, finite in that it has a definable beginning) MUST be INfinite, (has a ruleset which doesn't include beginnings and endings) or you get the infinite regress.

Go to 40:15
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atMuFCpxnUQ

>>2183716
what is the effective difference

File: they was rite.jpg (33KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 320x320px

THEY WAS RITE

>>2183740
"as above, so below."

quantum physics containing hints of what metaphysics might be like makes perfect sense.

>>2183537
So you have realized the intelligent infinity.

File: jesus_christ_time_traveller.jpg (21KB, 617x350px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 617x350px

>>2183702
“Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”

48The Jews answered him, “Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?” 49Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me. 50Yet I do not seek my own glory; there is One who seeks it, and he is the judge. 51Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.” 52The Jews said to him, “Now we know that you have a demon! Abraham died, as did the prophets, yet you say, ‘If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death.’ 53Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died! Who do you make yourself out to be?” 54Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God.’[a] 55But you have not known him. I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word. 56Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” 57So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”[b] 58Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” - John 8:48-58

“By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the MYSTERY of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel…” - Ephesians 3:4-6

Ofc he's real, I'm right here.

>>2183731
>yer just two STOOPID to understand!

Lmao getting a bit defensive there. You could have easily answered the question but chose not to.

>>2183537
OP, what's the formal name for this theory? I want to read up more about it.

File: bunta-.jpg (25KB, 711x370px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 711x370px

Think about these 3 things.

1. If there is a boundary then there must be something outside of that boundary and if there a boundary to the universe there would have to be something outside of that boundary and then the next one and the next one all the way too infinity.

2.If there was a beginning to time there would have to be something before it and before that and so on and son to infinity.

3.If you ask the question why about anything you will eventually get to the point of having no answer but ''it just does it because it just does'' and even if you found the answer you'd go on till infinity finding more answers and if we apply this to the laws of physics well that's certainly something to think about isn't it now.

God is an artifact of the way human brains understand things. Our brains naturally interpret the world around us in ways that relate to our nature as individual humans who try to find purpose in objects around us, and who try to identify other humans. This function of the brain is what allows us to ascribe human properties to inanimate things such as an image of a face or something that resembles a face. This also applies to abstract things,and this is how god is born. God, simply put is our brains projecting the template of human personality onto the universe itself, on order to understand it in the language of the human brain.

People who believe in God have not transcended the anthro-centric programming of the brain.

>>2183615
True, ultimately the computer ends up being consciousness, and the consciousness ends up being non-local.

>>2183741
yeah what you said is basically exactly what i was saying just reworded and i agree this seems a reasonable philosophy

>>2183537
Didn't read until post 10 or so. Just give you some info :

1.there is no matter.
2. There is only information.
3. Information forms into the information called matter.
4. And observer reads information and copies it to his storage system.
5. The information system of the observer is getting bigger by that.
6. Information behaves like waves.
7. Interpretation of waves are perceived as matter. Still matter is information, not matter.
8. Every information can be rebuild by nand gates. Logical decisions based on a binary system.
9. There is only two base information, light and no light.
10. The universe is light and not light aka 0 and 1.
11. The 1 was created by force to not leave an paradoxon which can't be since it's paradox.
12. Two 0 and 1 are the 2 aka polarity or duality.
13....i only continue if anyone wants to know more

>>2183748
it wasn't a question, it was an implication that philosphy is meaningless because it doesn't change your life. i responded to your rhetorical question in the best way i could and it didn't get through to you. there's nothing more i can say

>>2183732
The progress is exponential, though. The fact that you say that C and DNA serve the same purpose is an acknowledgement that we are already onto the basics of the system itself, all there is left to do is further refine what we have. In WW2, when America entered the war, all the tension was built up around D-Day because this was like going from nothing to something; a bunch of troop transports in the ocean to a well-oiled frontline. Once the beaches were taken, we were able to reinforce our men and, though typical of such a victory, it increased the American forces' potential to make an impact in the region. The same rules apply; we have have developed modern technology, and this technology will continue to grow more efficient, thus making our own scientific pursuits more efficient. So yea man designer alien pets in 2020?

>>2183746
>Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM

Exodus 3:

13And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?
14And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

God damn I love the Bible. So much weird shit in there that makes you REALLY think.

>>2183617
If he means the double slit experiment it was made more complex and proven that indeed by observer it means a conscious observer

File: 1502138074886.gif (2MB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x540px

>>141774910

>>2183759
Go to this thread to learn more about the inner workings of this simulation.

>>2183754
Go on

>>2183537
>We wuz bits.

>>2183732
ALSO my man, another thought, who is to say DNA has continued to evolve its basic structure beyond, hell, 5 nanoseconds of its conception. We are constantly looking for ways to "improve" our operating systems and the like, though what is to be considered "improvement" is purely subjective. The same goes for the driving mind/force/entity/conciousness/unconcious being/whatever behind DNA, entropy, competition, and the evolutionary process. Countless species, before the time of human interference, and excluding mass exctinction events, have gone extinct because they were shitty fucking animals. Evolution doesn't make the correct decision, it makes a plethora of "random" ones and whoever doesn't die, well, doesn't die. Some species simply stagnated into decline because they found a nice secluded valley or something, but sudden environmental changes punished them for "lowering their guards." The same can be said for DNA, maybe it's just some primitive, but sure as hell DIFFERENT, shit

>>2183762
we wuz photons n sheeeeit

>>2183749
There are several people talking about this concept. There is something called the simulation hypothesis by nick bostrom, but that is something very specific, and doesn't deal with the breadth of the topic. Here is a video which will give you some names and leads. The volume is uneven, so start out on low volume.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiZLlpqAQ7U

>>2183757
I've been literally mouth agape at times when I read about things like quantum entanglement and the paradoxes of time and space which we're still only scratching the surface of, and there new things that are being learned about our reality .. and then you relate some of those concepts to certain passages in the bible. So true .. a lot of stuff in there that "REALLY" makes you think.

File: i-has-flat-earts.jpg (130KB, 700x420px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 700x420px

I have recently bitten off Flat Earth Theory and have bought in. Then, all at once, I realized that Flat Earth meshes perfectly with The Matrix.

Flat Earthers believe

>Moon and Sun are spotlights in the sky
>We never landed on the moon
>All space travel is faked
>Space station is faked and astronauts use wire harnesses
>There are no satellites since the Atmosphere where they supposedly are would melt the metals they are made from.
>Water finds it's level and there are lots of construction projects like the English/French Chunnel that never took the earth's curvature into account during construction.
>And so on....

If you bite off Flat Earth and realize there are no "other" planets and civilizations, then this very likely *IS* a computer simulation. We are absolutely inside a Petri Dish.

And you can see "Reused Video Game Code" in the Fibonacci Sequence; Golden Spirals; PHI, PI, Fractals, etc. There is a mathematical order to our reality. It is not random. This is computer code.

File: 35b028d71b24c7092e9db3ef37662275e264b6c6cee615aa9f42bfead0036035.gif (2MB, 450x254px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 450x254px

>>2183750
>2.If there was a beginning to time there would have to be something before it and before that and so on and son to infinity.

This is incorrect. The very definition of "beginning of time" rules out anything happening previous to that, ie there is no "before".

But to solve even your false paradigm is easy. Think of a string. It starts at one point and ends at another, right? A beginning and an end. Wrong. Tie the beginning to the end and it's a loop with neither a beginning nor an end.

>>2183751
>my brain is specifically set up to think of things in personal terms
>therefore using personal terms is wrong
Using the mechanisms in your brain is a better way to gain knowledge than not using them. Also if we stop using those terms we won't be able to relate to the way our ancestors thought which means loss of information and experience.

File: 1487368401005.webm (1MB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x640px

>>2183537
You guys ever notice texture pop-in, or trees in the distance popping into your vision briefly after you've surveyed a scene?

My mistake, I meant to link >>2183746
to >>2183757
>>14. Retrospective action occurs. If the future can affect the past, causality fails and with it physics. Yet in delayed choice experiments, an observation made after a photon takes a path defines the path took before the observation. This has led some to speculate that all time, like all space, already exists, allowing time travel and all the paradoxes it implies. In quantum realism program instances take all paths and the observation picks the physical event (see 3.6.3), so there is no time travel.

>>2183766
The Old Testament is straight up a physics manual and (((they))) did not want that shit getting out so they masked it as a religion.

>>2183761
OK to go on its easier to understand life and death before. So new list.

1. Life/Mind is a capsuled group of information with a machine learning kind of neuronal network which is possible to store information by reading them into its storage.
2. Since information is stored on matter which is not matter rather other information with another function and every information can be recreated with nand gates, the information called mind is not dependent on the storage system in our body's.
3. But it is dependent of a storage system but it not important of what kind since nand gates can be built with all kind of matter.
4. Since matter is information the mind can be stored also in other information which is not our body.
5. If the body dies the information of the mind can't longer be saved on that storage.
6. Since information is only a combination of nand gates or 0 and 1. The mind will be inside the universe(l mind), without being able to be stored.
7. Now that you know what information is, you know that the whole universe is binary and every information too.
8.now imagine a robot with senses / sensors possible to read frequency which humans can't.
9 now imagine this robot reading the mind which isn't bound to its storage anymore.
10. The robot aka observer will read the information which are waves and perceive the sensation of that mind.
11. Of the robot could save it the informatio of that mind would be stored in a new storage system which works just like the old one, with nand gates.
12. Now I lost my train of thought.

>>2183768
What I was really trying to say is that there can be no beginning and no end it's impossible to have either.

>>2183633
if you believe in the ability of a civilization to build a simulation that is identical to the real world, then imo that proves that this world is way more likely to be a simulation then a real world, because of time being infinite.

>>2183768
I believe that there can be no beginning or end to time or the universe and that the laws of physics and physical reality cannot exist according that ''why theory''.

What do you think ?

>>2183775
Not possible since you would need to build more nand gates than space in universe, since the universe itself is build with nand gates

File: HjOUDaW.png (124KB, 715x857px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 715x857px

The Final Redpill:

Aliens are Demons
Jesus Christ is GOD

https://50shadesofpissedoff.com/2016/04/04/how-i-woke-up/

>>2183777
So what would exist outside the so called universe then ?

>>2183776
Our only tool for modeling anything is logic. Trying to model what happened "before" or "outside" our reality assumes logic already exists so doesn't explain anything. We don't have the tools to even begin to try analyze the true nature of God.

>>2183537
there is only one Creator. God, YHWH. Jesus Christ is our only way to God. Period. End of story.

File: 1364640228369.gif (174KB, 494x665px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 494x665px

>>2183537

If it was a Slimulation, there would be no Americans.

>>2183778
What if Satan,God and Humanity make the trinity.

>>2183537
When humans are capable of replicating this simulation does that mean we become god. Is god a mortal human? If so, how does that make him god? God of the gaps is not god at all.

>>2183778
JESUS CHRIST IS AN IDOL OF THE DEMIURGE. JESUS CHRIST THE MAN WOULD NEVER WANT YOU TO WORSHIP HIM.

>>2183777
well then scratch the identical part of the simulation, what if it only appeared identical but with more limits?

>>2183779
There is no outside since the outside would be a 0 without a 1 which is paradox therfore would create a 1 to solve the Paradoxon which explains the expansion of our universe. Expansion is the continuing solving of the paradox that there exists a non existence which is paradox since existence can't be non existence

>>2183778

God looks like a Red Indian. His face looks at the Sun when the Moon is trailing it. You can only see it with the naked eye. It is in profile, on the side nearest to the Sun.

>>2183786
Two less nand gates leads to a slow and limited simulation which will be a movie, not and existence

File: 1502139306175.png (142KB, 293x341px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 293x341px

>>2183783
This isn't a MegaTen game.

>>2183540
Because fake Jews fly the Star or Remphan/Moloch/Baal aka Satan on their flag. David never had a star, Solomon did though, he brought the Star of Remphan into the Temple when he worshipped devils.

Kikes are fucking disgusting, and the Zionist "christians" are apostates who preach a false gospel of dispensationalism. Implying the kikes can worship God the Father without Jesus, which Jesus says NOPE in the Bible to.

>>2183785
This. Jesus isn't God - his and our Father is.

>>2183779
Edward Fredkin, digital physicist, calls this place outside our system "other".

38:07
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atMuFCpxnUQ

File: 1504238962589.jpg (30KB, 640x395px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 640x395px

google "quantum microtubules" it's something you have in every neuron.
you'll thank me later
it's not slam dunk proof of life after death. but it's a physical observed mechanism that may or may not allow for the possibility.

File: native-indian-native-american-indians.jpg (14KB, 315x271px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 315x271px

>>2183788

Like this, but the face looks younger.

>>2183789
It wouldn't matter how slow the simulation is running from the point of view of someone inside it. They only experience rendered frames, not the time between them. We could be in 50 nested perfect simulations and none of the simulators would be gods, they would just be creatures like us, subjects to the ultimate underlying laws. The Word of God.

>>2183537
if we live in a simulation than it means /ourguys/ won in the end right??
i mean why would everything be so ridiculously obvious, why would all our memes turn out to be true? why would their be so many (((coincedences))) and so many shit libs acting outside of the realms of parody??? why would everything be so theatrical if this isn't a simulation made by us to show how evil and stupid our enemies were?

Good thread, glad they left it up this long

>>2183787
That's exactly what I think there cannot be an end or a beginning to it.

>Expansion is the continuing solving of the paradox

Brilliantly worded

File: 1489420651490.jpg (49KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x500px

>>2183537
I dont get how this shit proves god exist, we just dont know shit either way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mcf9CLMQuRQ

File: IMG_6644.png (2MB, 1242x2208px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1242x2208px

And the meme becomes flesh

>>2183789
even if it was a movie, whose to say you even have control of your own destiny..?

File: john_brown_kjv_bible.jpg (261KB, 1371x1200px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1371x1200px

>>2183778
This link .. '50shades...' is fascinating. Read it a couple months ago. It describes an extraordinary chronology of a man's search for the truth and the understanding it has lead him to. Also ...
> aliens are demons
true

One of the most extraordinary publications of the bible I've ever come across, and that has among the finest set of 'notes' and 'references' ever printed with the bible, now happens to be out of print .. however, it IS available in a download pdf below. This bible was a KJV printing annotated by Rev. John Brown, and printed in Edinburgh, Scotland in the mid-1800's.

(Pdf download links below) - Rev. John Brown Self Interpreting Bible - Printed in 1800’s - extensive notes and references -
(J. Brown’s magnum opus - exquisitely produced - extraordinary set of notes attached to scripture)
https://books.google.ca/books?id=rGZAAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://books.google.ca/books?id=rGZAAAAAcAAJ&redir_esc=y. (download 100mb +)

>>2183541
Look up quantum eraser and delayed choice, dummy

File: 1505090231077.gif (1MB, 343x356px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 343x356px

>>2183537
A simulation for what?

File: Whew.gif (4MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 200x200px

>>2183537
>The properties aren't loaded until a human observes them


This is self supporting logic, you have no evidence to support this claim, and this is negating your entire position. The universe isn't a simulation, but god is still real. Laws of causality and ontological arguments regardless of axiom are sufficient enough. "Seeing" something before you observe it is impossible, you are saying that the universe objectively exists but only when you observe it. Ad infinitum is a logical fallacy in itself because its a presumption that such a concept of infinity exists solely to keep the laws of causal reasoning in check, and to keep them from instigating a creator in a realistic way, your transhumanism matrix crap, is nothing more than a vector for globalists to maintain the argument that god doesn't exist, and we are deterministic animals.

Thiskillsthead"infantine".jpg

Properties passed from the originator invalidate the claim of ad infinite because the claim "God originated everything" Still works causally if you understand that before god its undefined, and therefore impossible to not assume its infinitely god "Before" god, the properties of this universe would have to be the same if not almost completely relevant in some way to the originator or parent universe that this one came from. The laws of administrative properties and the way the logic works with them is literally property based semantics that explain one universe cannot create another greater than itself, because it would be violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics, as well as the first. This "Simulations" physics are only attributed in the sense of a 3 dimensional understanding, meaning its extremely limited but the dimension before could of < (4) != 2 or == (3). Its not a simulation ad infantnum existence because somewhere down the line in terms of administrative properties there is an originator that gave everyone after it rights to do certain things.

>>2183805
to see who is worthy of being born/integrated into society

they implanted Christianity and other religions and save em all i suppose

>>2183799
Technicaly there should be am start but not an end. The start is the moment when the 0 dissappeared just to appear again calling the debugging function which created the first 1 so the 0 don't have to disappear again. Since the 1 is the negation of the 0 it inherence everything. Unfortunately everything without space to move is the same like nothing or the 0. But as a combination 01 we have the first information, the 2 the duality which is the binary system everything is based on

>>2183572
dat frazetta

>>2183805
A simulation of an objective reality which is existent in and of itself, regardless of if there is a consciousness demanding a data stream. In other words, our reality is participatory.

File: SIG.png (1MB, 1473x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1473x2000px

>>2183537
God is real, and he wants you to rise and take control of your life.

>>141780536
>>141780536
>>141780536

>>2183791
Underrated.

File: h.jpg (6KB, 250x202px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x202px

god isn't real, the sun and the moon are the causes for nearly everything we perceive

File: harvestmoon-montana.jpg (92KB, 960x639px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 960x639px

>>2183537
I honestly believe this is probably correct. As a kid, I used to play with telescopes a lot in the field at night, looking at the stars.

Zooming in on them, it feels like you're zooming into nothingness. It gave me the same feeling that you would get when you zoomed into the sky on Zelda Majoras Mask using the floating hack, it just looks like pixelated globs when you zoom in on a star. I wouldn't be surprised if it's just a wallpaper with an enhanced perception.

That's because that's probably all it really is.

Our eyes just perceive that it's something more, if we could actually reach it maybe not!

>>2183584
Learn to control your mind.

File: kim jong un pahis.jpg (30KB, 560x400px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 560x400px

Here's my final thoughts on the topic:

1. Life, and the universe, at their core can be rather simply described with just a few core properties/equations, which only create complexity with massive amounts of evolution and interaction (time). Basically, all the stuff you see is a result of simple equations and algorithms, so setting up a "virtual world" is in essence stunningly simple.

2. Such a system can be run on almost any machine, with the only constraints the world has being the power of the machine and how much of "reality" needs to be observable at any one moment

3. 'Lo and Behold, humans have just the type of machine that can model this world in all it's excruciating detail and understand the underlying equations. An electro-chemical machine. It's called the brain.

I'm not saying that's what it is, but it is what it is.

>>2183537
The double slit experiment confirms reality is objective. Simulation confirmed

You people are niggers and faggots. This is the only objective truth.

File: 1505156331206.jpg (39KB, 374x347px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 374x347px

whut is this?

>>2183819
>>141788726
No it proves that information is interpreted and interpretation is subjective and depends on the mind of the observer. The information itself is objective. Therefore the simulation happens inside our mind. And the universe itself is a mind where we are an objective part of.

>>2183537
OP probably watched a 30 minute youtube video on quantum mechanics and now probably thinks he truly understands whats going on

>"wtf life is a video game high ping lag like reality haha"

Faux intellectuals are some of the worst people.

Ah of course. More pseudo-intellectual bullshit coming from the one and only /pol/.

anyway some redpilled haircuts?

>>2184052
>pseudo-intellectual
How did the jews manage to frame wanting to think about things as something negative? Any student of anything is a "pseudo-intellectual".

>>2184061
The Chad single protruding horn.

>>2184186
>m-muh jews is why I haven't accomplished anything in life

>>2184220
Why does /bant/ never produce anything even slightly interesting while /pol/ pumps out these "pseudo-intellectual" almond activators? Even the supposed bants are weak and predictable. I suspect the whole board is a JIDF psy-op.

>>2184337
oh lord you can't go one post without mentioning jews

>>2184357
It's because of the jews.

>>2184366
thats what the jews want you to think
#notalljews

>>2184337
that is because most of /pol/ are true thinkers and dreamers, mostly INTJ, INTP etc.

https://www.16personalities.com/personality-types

We're probably that odd person sat next too you at work, our perception of the world is very different from the normies.

>>2183537

Every day I steer more towards solipsism. Fuck it, I'm going to try and become rich so I can study how the brain produces/interfaces with consciousness.

>>2183537
GOD IS REAL BECAUSE GRAPES HAVE FLAVOR

>>2183537
what are some redpilled haircuts?

>>2185497
it is you that has no chill, these topics are very chill to us, what you're really saying is that your afraid.

File: BuhoHCDCAAAnCR2.jpg (14KB, 372x351px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 372x351px

>>2185757
Thanks for explaining my words to me I don't know how I ever managed to talk without you before