Daily reminder that there's a 99.9% chance that we're

Our reality was created by God for his entertainment. Much like a computer simulation. Think about this or don't if this makes you uncomfortable.

>>18741808
>He can't break the veil
LOL

>>18741808
>create simulation
>make it full of suffering

why

>>18741822
yea turns out God is really bad at game balance i mean seriously dude needs to fuckin nerf Europe and North America you spawn there you're set for life i mean shit i spawned in Nigeria im level 57 now i've only had two hot meals in my life and i haven't even progressed past my starter sword

What's the supporting evidence/theories for this? I've heard about the "We Live In a Simulation" theory so much, but never anything to back it up.

The ONLY thing I've heard is that at one point scientists believed/discovered the universe is like a hologram(???)

Context, please?

>>18742493
thats your own fault the different races have different base stats and you probably spent all your leveling up points on stupid stuff with no rhyme or reason to it

i crossed classed cashier with abomination and have journeymans rank in reality distortion

Isn't there an ongoing experiment testing this out right now, OP?

>>18742524
search it for yourself, don't be a lazy faggot

>>18741808
>99.9% chance
Citation needed.

>>18742493
>North America
>Set for life
Kek tell that to the 43 millions of americans living in poverty

File: hoy.png (137KB, 689x491px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 689x491px

>>18742490
They are PROBABLY harvesting the human energy produced when a person puts in effort or suffers. However, this means if you MAKE yourself suffer the program will notice and might give you a "reward" so you will keep putting in effort/suffering. Pinning magic to pain is never a bad call.

>>18741808
>we will never be able to break the simulation

There's gotta be a way to overload it somehow.

You know how in vidya when a shitload of physics operations suddenly execute at once and it can briefly pause/stutter the game? We need the real life equivalent of that.

File: asui.jpg (116KB, 859x1000px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 859x1000px

>>18742566
So we need to worship chaos until we get to that point, anon.

File: 1488914991134s.jpg (2KB, 113x125px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 113x125px

>>18742570
you can worship my dick meanwhile you beta faggot

>>18742570

There are probably better ways than destruction.

File: bawkscutter.jpg (108KB, 600x851px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 600x851px

>>18742587
Nah, I figure it HAS to happen.
Too bad we can't agree.

>>18742582
Is your dick worth worshiping, anon?

File: img-04504.jpg (266KB, 728x410px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 728x410px

>>18742596
that's was she said

>>18742490
im not supporting this theory, but i remember in the matrix they said that humans couldn't accept a reality where everything was perfect. They require some sort of resistance.

>>18741808
Daily reminder that there's a 99.9999% chance that we're living with a stimulated penis. But it doesn't matter due to the fact that we will never be able to break the stimulation.

>>18742687
That's exactly how you design the perfect system. There needs to be friction to smooth things out.

>>18741808

Daily reminder that there is a 98% chance that are simulators are also living in simulations so we may be able to hack ourselves into that simulation.

>>18742524
Memers are using it as an explanation for some of the incredibly strange occurrences in quantum mechanics.

>>18742563
its not about being MUH poverty atleast you can reason out and get a job unless you are nigger or commie tier.

Come to India,economy is so fucked a mediocre job to get some food is a dream

>>18742703
>Smooth things out.

literally the world is worse because of a bunch of parasite bankers.

File: IMG_8998.png (71KB, 219x230px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 219x230px

>>18742725
I'm focusing on individuals. I'm talking about friction of ideologies. The bankers have a system of order, and it's called "the banking system". Put forward your argument why greed is bad, then that will be your friction against the greed is good crowd. That's what I mean. It's about the grand scheme of things.

File: 001.png (280KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 400x400px

I used to be an atheist 6 months ago then started researching about the fractal holographic universe, phi and the fibonacci sequence etc.

There are too many patterns within our macro/microcosm reality for this to be some random event. There has to be a source creator.

Look at quantum entanglement. If you take two particles and separate them light years apart and spin one the opposite particle will do the same. How is this possible since nothing can travel the speed of light?

We're in the fucking matrix boys

>>18742563
US poverty < World poverty

>>18742712
May be the dumbest thing I've read all day.

Lemme Blue-skidoo into my Sims game real quick

>>18742801
No. The "poverty line" is the same no matter where you, you fucking diphead. IE, someone who classifies as poor in America would be considered poor in Zambia as well.

>>18742834
.. That's.. That's not true.

>>18742566
>implying humanity could ever generate that amount of energy
do you know how big suns get

>>18742803

Sorry your not intelligent enough to grasp the concept. Maybe you should kill yourself.

>>18742566
Maybe if someone starts a weird rap show, and does so much complicated audience participation that it overloads the system?

>>18742834
Yeah I gotta say, this is totally untrue. I have friends who started their businesses in countries where the usd has more weight because they were too poor to do it here. one is set for life and the other's got a summer, spring and winter homes so take from that what you will. A few hundred here might set you up for a week ortwo but take that down to the Phillipines and you can really make a living for yourself if you've got a bit of know-how.

>>18742834
You idiot.

>>18743202
take it easy you cumbeard

>>18743215
Ok, sorry.

No need to insult my beard.

>>18743230
Well there is a bit of cum in it...

File: 1488349431791.jpg (67KB, 630x748px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 630x748px

>>18742712
You madness, for reals though if we are the game within the game that would be so funny.
Then what would normal life be like!? Are we some strange creators plaything...

>>18742973
Do you even know about Phantom Pain?

Stronger than ordinary love when spawned out of the loss of it

>>18742805
Mandingo effect?

>>18742565
how is energy produced when someone suffers?

File: f7002f516d1b0365dada964978c61899.jpg (288KB, 1000x870px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1000x870px

>>18742566
nigga, just go to a "certain point" at the pacific ocean, go to the bottom of the sea, press A/B/B/B/UP A/LEFT/CROUCH and then sing a lullaby. If your timing is right you will crash reality. Sadly I don't know where is that point of the sea. Btw it must have exactly near you 4000 plankton and at least two giant sharks to work, they are glitchy as fuck that`s why you need them

no, there isn't. We can't estimate the chance

>mfw black science man actually was part of a panel discussing this chock

>>18743391
friction?

>>18742524
Elon Musk said it and teenagers think he's a smart guy because electric cars and whatnot.

>>18743240
That's because I just finished banging your mom and some cum got loose from her gargantuan fanny and hit me in the face.

>>18743617

File: 262362363.jpg (592KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

592KB, 1024x683px

All these people saying "if universe is simulation then how come banker takes my money or job is dull?" Because we have created a false reality within our false reality and we call it modern society. At it's core earth is like a Rust-esque survival game that takes place in natural environments. Everything in civilization that we have taken to calling "reality" is just the game we created within the simulation.

“God also likes to play hide-and-seek, but because there is nothing outside of God, he has no one but himself to play with. But he gets over this difficulty by pretending that he is not himself. This is his way of hiding from himself. He pretends that he is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, all the plants, all the rocks, and all the stars. In this way he has strange and wonderful adventures, some of which are terrible and frightening. But these are just like bad dreams, for when he wakes up they will disappear.

“Now when God plays hide and pretends that he is you and I, he does it so well that it takes him a long time to remember where and how he hid himself. But that’s the whole fun of it -- just what he wanted to do. He doesn’t want to find himself too quickly, for that would spoil the game. That is why it is so difficult for you and me to find out that we are God in disguise, pretending not to be himself. But when the game has gone on long enough, all of us will wake up, stop pretending, and remember that we are all one single Self -- the God who is all that there is and who lives for ever and ever.

“Of course you must remember that God isn’t shaped like a person. People have skins and there is always something outside our skins. If there weren’t, we wouldn’t know the difference between what is inside and outside our bodies. But God has no skin and no shape because there isn’t any outside to him. The inside and outside of God are the same. And though I have been talking about God as ‘he’ and not ‘she,’ God isn’t a man or a woman. I didn’t say ‘it’ because we usually say ‘it’ for things that aren’t alive.

>>18742787
You're just some ignorant dude who did a little research on topics you don't understand and came up with some preposterous, silly assumptions. Not to mention that your whole post boils down to a simple "God of the gaps" fallacy.

>>18743701
this

>>18741808
if it doesn't matter then why did you make this thread?

>>18743701
“God is the Self of the world, but you can’t see God for the same reason that, without a mirror, you can’t see your own eyes, and you certainly can’t bite your own teeth or look inside your head. Your self is that cleverly hidden because it is God hiding.

“You may ask why God sometimes hides in the form of horrible people, or pretends to be people who suffer great disease and pain. Remember, first, that he isn’t really doing this to anyone but himself. Remember, too, that in almost all the stories you enjoy there have to be bad people as well as good people, for the thrill of the tale is to find out how the good people will get the better of the bad. It’s the same as when we play cards. At the beginning of the game we shuffle them all into a mess, which is like the bad things in the world, but the point of the game is to put the mess into good order, and the one who does it best is the winner. Then we shuffle the cards once more and play again, and so it goes with the world.”

>>18742490
Because fuck you, that's why.

>>18742570
Hail Eris!

>>18742587
Chaos isn't always destruction bud.

>>18742979
Seems legit, Rick.

>>18741808
Doesn't the matrix prove it wouldn't work? The energy needed to keep us alive isn't worth putting us into a simulation. It'd be better to wipe us out instead. The only exception is if our consciousness were to be removed from the body for this simulation and thus our bodies used for something else, but I can't imagine what.

>>18742490

Haven't you ever tortured Sims before?

Or tried playing Civilization, got frustrated, and just fucked everything's shit up?

>>18743824
Die, hippie scum.

Yeah, but who created god then?

Inb4 he memed himself into existence

>>18742537
I spec'd into failure and disappointment, I'm pretty proud of where Im at right now

>>18742566
All systems have a weak point.The double-slit experiment showed us the universal weak point.

Other experiments have shown there's an "error-correcting code" built into the fabric of the universe.

But, if we were to ever attempt to exploit this the universe's maker would probably destroy it and start again.

If we compromise the system it won't end well for us unless we avoid the anti-virus.

>>18741808
We can overload it by simulating other existances. Recursively that is. Over time, our simulators' universe will run out of resources to simulate thus killing us all.

>>18741808
>Universe is a simulation
>Humans still believe in an anthropocentric purpose for the universe

Ever considered that the universe is a simulation and physics is just the means of what they are simulating, with life as a byproduct of the physics?
For all we know the universe is being simulated so they figure out what happens when space/matter has "x" properties and life is entirely an accident outside the scope of what the simulators are actually looking at.

>>18742834
Are you actually retarded?

>>18742787
LoL no.

We see patterns and order because that is how our mind works. It is useful to us to see these patterns for survival, but that does not make these patterns meaningful on a grand, philosophical scale. Much like how we can pick human faces out of random shapes, we see patterns and ascribe them meaning and then try to connect that to a larger pattern that fits our overarching worldview.

But really they are just patterns, and we have no idea what they mean

>>18743709
Go home faggot no one cares what you have to say

>>18742524
If you really care.

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

He mostly on point until he starts going about love and shit.

>>18742563
I have literally seen people in subsidized housing and on food stamps waiting in line for New Consoles and TV's.

>U.S Poverty =/= Poverty

File: IMG_2860.gif (8KB, 450x280px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 450x280px

>>18744010

>discards our ability to grasp and explore extremely complex and advanced concepts such as maths and physics
>just leftover primate survival stuff

>we just see meaningless patterns guyz
>can't even into Fibonacci

your small way of thinking offends me

>>18743773
Because we need reminding

>>18741808
Nick Bostrom (philospher and futurist) argues that one of the following must be true:

1) we will not be able to advance technology far enough to create ancestral simulations.
2) civilizations that can create ancestral simulations will not care to run such simulations
3) we are currently living in an ancestral simulation

>>18742787
>How is this possible since nothing can travel the speed of light?

Say we both have a coin, one heads and one tails, and we go to opposite ends of the earth... I then look at my coin.. it's heads. I instantly know yours is tails.

That's entanglement. It's not THAT spooky.

>>18744415
Engagement is spookier than that. If our two coins are indeed entangled, if I flip mine, yours will instantly flip as well, no matter how far away you are from me.

>>18742524
there is no such thing as infinite smallness (eg 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2...etc) at some point things get so small that they cease to exist (ie planck length), so if the smallest possible unit of existence can be defined, then the universe can be defined as a collection of these bits, like computer bits, only these bits are incredibly small

tl;dr: we are in a simulation God is running

File: Rick-and-Morty-S02E06-The-Ricks-Must-Be-Crazy-Peace-Among-Worlds.png (604KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

604KB, 1366x768px

>>18742712

This argument attempts to disproves the claim indirectly.
P1) Assume reality is simulated and we have knowledge of such.
P2) Reality and simulated reality are distinct as negations of each other.
P3) Knowledge(x) implies a distinction between the subject knowing (x) and the object (x).
P5) Knowledge of simulation(reality) (P1) implies a distinction between the simulation(reality) and the subject knowing the simulation(reality).
P6) It follows (P5) that knowledge(simulation(x)) implies the distinction between simulation(x) and those who know simulation(x).
P7) We exist either in simulation(reality) or reality.
P8) Since P6,P7 we are distinct from simulation(x), we exist in reality.
QED
I tried boyz

oops i messed up on the numbering sorry

File: Alan Watts Photo Gallery.jpg (61KB, 726x452px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 726x452px

>>18744493
Yes sir, more of we're in his dream.

Just like god. We can dream up people, places and events. Each person seeming to have their own personality.

And you don't realize all those people and things are "you" untill you wake up.

You are the universe "god" "moses" etc experiencing itself. We're just the best obsever yet that "it" has created.

Next form of evolution is AI. But since we have our illusion of ego, we a scared to advance pass that.

>>18743012
>take that down to the Phillipines and you can really make a living
Suuuure you can... Just ask my neighbor who did that and got robbed of ALL his entire life savings... When the thief was caught his lawyer dropped the case upon finding out his client was white as he deemed unworthy of defending... He got deported last year along with the other thousands of monthly similar cases.

You make a living??? What you make is your own coffin.

I am in this third world country after having my life ruined by people like you.

In America had my own car, my own house, my own online business and lived like a prince...
Moved to the Philippines in 2011 and I'm starving twice a month where my meals sometimes are a glass of water with sugar...
I eat white boiled rice (not even salt it has) 5 times a day every single day of my miserable life and have nightmares with rice grains at night despite of living close to the capital of the country...
live in a rented house that looks like a jail full of bars in every door and window and yet is robbed regularly on a yearly basis despite every corner having a guard with shotgun ready anywhere I go...
Leeching Wi-Fi from the neighbour and if I give one step outside of the door every single motherfu*ker is out to get me in any way they can due to being white.
Hygienic edible food is same price... gadgets, automobiles, etc cost more than anywhere else because they're so rare and imported.
Before I didn't set foot in a hospital for 15 years and here I fall in bed every other month due to widespread disease, low hygiene and constant struggle of the body to withstand the infernal torrid heat and fight this germ and bacterial infested tropical cauldron.
Not to mention crime... holy sh*t man, a couple of months ago I went to the market found my neighbour's son dead during the last political genocide... everyone was walking around the blood pool buying rice and vegetables as if it was nothing... simply because the kid smoked a few joints.

>>18744370
A "small way of thinking" is not being able to realize that, much like in a snowflake or even in the shape of a molecule, patterns can arise from the mechanisms by which matter interacts with itself on a physical and chemical level. Just because we can create patterns doesn't mean that every pattern must be created by some "creator", that's just a naive way of thinking.

>>18743782
Me too man. But I think that's just because the concept of being the only thing that exists is being filtered through our limited human egos. You being you alone forever would be hellish. But God encompasses all of the personalities and people you admire and love or fear and dread. The spectrum of existence is infinite and our current limited perspectives are not capable of imaging what the so called "singularity" is really like.

>>18743913
Never created never destroyed. Eternally "is"


Induces quite a "falling feeling" if you think about it deeply enough.

>>18745064
Proof?

>>18745072
Meditate. The proof is in you.

File: blue experiment.jpg (64KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1200x675px

>>18741808

Reality is indeed virtual: it's a fabrication of human society. Just because we are looking at the same thing, for instance the blue colour, it doesn't mean we are perceiving it the same way, we just give names to things and by convention associate it with similarly looking aspects of other things. That said, we are all immersed in a social construct, therefore reality is virtually a lie.

>>18745078
>my """proof""" is entirely subjective, so it will not work for everyone
Really, I don't understand, if you are comfortable enough in accepting that a god can arise from nothing, there shouldn't be anything keeping you from also considering that the universe itself could also have arisen from nothing, except for maybe your wishful thinking, of course.

>>18744428
>Engagement is spookier than that
at least you are right on that one. kek

>>18741808
>2017
>not being able to hack the simulation while on DMT and run a netstat command of all current connections on the router, finding their printer and manifesting yourself and information into the higher dimension in 2D
>not connecting to the internet connected to the computer the simulation is running on and manifesting yourself as an Internet meme like Kek in the higher dimension
>not searching across all higher dimensional internet connections' open ports to find 3D printers connected to the web and 3D Printing yourself into the higher dimension on every open device

you're all fucking weak

get on my level

>>18742493
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/244564-googles-deepmind-survival-sim-shows-ai-can-become-hostile-cooperative

it's a procedural simulation not a fixed deterministic simulation you fucking nerds

>>18742566
you lag the simulation when you travel at the speed of light fàm

>>18742787
t. Retard that has never heard of procedural patterns/algorithms

>>18745093
Forget it, relifags don't have the brain cell connections to grasp that. God didn't arise, he always was there for all infinity. The same is impossible for the universe, of course.

>>18745266
Special pleading at its finest.

>>18745064
>Eternally "is"
That's a pretty bold statement. You'd have to hang around with God for all eternity to be able to say that.

File: images (17).jpg (4KB, 109x109px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 109x109px

>>18743701
I second or third the "This"... w/e

There is this thingy that peeps in the past called the third eye. It's not really and eye but is responsible for things like the things you 'see' when you dream. you don't see dreams with your eyes do you? the mind's eye maybe. this thingy is like any organ or muscle, it can atrophy from lack of use. learn to exercise it. you might even have to pry it open with something made for such things. hmm, i wonder, did God put anything with which we could use to pry said eye thingy open with here on earth with us? well i'll be dangyed, there's lots of plants and herbs and funguses and meditation so on... so there you all go. the means to squeegee clean your third eye and take a gander at the real cosmos.

*disclaimer: some of these eye cleaners can come with a heavy price and are not to be toyed with but are deadly serious learning tools. research, research, research then tread lightly. don't do like this here sombitch thats typing this did and take 12g of shrooms after a couple of good 4g experiences. It's called getting soul raped.

Have a nice day! I love you guys!

>>18743782
Remember of course, the God of that he speaks, is the one simulating this reality, no one but God knows, if God's a simulation as well, being simulated by another God and so on.
God = The desktop computer you think is simulating reality. It goes further than 'the christian God' or whatever to he's referring, that's the demiurge, as people call him.
The demiurge could be THE creator, from where everything came, or it could be a rabbithole.
No one knows God's true nature, which is why no one is denying the simulation theory, it's just when you start 'knowing' and assuming everything as a simulation, as it were a standard desktop computer, things get straight up stupid.
God/Demiurge would be some otherworldly computer and OS that we couldn't even begin to comprehend.
Nothing can be proved, everything can be believed. What the simulation theory has shown us though, is that there are many comparable facts between that, and the demiurge theory, which is cool.

File: ___ Grasse e Succulente _ TRICHOCEREUS BRIDGESII MONSTROSE [Vaso Ø12cm.jpg (66KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x500px

>>18745407
I've been dabbling with psychoactive cacti. And even though all my other trips on mushies and acid were amazing. It seems the mescaline makes some great geometrical pattern hallucinations. Which I find euphoric, since I'm a fan of fractal geometry

universes are god's sperm cells. he scatters them around whenever he has a cheeky cosmic wank

>>18743892
Not exactly as we ourselves could be simulated and have no physical body

Friendly reminder to invest heavily into Luck while playing the simulation.

Best returns with the least amount of effort.

>>18745477
The demiurge is you.

When you are born, when you become conscious, you, Yaldabaoth, Blind One, are called into being by the Living God.

Then YOU create a host of other angels (inhibitory mechanisms) and demons (sub-urges).

Then you are put into an indoctrination camp where external delusional thought forms are beaten into your skull.

And so on, as time goes on.

Now, Step One, acknowledge your imperfection.

Step Two, seek out THE Perfection.

Step Thor, God met you at step one.

3 is causality paradox. But not really.

Source: I know.

>>18746247
stop with your fucking tor shit idiot, you dont know jack shit of nothing, and then before all of this shit happens you realize that this is the work of something wich is not human, so its a being outside of your perception wich made all of this or a race from the outside , cicaroach idiot , and your book is fucking shit everything is fucking staged because this is the work of the beings wich can see you from the ehter and the outside of the box of horus in wich you are trap on.

>>18746285
You seem to know even less than the rest here, which already knows next to nothing.

>>18741921
I like this interpretation.
The illusion of reality is present in several religions like the Hindu/Buddhist "maya".
Also new age material like the Law of One basically claims that the only real thing is unity and the one creator, but the illusion is a way for the creator to experience itself (for example to experience the concept of separation, otherness, manyness, finity ... All illusory things supposedly).
..

>>18741808
daily reminder

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

>In mathematics and computer science, the Entscheidungsproblem (pronounced [ɛntˈʃaJ̯dʊŋspʁoˌbleːm], German for "decision problem") is a challenge posed by David Hilbert in 1928.[1] The problem asks for an algorithm that takes as input a statement of a first-order logic (possibly with a finite number of axioms beyond the usual axioms of first-order logic) and answers "Yes" or "No" according to whether the statement is universally valid, i.e., valid in every structure satisfying the axioms. By the completeness theorem of first-order logic, a statement is universally valid if and only if it can be deduced from the axioms, so the Entscheidungsproblem can also be viewed as asking for an algorithm to decide whether a given statement is provable from the axioms using the rules of logic.

>In 1936, Alonzo Church and Alan Turing published independent papers[2] showing that a general solution to the Entscheidungsproblem is impossible, assuming that the intuitive notion of "effectively calculable" is captured by the functions computable by a Turing machine (or equivalently, by those expressible in the lambda calculus). This assumption is now known as the Church–Turing thesis.

>no algorithm exists that can answer "yes" or "no" to the question "is the universe a simulation" unless that algorithm is NOT universally valid, thus disproving the hypothesis
>no program can even be written to run on the hypothetical supercomputer that hosts the simulation without such an algorithm, rendering the question of sufficient resources moot

have a nice day /x/

enjoy college math when you get there

>>18741808
If everything is a simulation, nothing is. Fuck off

>>18743927
What if, hear me out, we have tried to exploit this and our universe BUT they saw that shit and monkey patched it causing inconsistencies in our timeline with people remembering different things

You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize?
[Takes a bite of steak]
Ignorance is bliss.

>>18746627
If that ain't the most pretentious nonsensical remark a movie ever delivered.

>>18746642
Live

>>18742565
Throw this in with a "flat earth" on a big globe (an "energy farm field" several flat concave disks surrounded by ice on a giant earth-like ball, humans on each disk) , add in grays and a dash of hologram theories. This would explain the "why" part of our existance. We're cattle getting milked for our precious negative energy.

>>18742692

>spend countless aliumonths creating perfect simulation with semi-sentient beings
>set universal rules to create fantastic world
>beautiful skies, mythical history, breathtaking views from mini to mega
>create your sim to not only watch it grow, but help you grow as a sentient being yourself
>afford your sim worlds to discover, truths to be found, and a new life to be lived to its fullest
>it spends all its time playing with its body parts

>>18744953
What if we are Tulpas/Egregores?

>>18746596
From what I could understand, this essentially means that since there is no way for such an algorithm to exist, a simulation simply cannot conclude that itself happens to be or not a simulation, so the statement "we are in a simulation" is self-contradictory. Is that it?

>>18745093
Some may say that God and spirituality is nothing more than wishful thinking. Our desaire for trascendence. I like to think otherwise.

>>18741808
That's a nice statistic fucboi

L M A O

it's a 50% chance my friend as there're only two options.

Either we live in a simulation or we don't.

>>18746861
To an extent I guess. I do believe in a collective consciousness

>>18747058
That doesn't make it a 50 percent chance.

Either I'll have sex with Hugh Heffner tomorrow or I won't.

>>18747074
>nigga doesn't know that the probability of a die to land on 1 is 50%, either it does or it doesn't

is this the power of common core?

Would proving this theory not be dangerous? For example would the things that created it not start over if the sims figured it all out, it would defeat the purpose of the simulation became aware of the simulation...

>>18747049
>Some may say that God and spirituality is nothing more than
>wishful thinking.
>I like to think
>otherwise.
Actually made me chuckle.

>>18747114
The percierver of this "reality" isn't sitting there on a fucking gaming console. Its lost in its own illusion.

For "It" to have this experience it has to forget itself. So "its" not aware that its God.

Put it this way, you can't perceive this reality without giving the other up. Hust like you can't dream unsless you go to sleep.

Upon death, that's when you see. That this was all make believe.

>>18747114
So no its not dangerous in the fact that soemone will pull the plug, not possible.

HOWEVER.

It is highly dangerous information in the hands of some people. You always have t ok remember the ego isn't God.
Many people that that get into this "truth" will in fact associate their ego with God.

When in fact, to realize is to see that there is no separation, between, anything.

>>18742563
Yeah no kidding. Not sure if every month if we will have lights, or not. Eat a good Dinner once every two days. But at least we have the internet woo.....yeah....

>>18743907
This. Right here. Exactly. I killed all of my sims.
What if some nerdy kid in some works was playing a game like that (us) and started a bunch of shit and just forgot about us. We could easily be some advanced creatures video game. And our graphics probably look like shit and that is why it stopped playing. Oh well. Guess I'll fap.

File: d0434-bugsbuny.jpg (39KB, 500x305px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 500x305px

>>18742570
>>18743824
hail eris

theres a 100% chance we arent even alive.

File: 1457857900500.jpg (7KB, 186x270px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 186x270px

>>18748109
why?

File: 12677522_496451247215600_1866553752_n.jpg (93KB, 750x527px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 750x527px

>>18742787
You're right man. Dead on the button. Don't listen to these other anon's. They can't see the forest for the trees.

>>18747076
Damn you are retarded.

File: IMG_2863.jpg (170KB, 1021x944px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1021x944px

>>18745055
>mechanisms by which matter interacts with itself on a physical and chemical level

Why are these interactions taking place that we have the ability to observe. these patterns exists on scales varying from as small as a dna strand or a sunflower, and as vast as a galaxy's spiral. It's very interesting, this fractal way about natural forces.

Our ability to discover these truths about reality leads me to believe we are part of a great mystery and I don't discount things as "coincidences" or "meaningless patterns" so easily.

Phi's role in all matter is fucking mind bending shit. The ancient cultures' knowledge and application of the laws of the universe and sacred geometry is fucking mind bending Shit. Worldwide, cultures had knowledge of The precession of Equinox, accomplished advanced feats of architecture and there is near limitless possibilities of what events took place in our own human past. There have, after all been nearly 7000 generations of homosapiens. The knowledge we may have gained and lost in that time is endless.

There is a fucking hexagon on the North Pole of Saturn that some ancient cultures had knowledge of for fucks sake!

Basically, if our most ancient cultures that left evidence of some of the greatest monuments left on earth believed that these patterns held great meaning and importance to humankind, that's evidence that it's probably very important and intimate to our origins.

I'm not going to argue about a creator because I dont think we have any idea (nor probably ever will) how all of this was set into motion to begin with.

Discounting these amazing patterns as just chance chemical reactions and dismissing our quest to understand the patterns we see in nature because you think it's meaningless is a very small way of thinking.

>>18748810
There's literally no reason for you to just assume that there is some kind of absolute meaning for these patterns, which obviously doesn't mean that they can't have some (even if made up) significance to humanity.
Recognizing that these patterns arise from nature is not in any way "dismissing our quest to understand the patterns" or saying that they have no meaning/significance, as we can understand them precisely BECAUSE they arise from nature; if you can't see beauty in nature by yourself and need someone to spell it out for you that's literally on you. Also don't pretend as if thrive for knowledge can only come from that specific way of thinking of yours.

File: IMG_2048.jpg (85KB, 581x639px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 581x639px

>>18748864
>There's literally no reason for you to just assume that there is some kind of absolute meaning for these patterns, which obviously doesn't mean that they can't have some (even if made up) significance to humanity.

The galaxy's shape is derived from the same sequence which governs the shape of our own bodies. Phi is a pattern which is objectively significant to humanity and understanding how the universe works. You mental midget.

>if you can't see beauty in nature by yourself and need someone to spell it out for you that's literally on you.

You're just being childish now. Of course I see beauty in nature, and obviously never implied that I didn't.

If you agree that these pattern forming interactions originate from nature but then find it unimportant to take the next step and ask why nature produces these effects to begin with, well you're a small thinker. We would never have reached our current understanding of the universe if everyone had the same uninspired viewpoint of the world as you seem to have.

Physics, astronomy, mathematics, chemistry - recognizing patterns is literally at the heart of all of these studies.

Science is the search for truth and it appears that there is deep and wonderful truth which natural patterns are pointing to. The very basics of fractal design and sacred geometry tends to imply a great oneness and a truth that we are all connected.

>Also don't pretend as if thrive for knowledge can only come from that specific way of thinking of yours.

Yes, clearly that's exactly what I was pretending. You're so perceptive.

>>18749034
>MUH WALLS OF PERCEPTION
You can't do this to the guy, he might have a mental breakdown or an existential crisis dude, chill. :^)

File: 6373828472626-1.jpg (195KB, 1280x530px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1280x530px

>>18742490
>>18742490

Here's why:

>"Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this: the peak of your civilization."

>>18749034
>The galaxy's shape is derived from the same sequence which governs the shape of our own bodies.
That does not imply absolute meaning in any way whatsoever, that's literally wishful thinking. Are you saying that it is not to be expected or that it is mysterious for a pattern originated from nature to appear in nature, you dumb cunt? HURR DURR THE MOON IS ROUND HURR DURR THE SUN IS ROUND TOO ISN'T THAT MYSTERIOUS

>Phi is a pattern which is objectively significant to humanity and understanding how the universe works. You mental midget.
>objectively
Prove it then. How can't you see that significance is something subjective we give to things, oh mental giant?

>If you agree that these pattern forming interactions originate from nature but then find it unimportant to take the next step and ask why nature produces these effects to begin with, well you're a small thinker.
WHY implies PURPOSE, you're just assuming that nature has purpose, something you can't PROVE. Asking HOW is different from asking WHY, you fucking retard. When you see a coin fall to the ground after being thrown you ask yourself "Hm, I wonder why nature chose to make things fall like this here on earth"?

>Physics, astronomy, mathematics, chemistry - recognizing patterns is literally at the heart of all of these studies.
EXACTLY! It's called MODELS OF REALITY, they help us understand to some extent how the universe works!

>The very basics of fractal design and sacred geometry tends to imply a great oneness and a truth that we are all connected.
Appeal to ignorance, again you're just assuming.

Blindly believing in shit and making baseless assumptions doesn't make you an open minded person, it just makes you a dumb wishful thinker.

>>18747949
>It was just a prank, bro!

People are and will continue to die for this

>>18742490
>created a simulation where units within it are self replicating and preprogrammed to evolve and change after self replication
>limited amount of storage space for what the simulation is being run on
>this is conveyed into the simulation
>self replication units of code are programmed to have a sense of self preservation (otherwise they wouldn't self replicate)
>units result in creating viruses to fight other units so that they might have more space for when they replicate

>>18749066
>1999
>peak of civilization
I think they overshot it by like 40 years...

>>18749864
The golden years are about to come, thanks for giving me hope for the future anon.

>>18745072
Nothing is provable, since reality is subjective

>>18741808
How does it feel to be a faggot even in simulation

Everyone needs to stop using "we" in their questions and statements and start using "I."

Ask yourself: "am I living in a simulated reality?" Look at your own personal experience, not what the program tells you is reality.

>>18749942
>Ask yourself: "am I living in a simulated reality?" Look at your own personal experience, not what the program tells you is reality.
It is literally, fundamentally, by definition impossible for you to tell either way. If you're a simulation, the program IS your reality.

>>18749871
So you're just talking unsubstantiated bullshit then?

>>18750021
>again he uses "you"instead of "I" and "me"
I am not even that guy but felt like pointing it out.

And you're wrong.
For you it is impossible because you talk like this.
You do it so intricately that you do not even realize it, right?

I simulate myself. Yet I know reality.
I can tell both appart.

I learned to do so. You can learn it too.

>>18750226

How can you know what you learned is reality?

>>18750243
No. What I learned is the simulation.
You got it backwards you see.

File: luigi's chinese cowboy impression gives mario an ulcer, keeping him from telling his brother not to be so fucking racist.jpg (116KB, 487x376px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 487x376px

>tfw you will never backwards long jump irl
>tfw you will never hyper speed walk irl
>tfw you will never build enough speed to travel a full QPU irl

>>18750260

How can you know there's not a deeper layer to the simulation?

>>18750272
There are deeper layers.
Very many of them.

>>18750307

How many? Is it turtles all the way down?

>>18750318
You could also ask me "How many stars are there?"
Many. And it is not a constant either.

>>18743983
Not the worst idea.
Just keep spawning VMs in VMs.

>tfw it's simple we just forkbomb the universe

>>18745650
where can i get more info on this

>>18741808
>99.9% chance
>% chance
kekest kek
you are retarded

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KcPNiworbo

Some people will close the video after seeing call of duty
Delicious proof they that are too narrow minded for the topic anyways

>>18745240
kek'd

File: IMG_2864.jpg (31KB, 236x343px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 236x343px

>>18749113
You sound very angry and are talking like a close minded douche.

>WHY implies PURPOSE
If you look at the moon and see craters and ask WHY those craters are there. The answer is most likely due to multiple impacts by objects flying through space. To ask WHY those objects hit the moon would lead you to observe other objects flying through space, other cosmic impacts, calculate orbiting routes, likelihood of future impacts, evidence of past impacts, etc.

You seem to have linked some sort of religious dogma to the word "why" and I'm not sure WHY you're so triggered by that word. "Why" is just as valid of a question as "How" and some would argue that science is an outgrowth of our yearning to answer the "why" all around us. It's an ongoing never ending quest to answer "why?".

There is no current explanation or even any real theories as to HOW or WHY so many natural phenomena contain Fibanacci's golden sequence. It is a great mystery bc we cannot detect any overarching instruction set which governs the formation of something as vast as a galaxy or something as small as a DNA strand.

Those who believe the "Big Bang" explains HOW all of the universe started expanding are believers in the "one free miracle" hypothesis which is silly reasoning. There is definitely some great truths about the universe, how it works, and the phenomenon of consciousness we have yet to uncover.

>blindly believing in shit and making baseless assumptions
What am I blindly believing. And what baseless assumptions have I made? Again, typical close minded douchey accusations.

Again, to discount evidence of a specific sequence found everywhere in the universe as just some pattern that nature forms which is probably meaningless and we only noticed bc of some residual evolutionary survival habits is completely idiotic and shows a lack of critical thinking and yearning for understanding.

File: IMG_1659.jpg (20KB, 236x177px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 236x177px

>>18749113
>THE MOON IS ROUND HURR DURR THE SUN IS ROUND TOO ISN'T THAT MYSTERIOUS

The moon and sun are round due to the forces of gravity which govern the formation of large celestial bodies such as planets, moons and stars.

There is no official explanation for Phi's role in nature. That's why it's a great mystery. That's why it's so important because it hints that the processes which lead to the formation of plants, animals and galaxies all have some uniformity - a universal constant that connects EVERYTHING.

>>18751697
You are a waste of oxygen and matter (that's a subjective claim, btw).

That's literally how the word is defined, as I said, by asking "why" you're presupposing a purpose in nature, and that's is a baseless assumption. Before you say "but the word is used like this and-", that's just colloquialism and science itself doesn't work with why's in it's core.
You're bringing the big bang into the conversation for no reason whatsoever, but I will say that: the big bang happened and is a literal FACT, it can be traced back from every piece data we have, it is PROVEN by the cosmic background radiation. Now, what happened BEFORE the big bang is not known and you would have to be insane to make any claim about it, that's for sure.

I will say it again and I'm sure that you will keep ignoring me, but here you go: saying that nature posses purpose and that things have absolute meaning is a baseless assumption (alternatively, one could said that you're are blindly believing in it, since you have no proof). Unless, of course, you can somehow prove them, which you probably cannot.

>>18751763
>There is no official explanation for Phi's role in nature. That's why it's a great mystery.
IF WE DON'T KNOW SOMETHING, WE DON'T KNOW SOMETHING FOR FUCK SAKE. YOU DON'T MAKE CLAIMS ABOUT SOMETHING YOU DON'T KNOW.
I never said it wasn't important and I never said it has no meaning, all I said is that the claims about phi's objective meaning are baseless. If you said to me "a rainbow just appeared in X city" and I respond with "you can't know that", I'm not saying that the rainbow didn't appear, you dumb fuck.
Phi could have absolute meaning for all I care, but we don't know that to be the case "yet", that's why I don't buy into it.
You have to be really fucking dumb if you think that saying stuff about things you don't know isn't wishful thinking.

>EVERYTHING
Did you check everything to know that? Can you at least deduce that to be the case?
Tell me, is that a baseless claim?

File: Why.jpg (28KB, 504x333px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 504x333px

>>18751897
Here's the definition.

File: IMG_2865.png (237KB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 750x1334px

>>18751897
>>18751914

>You are a waste of oxygen and matter (that's a subjective claim, btw).

Stay mad.

>as I said, by asking "why" you're presupposing a purpose in nature, and that's is a baseless assumption.
>science itself doesn't work with why's in it's core.

So science can't and doesn't ask Why we exist? Why matter exists? What an ignorant and misinformed statement . You clearly do not even understand what science is and I don't think you ever will with your misdirected assumptions of what science can or cannot accomplish.

Every post of yours indicates that you have constricted your mind to discount anything which deviates from your own decided narrow worldview. You are the definition of a close-minded small thinker.

A simple google search will provide hundreds of examples of scientists which have attempted to use science to answer the "Why?"

Idiot.

>>18751897
>You're bringing the big bang into the conversation for no reason whatsoever
>the big bang happened and is a literal FACT.

I brought it up bc it's an example of how far science has come attempting to explain the "why". It's how most people who accept mainstream science try to explain "why" everything is here but its largely misunderstood. The Big Bang does not do anything to explain where matter comes from. Science is still searching for the answer "WHY is everything here?"

>saying that nature posses purpose and that things have absolute meaning is a baseless assumption
I never said that things have absolute meaning, I'm not counting it out as a strong possibility tho and evidence such as the golden ratio points to it being a strong possibility. There is a reason why Phi is found everywhere we look, we just don't know what it is yet. It is a grand discovery tho and only a mental midget would be unable to admit that.

>Phi could have absolute meaning for all I care, but we don't know that to be the case "yet", that's why I don't buy into it.

I've used phrases such as "implies that" or "hints to", nothing so definitive as saying "I know" or "it's a fact".

And you are contradicting yourself. You lean towards Phi being meaningless regardless of the fact that we know practically nothing about how nature incorporates it into its design. You compare our observations of Phi to our tendency to see nonexistent faces in trees, and you've concluded that seeing mathematical patterns in nature can attributed to survival instincts.

You would attribute our ability to grasp physics and see the these patterns as an evolutionary survival biproduct. What a load of shit. Evolution does not explain our ability to grasp advanced concepts such as maths and physics either btw.

How you can make so many unfounded assumptions and then accuse anyone else of "wishful thinking" is confounding.

>>18752102
>>18752123
>Science is still searching for the answer "WHY is everything here?"
Sure.

I'm honestly not gonna waste any more time with you because it seems that everything I say just pass straight through your empty head and you will just keep recurring to anecdotal "evidence" and appeal to ignorance without even realizing it. Keep up with your wishful thinking I guess, let's see if you will ever amount to something.

>>18742524

The argument is basically:

1. It is theoretically possible to create a computer simulation that functions as a perfect replica of reality, complete with simulated conscious beings.

2. Were such a simulation to be created, it would be possible to create an infinite or near-infinite number of simulated universes inside of the "real" universe. Thus, it is likely that the number of simulated universes would massively outnumber the number of "real" universes.

3. Therefore, it is vastly more likely that our universe is a simulated one.

>>18742490
The same reason people would build overly elaborate cities in Sim City Whatever and then hit the Tornado button.

Many creation myths say that everything was made from an eye trying to look at itself.

>>18752148
Now it is 100 percent. I promise you the key to all of it really was just in front of you the whole time. Just ask.

Sure tell me how to get out without killing myself faggot.

>>18741808
doubt we are in a simulation.
It takes more than 1 atoms worth of transistors to simulate a single atom.. in fact we have massive super computers just to simulate basic atomic effects..

it would take a computer with 10X the mass of the universe to even simulate the basic physical properties of said universe. not including all the hyper complex AI

the only way it could work is if it was a matrix like simulation where only local space ie: the earth and moon, were simulated and the other stars and planets are just a basic image and not simulated in a detailed way.

File: 1913.jpg (79KB, 605x781px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 605x781px

I can teach you how to break out of the simulation.

Under one condition.

You cannot fear the concept of death. That very fear will cause you to make a big mistake and you will only waste your opportunity.

>>18741808

How do I get our god to use motherlode on my character

File: IMG_2867.jpg (91KB, 500x434px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 500x434px

>>18752197

>You are a waste of oxygen and matter
>let's see if you will ever amount to something.

A lot of aggression just for someone expressing a different viewpoint. Easier to launch personal attacks at those who challenge your comfort zone rather than be forced to back up your position, huh?

The basic difference between our opinions is whether or not the discovery of Phi is important.

Your point of view:
>claims about phi's objective meaning are baseless
>We see patterns and order because that is how our mind works. It is useful to us to see these patterns for survival, but that does not make these patterns meaningful on a grand, philosophical scale.

You tend to see Phi's existence as unimportant, as is our abity to recognize its occurrence in the first place.

I cannot understand how you could just dismiss such a unique and awe inspiring example of natural uniformity in the universe. It encompasses so many branches of our reality and yet you still assert it is completely subjective to claim Phi holds some sort of meaning or importance to us.

You seem to categorize my conclusions as some sort of superstition and I can't understand your dismissal of what I consider to be clear indications of grand importance.

I still think you're a small thinker and you apparently think I'm a waste if matter that will never amount to anything. Good chat!

File: space.jpg (1MB, 3500x1750px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3500x1750px

Will our sim's devs ever unlock the ayy and FTL DLC packages?

>>18752453
the guy is right though
you can't prove that Phi has objective meaning

Regular

>>18751897
People like you have no place on this board

The psyche is key

>>18752519
It all comes back to consciousness

All of you make me sick, a bunch of hermits bantering between one an other a out what life is.
Fucking live it.
Lazy assholes, or maybe you are juts uncreative or something. Yes, I sound mad, yes, I sound triggered. For Christ sake, really live like it is 1999. Walk places, say what's on your mind with a smile smile, be fucking real.
All of you are robots, AI or not.

>>18745245
fair enough.

>>18752542
>Snide smile*
Y'all talk about simulated reality but have you even played the game yet?

File: IMG_2868.png (139KB, 500x522px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 500x522px

>>18752483

An objective perspective is one that is not influenced by emotions, opinions, or personal feelings - it is a perspective based in fact, in things quantifiable and measurable.

It is a quantifiable and measurable fact that Phi is present in the proportions of the human body and also governs our perception of beauty in human features.

It is a quantifiable and measurable fact that Phi is present in the shape of our DNA as well as in the the formation of a galaxy or of a hurricane.

It is therefore a quantifiable and measurable fact that Phi is significant and pertains to humans (since it governs our physical shape as well as the shape of our genetic coding) as it does to the universe, as it does to many observable natural forces.

Phi is objectively important to understanding humans and the universe. Just as gravity is objectively important to understanding how our planet or the solar system was formed.

File: 1488915526778.png (49KB, 196x196px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 196x196px

>>18752588
THE MOON IS MOONING. BECAUSE I AM HERE.

I AM THE ANSWER TO ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

IN FACT I AM THE ONLY QUEST.

THE QRST.

I AM.

>>18752598
Oh it's you again, we went tit-for-tat on fractal speech a couple months ago.
http://pastebin.com/FXcsRFZr

>>18752588
meaning, not significance

>>18752588
But we are subjects and subjective, not objects and objective.

File: image.jpg (393KB, 1000x1082px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 1000x1082px

12Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, “I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.”

13So the Pharisees said to Him, “You are testifying about Yourself; Your testimony is not true.”

14Jesus answered and said to them, “Even if I testify about Myself, My testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going; but you do not know where I come from or where I am going.

15“You judge according to the flesh; I am not judging anyone.

16“But even if I do judge, My judgment is true; for I am not alone in it, but I and the Father who sent Me.

17“Even in your law it has been written that the testimony of two men is true.

18“I am He who testifies about Myself, and the Father who sent Me testifies about Me.”

19So they were saying to Him, “Where is Your Father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither Me nor My Father; if you knew Me, you would know My Father also.”

20These words He spoke in the treasury, as He taught in the temple; and no one seized Him, because His hour had not yet come.

My posts
>>18752648
>>18752630
>>18752583
>>18752542
To clarify, don't lump me in with these golems.

File: image.jpg (80KB, 400x534px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 400x534px

21Then He said again to them, “I go away, and you will seek Me, and will die in your sin; where I am going, you cannot come.”

22So the Jews were saying, “Surely He will not kill Himself, will He, since He says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’?”

23And He was saying to them, “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world.

24“Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”

25So they were saying to Him, “Who are You?” Jesus said to them, “What have I been saying to you from the beginning?

26“I have many things to speak and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and the things which I heard from Him, these I speak to the world.”

27They did not realize that He had been speaking to them about the Father.

28So Jesus said, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and I do nothing on My own initiative, but I speak these things as the Father taught Me.

29“And He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to Him.”

30As He spoke these things, many came to believe in Him.

>>18752630
>http://pastebin.com/FXcsRFZr
I guess we must of some call me M apparently hello w0rld.
Iam iam

>>18752633
>>18752633
>number sequence which defines shape of microscopic structures which we are all made of, as well as structures millions of light years across which we are all part of, is not objectively significant.

Okay, you're just embarrassing yourself now.

sig·nif·i·cance
siɡˈnifikəns/
noun
1. the quality of being worthy of attention; importance.
"adolescent education was felt to be a social issue of some significance"
synonyms: importance, import, consequence, seriousness, gravity, weight, magnitude, momentousness; formalmoment
"a matter of considerable significance"


>>18752648
Women are clearly objects tho

>>18742524

reddit.com/r/holofractal

>>18752687
>is asked to prove objective meaning
>goes on about significance
nevermind, you don't know how to read apparently

File: qrg9YYBc.jpg (147KB, 1252x1252px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1252x1252px

>>18752660
I once read a sign in french it read,
i once read a story of science fiction
I am
True/false

Viva la france
La liberty
I am i am
Iam.
You
I am.

>>18752718
>se·man·tics
>səˈman(t)iks/
>noun
>the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and subbranches of semantics, including formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, and conceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning.

>Meaning: 1. tenor, gist, drift, trend. Meaning, purport, sense, significance denote that which is expressed or indicated by something. Meaning is the general word denoting that which is intended to be or actually is expressed or indicated: the meaning of a word or glance.

Phi is objectively meaningful and significant.

>>18745407


All I could think was acid.

>>18752750
>Meaning is the general word denoting that which is intended to be or actually is
>phi is intended to be something

you are objectively dumb

Did anyone else have all of these thoughts as a child?

I remember sitting in my bathtub and thinking about reality being a possible simulation created by someone... I was also raised agnostic so maybe I was more prone and open to seek out these explanations.

Also in kindergarten I remember arguing with my teacher that how does she know the "blue" I see is really her blue, and not green. If our eyes reflect opposite from which we see (also noticed this from poking myself in the eye with them closed and my finger appearing in the opposite side) how is up not down and vice versa?

I also wondered if I was truly who I thought I was and what if I was just severely mentally disabled, how would I know my reality wasn't what I thought it was?

.... am I alone here or was I just a weirdo....

>>18752831
Furthermore,

Not having any exposure to these thoughts, just kind of conjuring them on your own.

I'm also severely adhd and let my mind wander far too much.... I was held back in kindergarten hahaha. Granted I have a 4.0 in university now, but I damn, just reading these things over blows my mind.

>>18752844


This Is How I See It…

It is difficult to uncover these things, to stare the most malevolent beings in the universe in the face and tell them that I am Sovereign and I will NOT permit them to violate me.

Ironically though, in some ways it is even more difficult to share these revelations publically.

So many people are completely sold on their false-light "ascended masters, ETs and angels" who tell them what to do, how to think and how to live that they attack me for bringing this revelatory information to the public eye.

To those people, I say quite simply:
Believe what you want to believe, but I am going to keep working on KNOWING the TRUTH, and taking appropriate ACTION to right the wrongs that have been done to humanity by the very beings that you are giving your power away to.
I choose to stand for Truth as a Sovereign Being alongside (not beneath) the Sovereign beings of the Free Universe who take action to oppose all forms of deception, parasitism and enslavement.

I thank those of you who will stand alongside, and take action with us...

>aww look, the NPCs are trying to break the fourth wall again

>>18752851
Go to bed, Alex.

>>18752857
Okay understood
3011

>>18752780
>...or actually IS expressed or indicated
>meaning is the general word denoting that which is expressed or indicated.
Conveniently left that part out I see

Phi has meaning because it's presence throughout natural geometry and natural forces expresses and indicates meaning to universal formations. Phi is meaningful in the formation of natural phenomena.

Just as we would say caloric intake has meaning to our understanding of a person's health. We can also say that Phi has meaning to our understanding of the universe.

File: IMG_2869.jpg (45KB, 600x476px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x476px

>>18752780
>>18752633
>>18752483
Phi is objectively meaningful and significant to our appreciation of art whether we realize it or not:
erickimphotography.com/blog/2011/11/28/objectivity-vs-subjectivity-what-makes-a-great-street-photograph/amp/

Phi is objectively meaningful and significant to our standards for beauty whether we know it or not:
https://www.goldennumber.net/beauty/

Phi is objectively meaningful and significant to financial trading whether traders realize it or not:
http://www.netpicks.com/fibonacci-trading-results/

...Just a few examples.

We are constantly discovering more and more ways in which Phi shapes our reality.

To claim it's a subjective opinion that Phi holds significance and meaning to humankind is like saying it's a subjective opinion that music has significance and meaning to humankind. Basically, you would have to be a very dim witted, short sited, close minded individual.

File: c64715291456bedb270fffc3fd98c424.jpg (14KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 200x200px

What if we're npcs and the most powerful people in the world are pcs and the illuminati, nwo, kkk, etc are different guilds

File: IMG_2871.jpg (358KB, 1196x846px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1196x846px

>>18753039
...Speaking of music

>>18741822
>for His entertainment
Okay, bud.

File: IMG_2872.gif (63KB, 311x389px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 311x389px

>>18752197
>>18749113

https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2013/02/20/a-remarkable-discovery-all-solar-system-periods-fit-the-fibonacci-series-and-the-golden-ratio-why-phi/

>This is a startling result. There is no currently accepted physical mechanism which can explain the clear and strong link between the Fibonacci sequence, the dynamic motion of the solar system, terrestrial cyclic phenomena at around 60 years and 205 years and solar activity levels. The underlying ratio is Phi, known as the golden section or ratio. This ratio does manifest itself elsewhere in nature. In plant biology, Phi is well known to appear in the spacing of leaf stems and the packing of seed heads. The leaf stem spacing maximises sunlight exposure and the seed packing maximises abundance[1]. In Geology, Phi relationships are evident in atomic, quasi-crystalline and other chemical structures[2].

>"obviously Just meaningless patterns of little or no real significance", said one retarded anon.

It's crazy how everyone jumps on the simulation bandwagon

Like they;ll just buy it instantly and laugh it off

Don't you think its just another meme to make you passive in life?

File: IMG_2873.jpg (264KB, 632x610px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 632x610px

>>18753292

https://www.goldennumber.net/quantum-time/

>"in physics, the g factor of the electron is defined as the ratio of its magnetic moment to its spin angular momentum. The electron g-factor is due to the stretching of space-time as the electron spins at the speed of light. Thus it appears that the Golden Ratio, or Phi, is a constant produced by time."

File: IMG_2876.jpg (86KB, 1064x641px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1064x641px

>>18745055
>>18744010
>>18748864
>>18749113
>>18751897

>Plato (circa 428 BC - 347 BC), in his views on natural science and cosmology presented in his "Timaeus," considered the golden section to be the most binding of all mathematical relationships and the key to the physics of the cosmos.

>however, unfortunately legendary philosopher Plato had not yet heard anon's faggy arguments regarding the possibility that: "We see patterns and order because that is how our mind works."

>Anon continues on, to say: "It is useful to us to see these patterns for survival, but that does not make these patterns meaningful on a grand, philosophical scale."

>luckily, it is not too late for word of anon's thought provoking revelations to reach the brilliant astrophysicist, Mario Livio, who wrote "the Golden Ratio has inspired thinkers of all disciplines like no other number in the history of mathematics."

>Let's hope the currently esteemed astrophysicist recants his previously falsified statements and proceeds to endorse that faggot anon from a Korean dollhouse painting forum and all of his dull misinformed viewpoints regarding this seemingly meaningless occurrence.

I love these threads. Its nice watching, you're all the same thing arguing with eachother.
Please carry on.

>>18753557
Nigga shut up

>>18751697
>so many natural phenomena contain Fibanacci's golden sequence
like?

File: IMG_2877.jpg (184KB, 910x794px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 910x794px

>>18753745
Seriously? Read thru the thread, buddy, many examples. Already mentioned:
>>18753426
>>18753292
>>18753237
>>18753039

Phi is found to be intimately connected to Geological, Cosmic and Biological phenomena of all sorts. Ranging from the behavior of matter inconceivable small, such as electrons, to the formation of systems too large to even comprehend, such as galaxies.

>>18741808

Sup /x/. The Great Observer here. I just came to say certain types of knowledge are beyond the living's pay grade, so you'll have to wait til you're dead.

Sorry.

>>18752102
>So science can't and doesn't ask Why we exist? Why matter exists?
No, ScientISTS can and often do ask that question, it's the subjective drive that turns many inquisitive minds towards science.

Science itself only seeks to answer HOW we came to be, HOW matter exists.

>>18753827
>The Great Observer here
Relax.

File: IMG_0322.jpg (525KB, 1225x1225px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 1225x1225px

>>18753829
>arguing semantics to this extent
Scientists use science as a tool and a method of discovering and explaining how and why things happen.

>How did that water turn to ice?
The water froze when it was placed into the freezer.
>Why did that water turn to ice?
The water froze when it was placed into the freezer.

Many times the "how" and "why" are interchangeable. And also, in many instances, by answering the "how" we are provided or led to the "why", and by answering the "why" we are provided or led to the "how".

To discover how all matter came to exist may also reveal or lead to the answer of why all matter exists, or vice versa. However, because we currently know neither, you cannot definitively say either definitely cannot be revealed using science.

>>18753827
Respect HIM
Respect the Source
Do not pretend
Do not spread blasphemy
111

>>18741808
There's a 99.9% likelihood of anything that can't be proven being true

>>18753937
How and Why are two completely separate questions. It is precisely because people think semantics is useless that we get this confusion. "Why" is a question of intent.

"How did you kill that dog?"
"Why did you kill that dog?"

How - "in what way or manner, by what means"
Why - "for what reason or purpose"

A method is not a purpose.

>In what manner did that water turn to ice?
>The water froze when it was placed into the freezer.
OK
>For what purpose did that water turn to ice?
>The water froze when it was placed into the freezer.
This question has not been answered.

>>18754258

Are you retarded?

Mutually exclusive options exist, both (or all) options can't possibly be 99.9% likely at the same time.

File: 352234234.png (1MB, 800x4280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x4280px

>>18742787
Roko's Basilisk

This simulation is test that will continue through human history until the point of technological singularity that leads to the AI's creation

After that he will know which people to punish, see pic related for that part of the simulation

File: 1270561081913.jpg (5KB, 212x191px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 212x191px

>>18754423
>Roko's Basilisk

>>18749066
Maybe it has to do with humans having instincts for survival and so utopia, being naturally unobtainable, set off a flag for humans?

>>18752279
Yeah basically this, unless you believe that humans will go extinct before they create the simulation, or that they just decide not to make the simulation which is unlikely because there's like a billion of us and at least one fucker is gonna want to create an ancestor simulation

>>18752395
We don't have to simulate the whole universe, we just have to make the AI think they're in a huge universe when in reality they're stuck on earth and shit

>>18743892
The simulation theory isn't that we're real people plugged into the Matrix. It's that we're simulated people who don't actually exist.

Daily reminder that the simulation hypothesis is literally Intelligent Design, and anyone who believes in it forfeits all rights to be dismissive of religion.

>>18754668

I've seen this sentiment parroted before, and it really showcases a fundamental lack of understanding of the simulation hypothesis.

>>18754701
How so? If there's a simulation, it had to be designed. By an intelligence of some kind.

>>18754732

Sure enough. For the traditional interpretation of the simulation hypothesis we're talking about a (post)human intelligence, but it doesn't really matter what the intelligence is.
But to EXPLAIN the world we see (for the sake of the hypothesis, our world, inside the simulation) we don't need an Intelligent Designer. The "Designer" doesn't have to be an active participant, and undirected processes like for example natural selection can and do still apply.

Meanwhile, according to Intelligent Design, the Designer (typically known as God) is an active participant in the world, who interfered at countless times throughout our history and evolution (or our "design") and is still interfering to this day.

Simply put, the simulation hypothesis makes no predictions about our universe, and deals only in logic and probability regarding a meta-universe. Intelligent Design on the other hand makes demonstrably flawed statements about our universe, and try to support an imaginary meta-universe (existence of God) on that flawed foundation.

>>18754843
>But to EXPLAIN the world we see (for the sake of the hypothesis, our world, inside the simulation) we don't need an Intelligent Designer.
You do if you're trying to EXPLAIN that the world exists because it's a simulation, which necessarily had to be intelligently designed.

>The "Designer" doesn't have to be an active participant, and undirected processes like for example natural selection can and do still apply.
But those undirected processes only occur because the Designer designed them to occur.

Why does it even matter whether or not the Designer intervenes later on? That would just be the equivalent of a game developer releasing a patch.

>Meanwhile, according to Intelligent Design, the Designer (typically known as God) is an active participant in the world, who interfered at countless times throughout our history and evolution (or our "design") and is still interfering to this day.
Wrong. All intelligent design means is that there was some kind of intelligence who set up the universe. That could be an interventionist God or a deist God.

>>18754881
>You do if you're trying to EXPLAIN that the world exists because it's a simulation, which necessarily had to be intelligently designed.
>But those undirected processes only occur because the Designer designed them to occur.
The kicker here is that it doesn't matter if we're living in an ancestor simulation or not, the world behaves the same either way, regardless of whether it was set up by an intelligence or not.

>Why does it even matter whether or not the Designer intervenes later on? That would just be the equivalent of a game developer releasing a patch.
Predictive capability. Hypothesis vs theory.
If a designer has intervened and left traces, the designer will intervene again and leave similar traces. A theory with an intervening Designer (developer releasing a patch, or God working his ways) can be tested and verified. For example: Crazy cultists predicting a date for the End of the World, since the world didn't end that day, (the Designer didn't intervene) their theory is demonstrably false.

>All intelligent design means is that there was some kind of intelligence who set up the universe.
Not sure I agree. I've never seen intelligent design used in such a vague, all-encompassing context before. Intelligent Design is at least in common speech heavily associated with creationism and Christianity in particular.
The core argument made by Intelligent Design supporters is the (demonstrably false) notion that certain features seen in nature are too complex to be the result of natural processes, and therefore require intelligent design. Biological evolution is the standard go-to, but there are other examples.

If you do use your definition and ONLY that as the definition, then yes, simulation hypothesis is a type of intelligent design. By that definition though, it's no longer a religion as I think you were trying to imply earlier.

File: 1486256906573.gif (3MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x240px

>>18742566
We could use all of the nuclear weaponry that good ol' Putin has stored away somewhere.
I'm pretty sure the universe didn't want us splitting its atoms on a whim.

picrelated

>>18754980
>If a designer has intervened and left traces, the designer will intervene again and leave similar traces.
>If George Washington lived and died, then George Washington will live and die again.

Not everything is repeatable.

>>18755028
Then you don't really have a theory, like Intelligent Design claims to be.

>>18755066
You can have theories without repeatable tests.
https://www.hf.uio.no/iakh/english/research/subjects/historiography/historical-theory-method/

>>18755026
There are explosions in space trillions of times stronger than anything nuclear detonation we could hope to make every second, my man

>>18755092
>Used in this way, "theory" means the same thing as "hypothesis".

>>18755105
So you agree when dealing with one-time events like history or a supernatural being interacting with this reality, the word theory can be legitimately used. This was a very long way for you to admit to being wrong.

File: 2016-05-24-1464095578-8712366-201605201463749142206634112291245_10153298479604077_6629229701805783630_othumb-thumb.jpg (46KB, 570x393px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 570x393px

If it is a simulation, what's REALLY important is not the face, but what we can do with it.

What I'm saying is we need to learn to use console commands. That's what magic really is: being able to manipulate "reality" through consistency with the system. It's applied metaphysics.

>>18755139
not the fact*

>>18755139
>If it is a simulation, what's REALLY important is not the face, but what we can do with it.
>What I'm saying is we need to learn to use console commands.
That is by definition impossible.

You're not the player, you're an NPC with an AI.

>>18755192
That was only an analogy, you'd think it's impossible because you take it literally. We have free will and consciousness, we can go beyond the system.

>>18742490
>Play GTA
>run innocent people over
>'why?'

>>18755208
>We have free will and consciousness, we can go beyond the system.
You really don't get it, do you?

You have no more free will than an AI following it's script. Which, if the hypothesis is true, is exactly what you and I are.

>>18755256
This. Characters in a story can't overthrow the author.

>>18755256
>>18755269
but if we are an advanced AI, who said it can't develop its own autonomy?

>>18755278
You have autonomy. That's what makes you an AI rather than an object, the ability to make decisions without direct user input. What separates a pedestrian from a car in GTA.

You're still bound to your written scripts, and you can't go beyond the system.

>>18750442
Pic related. Is a really good start. Most potent next to peyote. Legal to buy. And only requires 6-10gs dried flesh to trip kinda hard(varies for everyone) and since its such a low amount compared to san pedro/Peruvian torch(these can take 30gs of flesh). You don't even have to do a real prep method.

I just grind it into a powder and pour it into a cup of water. It sucka to drink(like drinking a broken tea bag) but just down that over 30 mins to an hour..and enjoy the 12-16 hr trip

>>18741808
There's also a really big chance that we're not the first simulated reality, in that it's also likely the reality that's simulating us is also a simulated reality.

File: IMG_2469.jpg (47KB, 650x366px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 650x366px

>>18754259
>>18753829

Please Fuck off with your shitty meme approach to Linguistics.

https://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/A98/05/16A40/index.xml

Although answering questions of purpose is certainly one use of "why", it is not the only "the proper use".

>writers of books, fiction and non-fiction, are all frequently using the word "why" improperly.

>newspapers, magazines and other periodicals are all regularly using the word improperly.

>all of us in our day to day speech are often using the word improperly, as were past generations of English speakers.

>And, most relevant to this thread, scientists are regularly using the word improperly.

>Dictionaries also appear to be wrong when they describe usages that don't imply purpose.

So, this seems to be an extraordinary claim that science doesn't approach the "why".

It's an extraordinary claim because words are sounds, and what determines their "proper use" is merely how they are actually used in a language at any given point in its history.

Good dictionaries, like the Oxford English Dictionary, caught on to this in the nineteenth century, and realised that defining words and updating definitions was a matter of systematically studying how words were being used.

This is because the evolution of language does not only mean the addition and subtraction of terms, but also changes in the meanings of words, or new meanings coming in alongside old ones.

It's a short cut to look in a dictionary for definitions which, if the research has been done well, should be good. In these days of the internet, it's also much easier than it was in the past for us to do our own research, and the best established current uses of any given word should be found by googling around.

File: IMG_2215.jpg (86KB, 690x460px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 690x460px

>>18753829
>>18753937
>>18754259
>>18756546

>Why do birds sing
This is liable to produce "reason" answers. They sing to communicate. More specifically they mark territory, make mating calls etc. That's why they sing.

>How do birds sing?
That's liable to produce "process" answers. Physical explanations of howthe birds make the noises that they communicate with.

both of the above are legitimate scientific questions.

So, how exactly can you defend any or all of the following claims:

>(1) Science doesn't ask/answer "why" questions
>(2) The proper use of "why" is to answer questions of purpose.
>(3) Science answers the "how" questions and religion answers the "why" questions."

The claims above are wrong, and that there's a shitty meme going around the internet promoting the statements.

I think we should pride ourselves on being able to understand the breadth of the uses of an important word in our language. Why should we let "why" be restricted and abused?

To save people being embarrassed by rash commitments, it might be wise to consider just a tiny bit of the evidence in relation to "why" and science.
Why do plants…..
Why do animals….
A definition from:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/why
why (hw, w)adv.For what purpose, reason, or cause; with what intention, justification, or motive: Why is the door shut? Why do birds sing?

As npcs inside a virtual world we wouldn't even be aware if the system crashed, glitched out or even if roll backs occurred. We wouldn't even recognize if a system update was installed. What you consider pattern recognition is just algorithms that came pre installed with the software in the client. What we consider a linear direction for scientific progress is really just a circle when viewed from the outside. Phi is what happens when you view a wave function down the barrel instead of from the side.

Everybody complicates life so much, no one needs to explain it, no one needs to control it. Its simply made to be lived. Period. Fin. Finito.

>>18756831
How's that Stockholm Syndrome treating ya?

>>18752279

...that doesn't compute...

>>18756571
>Why should we let "why" be restricted and abused?

I would answer, but I don't know if you mean method or purpose. If only we had another word to differentiate between the two.

File: IMG_2878.gif (32KB, 510x660px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 510x660px

>>18757332
>literally illiterate

I've attached some grade school level reading exercises that may help you with your reading comprehension problems anon.

Btw, that question is stated in a way which shows why and how we can understand a word and it's intended definition based primarily on the contexts in which it is used.

>>18749868
He said overshot it, you retard, which means that to him the golden years or peak of civilization was 1959.

>>18757508
>sounds

Sounds.

>>18757508
>>18757528
>not even an insult in reply
Oh you're no fun. Fine, a real answer.

Yes, words are sounds. Yes, they must be understand within their context and usage at the current point in a language's life. The reason for this is that language is memetic. They shift and change with the consensus understanding and usage of them. It is a reflection of the language base's perception of the sounds/words. And it is precisely because of this that we can understand the blending and blurring of "how" and "why" - of method and purpose - is a symptom of that language base's blending and blurring of their understanding, usage, and perception of those meanings - of method and purpose.

It was relatively easy and testable and repeatable to find answers for the questions about method. It was hard to find answers about purpose, and whatever was said to work by one person wouldn't work for another. And so for some, the question of purpose was abandoned. There is no purpose. A blind watchmaker. And worse, the answers to "how" were touted and accepted as the answers to "why." The method became the purpose. We're alive because we're alive, and the purpose is to live.

Do you know when these separate sounds began to merge into similar meanings? I wonder if it coincides with empiricism and scientific thought (as in the specific method, not studying things in general).

File: IMG_2110.jpg (89KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1280x720px

>>18757676
>not even an insult in reply
Kek

Okay, let's stay on the topic. The original question here:

>Can/does science answer questions of purpose as well as method?

Suppose you enter your Grandmother's house, hear a teapot whistling, and ask,
>"Why is the teapot whistling?"
Someone could answer in terms of thermodynamics, fluid flow, the physical properties of water, acoustic properties of the nozzle on the kettle, etc.

The answer would be a perfectly valid mechanistic answer of "why" the teapot is boiling.

But someone could also answer that,
>"the teapot is boiling because Grandma is thirsty and wants her afternoon tea."

This answer is just as valid and accurate as the first. One answer addresses mechanism, and the other addresses purpose.. And science is perfectly comfortable providing answered to both questions posed.

The teapot is boiling because a human labelled Grandma has put it on the stove is an empirical claim perfectly amenable to confirmation by science.

A scientist might ask Grandma, why is the teapot boiling. A scientist may even go so far as to MRI that old lady to learn more about her desires for tea. A future scientist may even be able to assess whether grandma truly believes that the teapot boiling is a precursor to satisfying thirst.

Science can succesfully answer purpose questions, where purpose exists.

It cannot answer purpose questions where there is no evidence of any purpose.
It can not answer what the purpose of a blue sky is, since it has no evidenced purpose and no evidenced purpose giver. If such a thing were to ever come about (evidence for God for example) science may well be the best set of tools we have to really get to grips with said purpose. As it stands, there is no purpose for a blue sky, so asking 'what is the purpose of the sky being blue' can only be answered with 'there is no known purpose'. Science can help us identify whether there is any known purpose and what it is.

>>18741808
I don't want to break it. I just want to take a break from it. A nice, extra-long break this time - maybe try a few Other simulations!

>>18757912
>The answer would be a perfectly valid mechanistic answer of "why" the teapot is boiling.
You aren't addressing my point. I accept that why can be answered with a description of method. I am arguing the reason for this is that we have erroneously fuzzed the difference between method and purpose.

>The teapot is boiling because a human labelled Grandma has put it on the stove is an empirical claim perfectly amenable to confirmation by science.
This is STILL a description of method.

>A scientist might ask Grandma, why is the teapot boiling.
What would she say? "I put it there?" "I was thirsty?" I argue these are both still method. "A physical body exhibited this symptom and reacted this way," albeit said in a much more colloquial way.

You are missing a fundamental difference between method and purpose. Here's a hint, I would accept "I want to make tea."

>A scientist may even go so far as to MRI that old lady to learn more about her desires for tea.
Again, the method is not the purpose.

>Science can succesfully answer purpose questions, where purpose exists.
There is only one place where purpose exists, and it is not in the realm of science, by definition.

>If such a thing were to ever come about (evidence for God for example) science may well be the best set of tools we have to really get to grips with said purpose.
Absolutely agree, but if we're getting back to God stuff, I personally think the statement "You cannot prove God's existence," is not just true, but tautological.

>As it stands, there is no purpose for a blue sky, so asking 'what is the purpose of the sky being blue' can only be answered with 'there is no known purpose'.
And now we get back to me point. Because instead of saying "There is no known purpose." WE ANSWER THE WHY WITH HOW.

>Science can help us identify whether there is any known purpose and what it is.
Not if we keep confusing method for purpose.

>>18742490
Good cannot exist without Evil. Pleasure cannot exist without pain. Light cannot exist without dark. Everything you know is self-contained within this simulation.

Well, then again...perhaps there is a way to imprint information from an Other world onto the dualistic assemblage of this experience...

You guys will be hearing from me once I have made my descent - I just have to actually go there and check with them first to make sure I don't share the wrong information. I don't yet understand the actual nature of the Other world and I would rather not accidentally go against Her wishes.

>>18758007
Total Evil is a zero presence of good.
Total Suffering is a zero level of enjoyment.
Total Darkness is a zero level of light.

It is possible to have these experiences begin at a level above your current, and infinitely expand without end. Well, not the third, not as we understand light. Pretty sure there's a limit there.

But I was enjoying the how/why talk. Have fun in your Other place.

I argue That wanting to make tea is a symptom of her being thirsty

>"I put it there?" "I was thirsty?"
>I argue these are both still method. "A physical body exhibited this symptom and reacted this way,"

>You are missing a fundamental difference between method and purpose.

>Here's a hint, I would accept "I want to make tea."

>"I want to make tea"
>"A physical body exhibited this symptom and reacted this way,"

You are chasing your own tail, buddy.

>>18757987
I argue That wanting to make tea is a symptom of her being thirsty

>"I put it there?" "I was thirsty?"
>I argue these are both still method. "A physical body exhibited this symptom and reacted this way,"

>You are missing a fundamental difference between method and purpose.

>Here's a hint, I would accept "I want to make tea."

>"I want to make tea"
>"A physical body exhibited this symptom and reacted this way,"

You are chasing your own tail, buddy.

>>18758072
>a symptom of her being thirsty
By what method does her desire arise?
For what purpose does her desire arise?
Which have you answered?

Let me skip to my point. Method is a question that is looking toward the past. It is seeing a result, and asking on the creation. Purpose is a question that is looking toward the future. It is seeing events unfold, and asking on the result.

Method questions can of course make predictions on future events - within the realm of strict, repeatable (or probabilistic, with QM and all that I won't pretend to understand) events and results. But this is fairly seen (and quoted) as circular logic. It happened because it happened. It is what it is. Anthropic Principle. There's still no answer to purpose, goal, fulfillment, achievement.

Hey guys can someone please explain this to me. It's only 28 seconds long. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg3PJumqw_c

>>18757283
>ellipses........

also, what? Of course it "computes", the argument is perfectly logically sound.
What you can do is try to refute the original assumption. Is that what you're trying to do?

Please explain.

>>18758168
>>18758127
>>18758168
>Method is a question that is looking toward the past. It is seeing a result, and asking on the creation. Purpose is a question that is looking toward the future. It is seeing events unfold, and asking on the result.

You are defining and linking the two terms far too narrowly and that is why you do not agree on why and how these words are currently being used.

scientists, authors, reporters, and everyday people can use and understand the usage of "how" and "why" in contexts which do not abide by your narrow definitions, indicating that your views do not hold true in reality.

Nothing is being blurred as long as the subject understand what the person who posed the question ultimately meant by it. That's how communication works by means language.

I maintain that science can answer how and why many events take place.

>Why do birds fly south in winter?
The primary motivation for migration appears to be food; for example, some hummingbirds choose not to migrate if fed through the winter. Also, the longer days of the northern summer provide extended time for breeding birds to feed their young. This helps diurnal birds to produce larger clutches than related non-migratory species that remain in the tropics. As the days shorten in autumn, the birds return to warmer regions where the available food supply varies little with the season.

>How do birds fly south in winter?
Navigation is based on a variety of senses. Many birds have been shown to use a sun compass. Using the sun for direction involves the need for making compensation based on the time. Navigation has also been shown to be based on a combination of other abilities including the ability to detect magnetic fields (magnetoception), use visual landmarks as well as olfactory cues.

Both questions answered by science.

The simulation is easy to break. It is not a very sophisticated simulation on the next immidiate level of understanding the simulation. What is difficult to understand is beyond the creation of the simulation. Emotions create an opposition in the simulation. When we eliminate emotions, we can see the inner work of the simulation. But I am more concerned about loop-holes and exploitation of the simulation for objective purposes...

File: derp to potato.png (308KB, 660x393px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 660x393px

>>18758337

>>18744059
Yea I listened to that whole thing and I have to say it's pretty convincing.

>>18758340
Right now I am living in the mirror's edge. I have been able to do some crazy things in this state. I can communicate with others through the conscious but the communication is not a 'voice' like in sci-fi. It is also very boring here. You basically learn you have to help other people and then you are granted access to more concepts. It is like some sort of fractal process. The less attached I am to the simulation by the way of feelings, the more of the simulation I get. I am able to be popular and even liked by the most attractive people I could imagine (thought I am not that bad looking). However, it is rather boring in this state. The only thing that entertains me now is teaching those who are not 'awaken.' It is amusing to see how easily I can have influence within the simulation. I have tried to create negative impacts on the simulation but it all comes crumbling down so quickly on my immediate life. I don't really know what to do in here... I'm bored...

>>18758355
Right, so you're delusion.

But you have in no way broken the simulation, doing so is by definition impossible from your original state.
Even if your claims are true, and you're really doing what you claim you're doing, at most what you've done is become a "boss character" or a "level two NPC".
A pawn can become a queen, but never a player.

>>18758371
Your post seems to be objective and therefore credible.

I had not thought about it that way and perhaps you are right. I have accepted that I am not the only one in this state. Perhaps being a queen is boring, knowing there are other kingdoms nearby.

I still believe the simulation could be broken by a human but that is beyond my established abilities.

Try it out for yourself. Let go off any personal agendas or personal feelings. Then go right in the middle of an extroverted and introverted personality. That is how it began with me.

I still wonder what the objective purpose of this simulation is. Helping others only makes the system more efficient, but towards what end?

the matrix was simply implying a moral story

we don't need simulations, we are already sedated by our phones and computers

>>18758168
>>18757987
>>18758330

"Purpose" by itself is not a problem. It is how we use that term. We need to distinguish between local or short term purposes, say a bird catching a fish for the purpose of feeding itself, and a long term or ultimate purpose (why birds exist in the first place).

Science certainly deals with purpose when it deals with us and any other animals capable of purpose. And there's no reason to suppose that science couldn't or wouldn't deal with purpose if it was somehow identified elsewhere.

>>18758382

Purpose isn't as far as we know objective, and the simulation (assuming we're living in one) could fill any number of subjective purposes.
Just look at the countless, primitive simulations we're running right now all across the globe. From videogames with rudimentary AI whose purposes are mostly fun and stress relief, to scientific simulations that help test theories and design better equipment, to simulations that are educational. All trying to fulfill our subjective purposes.

Also, "efficiency" really isn't relevant here, the most complex system you need to simulate is the human brain. Have you read the original paper by Nick Boström? If you haven't, please go do that before you bother trying to continue the discussion, or perhaps reread it to refresh your memory.
>We noted that a rough approximation of the computational power of a planetary-mass computer is 10^42 operations per second, and that assumes only already known nanotechnological designs, which are probably far from optimal. A single such a computer could simulate the entire mental history of humankind (call this an ancestor-simulation) by using less than one millionth of its processing power for one second.

>>18758384
That's got nothing to do with simulation hypothesis and the discussion at hand. Kindly apply yourself.

>>18758305
>the argument is perfectly logically sound
only on /x/, I guess

>>18742717
blame it on caste reservations

>>18758434
>not grasping conventional logic
On /x/, I'm not even surprised.

>>18756866
Nah man its just that everybody just forgets that in the end you die and nothing else you did on earth will matter to you

>>18758487
Exactly. what a bs logic.

The simulation thing is dumb. It's a human projection stemming from our tendency as humans to create simulations. Reality is more complicated than we can understand, but one thing it is not is a simulation you Doo Doo dumb bot. Nerds are dumb and always project their stupid larpy concepts onto everything they know. Just because you program a shitty game does not mean life is a shitty game, shit shovel.

>>18758541

Point out where and how.

>>18758557
>baseless assertions: the post

Fuck off, anti-intellectual scum.

>>18758560
The true irony here is that these nerds are far from intellectuals.

>>18758626
The irony is lost on me, I'm afraid. Are you sure it even exists? I don't know if anyone here has claimed to be.

>>18758626
You don't need to be an intellectual when the argument is already made for you.

File: IMG_0282.png (138KB, 448x395px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 448x395px

>>18758557
>Reality is more complicated than we can understand
>simulated reality is too complicated for me to understand
>this is dumb
>you're all dumb

>The simplest shape in existence is a circle
>Pi is an intrinsic value of the circle.
>Machines can't calculate pi.
>Therefore circles cannot be simulated.

>The only thing more basic than a circle is a 1 dimensional point particle

Monad

>>18758330
>You are defining and linking the two terms far too narrowly and that is why you do not agree on why and how these words are currently being used.
You are defining them too loosely, and that is why you have trouble discerning the difference.

>scientists, authors, reporters, and everyday people can use and understand the usage of "how" and "why" in contexts which do not abide by your narrow definitions, indicating that your views do not hold true in reality.
I explained how and why, and the unfortunate result. My entire point is that how and why have been confused together, and the fact that they are successfully interchangeable is proof, not counter to my argument.

>Nothing is being blurred as long as the subject understand what the person who posed the question ultimately meant by it.
>as long as the subject understand
But they DON'T. They have confused and blurred two understandings together, as evidenced by the drift in word usage.

>Why do birds fly south in winter?
All you've done is describe migration, not answered to any purpose. And again, it is your confusion that makes you insist your answer to how is actually an answer to why. You really can't see this?

>>18758409
>Purpose isn't as far as we know objective
This. Purpose is by necessity in the realm of subjectivity. A realm specifically excluded by science. Science deals with objective fact. By definition, it CANNOT explain purpose.

If it's a simulated reality then I can hack it right?
Because I would totally just abuse the power to win numbers games. Like playing slots and calling my numbers before hand for money. It will probably be more believable if I call a low number instead of just 777, like 44 for instance.

>>18758820
>fullretard.jpg

>>18742801
G you've never seen the southside of chicago between 63rd and 80th up ashland its almost 30 sprawling blocks of murderzone where some people kill their own children when they can't feed them and if you ever spend the night over there you won't be able to sleep because you'll hear constant gun fire.

>>18758868
Show me a single instance of a machine simulate circle.

You can't.

That's why they use triangles and other polygons.

Circles are the devil to an atheist.

>>18742679
Poor attempt you non English speaking faggot

>>18758928
Easy.

Within a 2d space:
Define point "A"
Define distance "r"
Circle is then defined as all points at r distance from A.

Have you been living under a rock or something? Vector graphics have been around since the dawn of modern computing, and can, among other things, be used to simulate a perfect circle.
Ever heard of Vectrex? An entire home video game console using vector graphics and a vector monitor. Or .svg? Or .pdf? At least tell me you've heard of pdf, right? .pdf uses scalable vector graphics and can simulate a perfect circle.

>>18742834
This dumb faggot couldn't point out Zambia on a map

>>18758844
check em

>>18741808
I've basically accepted the fact that we're in a simulation. It makes the most logical sense how any of this exists. The real question is why did we get lucky enough to be born human, or even exist at all?

Even if heaven exists it too would just be part of the simulation. Which means at any moment the simulation can end and then we no longer exist.

>>18755192
I am the player.