Noble Dreams

Noble Dreams

You are not logged in.

#31 Sun 24th May 2015 05:50 am

SW
Member
Registered: Thu 15th Jan 2009

Re: Is the Universe a Simulation?

The Reality Salesman makes a call - are you buying?

For a moment, a person sees beyond the picture of his own reality. He sees huge open space. He knows he can act on the basis of an inner leverage. He knows he has great power.

And thenÖ

THE REALITY SALESMAN CALLS.

Step up, folks. This is a deal you canít afford to miss. You know that thing you cling to like a drowning man in a turbulent sea?

Itís called reality, and I represent the company that manufactures it. Iím proud to say Iíve held this job for over a hundred thousand years. So as far as product knowledge is concerned, you just arenít going to find anybody like me.

Iím here to tell you that reality is never anything more than rocks and bricks and concrete and steel. Reality is never anything more than a house and all the things in it, and the mementos you hold on to, to remind you of the past.

And in conjunction with that, Iím really sellingÖguess what?

A little thing called perception.

Iím selling How You See Things.

Because, no matter what time period you live in, it all comes down to that: how you see whatís in front of you.

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015 … se-call-2/

Are we buying?


HOPE is the thing with feathers   
That perches in the soul,   
And sings the tune without the words,   
And never stops at all        Emily Dickinson

Offline

 

#32 Tue 26th May 2015 10:55 am

SiriArc
AD VO ZIN
From: Denver
Registered: Thu 31st Jan 2008

Re: Is the Universe a Simulation?

5
http://forum.noblerealms.org/viewtopic. … 840#p32840

This, in a nutshell, is The Parasitic Factor:

Life feeding on Life - Awareness feeding on Awareness. And to the degree that it exists, The ALL, of this Set, has Cancer.

This is a set-up Doomed to Failure.

What works is Symbiosis and Empathy (Which is the Natural Realm of "loosh").

Far Journeys wrote:
Someone, Somewhere (or both, in millions, or uncountable) requires,
likes, needs, values, collects, drinks, eats, or uses as a drug (sic) a substance
ident Loosh. (Electricity, oil, oxygen, gold, wheat, water, land, old coins,
uranium.) This is a rare substance in Somewhere, and those who possess
Loosh find it vital for whatever it is used for.

The "someone" noted above is a shortsighted, lunatic, drug addict - A minor creator god that is currently in the process of being Healed and restored to pre Distortion Self.

The Family of Light is here to Dissolve this distortion and return to Love That Which is Precious.


http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b321/siriarc/Lightning.jpg


11   23   11

Offline

 

#33 Thu 28th May 2015 11:04 am

SW
Member
Registered: Thu 15th Jan 2009

Re: Is the Universe a Simulation?

The bizarre nature of reality as laid out by quantum theory has survived another test, with scientists performing a famous experiment and proving that reality does not exist until it is measured.

Physicists at The Australian National University (ANU) have conducted John Wheeler's delayed-choice thought experiment, which involves a moving object that is given the choice to act like a particle or a wave. Wheeler's experiment then asks - at which point does the object decide?

Common sense says the object is either wave-like or particle-like, independent of how we measure it. But quantum physics predicts that whether you observe wave like behavior (interference) or particle behavior (no interference) depends only on how it is actually measured at the end of its journey. This is exactly what the ANU team found.

"It proves that measurement is everything. At the quantum level, reality does not exist if you are not looking at it," said Associate Professor Andrew Truscott from the ANU Research School of Physics and Engineering.

If one chooses to believe that the atom really did take a particular path or paths then one has to accept that a future measurement is affecting the atom's past, said Truscott.

"The atoms did not travel from A to B. It was only when they were measured at the end of the journey that their wave-like or particle-like behavior was brought into existence," he said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-05-quantum-th … s.html#jCp

http://phys.org/news/2015-05-quantum-th … dness.html

So am I reading this correctly - we make the choice as the observer?

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ … 052715.php

How spacetime is built by quantum entanglement

New insight into unification of general relativity and quantum mechanics

University of Tokyo

rollva Got it?



i need a molly to untangle this entanglement

ďAnd a new philosophy emerged called quantum physics, which suggest that the individualís function is to inform and be informed. You really exist only when youíre in a field sharing and exchanging information. You create the realities you inhabit.Ē
Leary, Chaos & Cyber Culture


HOPE is the thing with feathers   
That perches in the soul,   
And sings the tune without the words,   
And never stops at all        Emily Dickinson

Offline

 

#34 Thu 28th May 2015 02:39 pm

Sencha
Member
From: England
Registered: Sat 26th Jan 2008

Re: Is the Universe a Simulation?

That made my eyes bleed. I agree, Molly angle required.


'Tea is drunk to forget the din of the world' - Tíien Yiheng.

Offline

 

#35 Thu 4th Jun 2015 12:03 pm

Sencha
Member
From: England
Registered: Sat 26th Jan 2008

Re: Is the Universe a Simulation?

I stumbled across a Montalk angle, kind of, in the interview I posted here: http://www.nobledreams.co.uk/viewtopic. … 68&p=7 #63. At around 06:30 he mentions how the past can be influenced by the present.


'Tea is drunk to forget the din of the world' - Tíien Yiheng.

Offline

 

#36 Fri 5th Jun 2015 05:28 am

SW
Member
Registered: Thu 15th Jan 2009

Re: Is the Universe a Simulation?

Sencha wrote:

I stumbled across a Montalk angle, kind of, in the interview I posted here: http://www.nobledreams.co.uk/viewtopic. … 68&p=7 #63. At around 06:30 he mentions how the past can be influenced by the present.

I am at my best early in the morning before EVER turning on the television to watch all the horror and mayhem that has happened. I read this statement this morning and it feels like I am flying through time and really seeing what is going on for the first time - seeing how some "programmer" really does control us and our "reality".

These two stories popped up in my reality for my lesson of the day. And I would like to share, but I have sadly noticed that one can only see with one's own eyes. And see what you have been programmed to see. But a day will come (if you want it) when you will see the endless possibilities that YOU can create. And THEY begin to lose any power over you.

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015 … out-media/

Network: the last great film about media

In the brilliant 1976 film, Network, written by Paddy Chayefsky, the programming head of a giant television network, Diana Christensen, shifts the whole news department over to the entertainment division.

Thus emerge new shows with galloping ratings: Howard Beale, Prophet of the Air Waves; The Mao Tse-Tung Hour, in which a guerrilla group films itself carrying out armed bank robberies; and Sybil the Soothsayer, a Tarot reader.

Diana becomes the networkís new executive star.

There is no longer even a pretense of a need for news anchors to appear authoritative, objective, or rational.

Diana Christensen is unstoppable. She sees, with burning clarity, that audiences are bored to the point of exhaustion; they now require, as at the end of the Roman Empire, extreme entertainment. They want more crime, more violence, more insanity, out in the open. On television.

This is how it is in the USA - nonstop news with nonstop violence and chaos and POLITICIANS (the most important people in the world)~

But if you ask and wonder how to break out of this - there is a way and the answers are there -

http://neilkramer.com/transcending-the- … umber.html

Transcending The Control System: You Are Not A Number

If you are not shaping your own reality, then someone else is doing it for you.

The Control System serves up the default reality configuration for those who do not determine their own. There is no neutrality. Each individual has a prescribed belief system downloaded into their head via repeated containment encoding* that emanates from parenting, schooling, sociological trends, organized religion and the mainstream media. The ultra-saturation of this mass hypnosis is so pervasive and well established that most people no longer wish to think for themselves, preferring instead to slip into the anaesthetizing pre-packaged reality they have grown to venerate.

For those who have chosen a path of awakening, the study of esoteric knowledge and the transcendent journey itself automatically formulates a deprogramming procedure to remove Control System sludge from oneís personal world view. An enema for the mind. As the transparent absurdity of the old hierarchical systems is perceived, a dynamic gnosis of the sacred and sovereign nature of oneís own being starts to resonate new harmonic insights and deeper universal connections. All part of the natural progress of the soul. In stark contrast, for the other 7 billion sleepers on the planet, ever deeper and more elaborate unreality indoctrination is conjured upon them to constrain any sense of selfhood.

Who is creating your reality?


HOPE is the thing with feathers   
That perches in the soul,   
And sings the tune without the words,   
And never stops at all        Emily Dickinson

Offline

 

#37 Tue 16th Jun 2015 03:58 pm

Valentine
Member
Registered: Mon 11th Feb 2008

Re: Is the Universe a Simulation?

http://philo-logos.blogspot.com/2015/01 … s-you.html

The Singularity Is Not As Near As You Think

One of the world's leading neuroscientists, Christof Koch, has some fascinating theories about consciousness and computers. He believes it is possible, in principle, for a computer to become truly conscious, but only in a very specific way. Transhumanists the world over will applaud. But not so fast. If Koch's views are correct, it also means that the ultimate hope of many transhumanists - that is, to eventually upload their mind and live forever inside a computer - is never going to happen.

Koch explains some of his ideas in a recent interview with MIT Technology Review. Here's what he says about computer consciousness:

    [C]onsciousness is a property of complex systems that have a particular ďcause-effectĒ repertoire. They have a particular way of interacting with the world, such as the brain does, or in principle, such as a computer could. If you were to build a computer that has the same circuitry as the brain, this computer would also have consciousness associated with it. It would feel like something to be this computer. However, the same is not true for digital simulations... The analogy, and itís a very good one, is that you can make pretty good weather predictions these days [with digital simulations]. You can predict the inside of a storm. But itís never wet inside the computer. You can simulate a black hole in a computer, but space-time will not be bent. Simulating something is not the real thing.

    Itís the same thing with consciousness. In 100 years, you might be able to simulate consciousness on a computer. But it wonít experience anything. Nada. It will be black inside. It will have no experience whatsoever, even though it may have our intelligence and our ability to speak.

So, according to the theory that Koch describes, a computer that is closely structured like a brain could become conscious, but software never will. Here's why that puts a damper on transhumanists' ultimate hope of digital immortality:

As the recent movie Transcendence depicted, the process of supposedly "uploading" a mind simply means digitally copying and simulating (via software) all the connections and information associated with a person's brain. It would be like having a 3-D, interactive simulation of your house saved on your computer, down to every board and nail. But, as Koch said, a simulation is not the real thing. If consciousness is only possible when you get physical parts configured in a certain way, then merely configuring digital "parts" in the same way will not have the same effect. You cannot actually live in the digital simulation of your house.

Even if Koch is wrong, though, there are further reasons why the future envisioned by transhumanists is likely pure fantasy. Pretend for just a moment that digital simulations could really be conscious. A person could still not achieve immortality by making a digital copy of their brain for a very simple reason: A copy is not one and the same object as the original; they're two different objects.

According to Leibniz' law, known as the "indiscernibility of identicals," if two objects are one and the same object, then they will have all the same properties. But a human brain and a digital brain do not have all the same properties for obvious reasons (one is made of physical, organic matter; while one is a virtual simulation). Hence, the consciousness of your brain (what we call "you") is one object, while the (assumed) consciousness of a digital simulation is another. They're two distinct consciousnesses. They can no more be the same person than identical twins could be. Therefore, making a digital copy of your consciousness does nothing to ensure that you will live forever, it just means the copy you made of yourself will "live" after you die. That's not immortality.

Moreover, there are good reasons to think that consciousness is more mysterious than Koch believes. It's possible that consciousness cannot be explained by physical components. Perhaps, instead, conscious experience is better understood as the property of something like a soul - something that cannot simply be copied or "uploaded."

Koch's theory is attractive for many reasons. He takes the qualia of conscious experience seriously, even though he thinks it is ultimately caused by physical components. Also, he correctly sees how the functionalist view of consciousness has ethical problems, and he speculates how his theory could help. But I find his theory most intriguing for the reasons I've explained above: because, even though the possibility of computer consciousness fulfills a major hope of the transhumanist movement, Koch's theory also means that the primary goal of being uploaded into the cloud is ultimately unrealistic. Transhumanists still have other hopes of immortality through human longevity research. But the pinnacle event of their religion - the rapture-like "singularity" - probably won't be what they've hoped for, if it happens at all.


Kindness is the language the blind can see and the deaf can hear.  Mark Twain

Offline

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson