Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Uncovering a Simulation
ikabod
Member (Idle past 4492 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 46 of 118 (484921)
10-03-2008 6:57 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Agobot
10-01-2008 6:42 PM


Re: evidence?! what evidence?
Pick something - a mobile phone. Have a look at it - it exists physically. Put it under a scanning tunneling microscope and have a look - you'd see individual atoms. Zoom in and it disappears. There is no more phone, no building blocks of matter. Move the phone around under the miscroscope, there is still nothing to be seen. Now pull it off the microscope and it's still there, but if you return it under the microscope - there is no phone.
interesting , but meaningless .. try this .. place the phone on a table , now shut your eyes .. is the phone still there ..
if it is then its exsistance is not dependant on perception .....
if it is not there what happens when i dial your phone number ... do i create your phone ..as i can here it "ringing" on my phone ...or do you create the phone by you hearing the phone ring .. or is there just a ringing and no phone till you open your eyes and create it ...
answer in no more than one million words ..((j/k))

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Agobot, posted 10-01-2008 6:42 PM Agobot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Agobot, posted 10-03-2008 7:06 AM ikabod has replied

  
Agobot
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 47 of 118 (484922)
10-03-2008 7:06 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by ikabod
10-03-2008 6:57 AM


Re: evidence?! what evidence?
ikabod writes:
interesting , but meaningless .. try this .. place the phone on a table , now shut your eyes .. is the phone still there ..
if it is then its exsistance is not dependant on perception .....
if it is not there what happens when i dial your phone number ... do i create your phone ..as i can here it "ringing" on my phone ...or do you create the phone by you hearing the phone ring .. or is there just a ringing and no phone till you open your eyes and create it ...
answer in no more than one million words ..((j/k))
The phone is there, the only way you could see that it's really not there is if you could transcend out of our classical world(our "reality"). While you are in our realm of existence, you couldn't not notice the presence of the phone. For more info on "reality", I suggest you a have a look at my last post on the previous page addressed to Legend.
PS. If you want to understand reality, you have throw common sense and layman logic out the window. The last 80 years of QM have confirmed that reality is much more complex that the human mind can imagine.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by ikabod, posted 10-03-2008 6:57 AM ikabod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by ikabod, posted 10-03-2008 9:02 AM Agobot has replied

  
ikabod
Member (Idle past 4492 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 48 of 118 (484931)
10-03-2008 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by Agobot
10-03-2008 7:06 AM


Re: evidence?! what evidence?
Ok , the whole point of that question about the phone is to try to see where YOU think reality is ...
and it would seem that you think reality is external to you ... this means that when you change your point of view you shouuld not be shocked that you seem to see something different ...perception and POV plays tricks
simple example ..look at your hand , then look at a x-ray of a hand ..both are real perceptions of the same thing , both are true and real .. but you see , or do not see differnt things .. yet reality is still the same .. just as if you look at the QM level of perception and at the eyeball level .. nothing changes both are reality both are equally valid .. you still interact in the same way ...
if you eyes saw everything at the QM level the cat you look at would still go meow and drink milk ...
if you stand a mile away and look at the cat with a classic eye then the cat is reduced to a featurelss dot of , for example , black ....it still goes meow and drinks milk
reality does not care how you percive it .. there is a good reason why we dont see at the QM level .. it make shoe laces hard to tie ...just as if we saw things as x-rays ... we see in the best way to allow us to interact with reality ..what we SEE is just a shorthand for reality that helps us live with in reality ....
Now if you had answered the phone question differently we could have talked about how reality is all internal and nothing is ... but you didnt .. so ....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Agobot, posted 10-03-2008 7:06 AM Agobot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Agobot, posted 10-03-2008 12:01 PM ikabod has not replied
 Message 50 by Agobot, posted 10-03-2008 4:42 PM ikabod has not replied

  
Agobot
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 49 of 118 (484937)
10-03-2008 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by ikabod
10-03-2008 9:02 AM


Re: evidence?! what evidence?
ikabod writes:
Ok , the whole point of that question about the phone is to try to see where YOU think reality is ...
and it would seem that you think reality is external to you ... this means that when you change your point of view you shouuld not be shocked that you seem to see something different ...perception and POV plays tricks
I just said there is our reality and the other underlying reality that is not dependent upon our minds' perception and body apparatus.
ikabod writes:
simple example ..look at your hand , then look at a x-ray of a hand ..both are real perceptions of the same thing , both are true and real .. but you see , or do not see differnt things .. yet reality is still the same ..
This is not a good example as whether you look at your hand with or without an x-ray, both cases are part of of the classical world(you are basically saying that our world is real because your hand is real).
ikabod writes:
just as if you look at the QM level of perception and at the eyeball level .. nothing changes both are reality both are equally valid .. you still interact in the same way ...
Could you re-phrase? There are 2 worlds, the quantum and the classical. They are not one and the same at all. They constitute one "combined" entity but they are very different.
ikabod writes:
if you eyes saw everything at the QM level the cat you look at would still go meow and drink milk ...
...and what is that supposed to tell us? That our classical world is classic?
ikabod writes:
if you stand a mile away and look at the cat with a classic eye then the cat is reduced to a featurelss dot of , for example , black ....it still goes meow and drinks milk
The quantum world is not when you zoom in and out and change how big you see things. Your understanding of the underlying quantum world is very far from being true.
ikabod writes:
reality does not care how you percive it ..
This is plain wrong. Reality is what and how you perceive it. That's what QM tells us. Read about Decoherence, The Copenhagen Interpretation, the MWI, the MMI. QM is clearly telling us that there could be other realities(worlds) we are unaware of.
ikabod writes:
there is a good reason why we dont see at the QM level .. it make shoe laces hard to tie ...just as if we saw things as x-rays ... we see in the best way to allow us to interact with reality ..what we SEE is just a shorthand for reality that helps us live with in reality ....
I am not sure i understand what you are saying but it seems you are saying that our reality is real. It is, as long as you are in the realm of the classical world.
ikbod writes:
Now if you had answered the phone question differently we could have talked about how reality is all internal and nothing is ... but you didnt .. so ....
What is an internal reality? A percepted reality?
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by ikabod, posted 10-03-2008 9:02 AM ikabod has not replied

  
Agobot
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 50 of 118 (484952)
10-03-2008 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by ikabod
10-03-2008 9:02 AM


Reality
What's more, quantum entanglement and its faster than light travel of information that breaks the law of Einstein's Special Relativity that nothing can travel faster than light, is an indication that we need to re-consider what space and time(our reality) really mean. For QE means that travelling, or at the very least, transfer of information is possible from the present to the past.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by ikabod, posted 10-03-2008 9:02 AM ikabod has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Percy, posted 10-03-2008 8:19 PM Agobot has replied

  
Legend
Member (Idle past 5005 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 51 of 118 (484968)
10-03-2008 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Agobot
10-03-2008 6:52 AM


Re: What reality?
How is that irrelevant? Explain, what are your arguments that the building blocks of our "reality" are irrelevant?
My argument is not that the building blocks of our "reality" are irrelevant. My argument is that the fact that we can't 'see' beyond a certain scale of building blocks is irrelevant..
Decoherence says what you percieve as reality is just a very very small, tiny fragment of all there is, you just don't have the apparatus to see all the states of matter/particles
Which is what I said earlier : you just need a bigger microscope!
QM tells us reality is not what we think of it.
QM tells us what reality is at a certain scale of matter. You and I as persons and don't operate in the quantum world, we operate in the gravitational and electro-magnetic world and your mobile phone behaves perfectly predictably in this world.
If and when there is a solid unified theory of everything under which your mobile exhibits some 'odd' behaviour your argument may hold some water. Even then, chances are that your observations will be a result of some holes in our knowledge rather than evidence of living in a simulation.
There is a third theory ...Then there is a fourth theory
The theories you mention are tentative to the extreme, more of hypotheses really rather than theories.
....you will discover that there are experiments which support the proposition that entangled particles "know" each of the others is present even when the distance separating the two is further than light can travel...
which in itself violates the theory of relativity!
There is a lot to be discovered but if QM and scientists are telling us that reality is not what we think of it, why would you go head against the wall and claim they are not right?
While in the same sentence you admit that there is a lot to be discovered you still expect me to believe what they claim as 'gospel' ?!
So, as per the previous paragraph, who do I believe: Einstein and Hawking or Schrdinger and his cat ?
When we have an adequate undestanding of quantum states in order to manipulate them robustly enough to repeatably produce something tangible like, say, a quantum computer then we may start thinking about simulations. Until then your argument is more of a 'Simulation of the Gaps' proposition, IMHO.
Edited by Legend, : spelling

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Agobot, posted 10-03-2008 6:52 AM Agobot has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 52 of 118 (484980)
10-03-2008 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Agobot
10-03-2008 4:42 PM


Re: Reality
Agobot writes:
What's more, quantum entanglement and its faster than light travel of information...
Information cannot be communicated using entanglement, and so there is no known method for information to travel faster than the speed of light.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Agobot, posted 10-03-2008 4:42 PM Agobot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Agobot, posted 10-04-2008 5:44 AM Percy has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 53 of 118 (484995)
10-03-2008 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Agobot
09-30-2008 6:10 PM


Prophecy faster than light communication!
the chances of us discovering that we are part of a simulation designed by god would not be good at all.
God already knew every decision your going to make in the future even before you were born and its not a simulation due God allotted you a free will meaning the decision is yours.
P.S. How can faster than light communiction not be possible given the evidence you have in prophecy. The past told thousands of years before it happened. Like Israel prophesy was it would be rerooted in the promised lands 1948 yet written thousands of years before happening. Its called prophecy God communicating the future from the past to our present point in prophetic time.
akjv rev 1:8 I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. akjv rev 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Agobot, posted 09-30-2008 6:10 PM Agobot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Huntard, posted 10-04-2008 5:01 AM johnfolton has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2294 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 54 of 118 (485008)
10-04-2008 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by johnfolton
10-03-2008 11:50 PM


Re: Prophecy faster than light communication!
johnfolton writes:
God already knew every decision your going to make in the future even before you were born and its not a simulation due God allotted you a free will meaning the decision is yours.
Yes, we all know God's a right bastard for creating people. I mean, he knew that if he'd do it terrible thing like the two world wars and the holocaust would happen, and he thought...."ah what the hell, let's do it anyway." And alloting a free will and knowing up front what someone decides takes away that free will. You KNOW what he'll do, so it's not a free will, now is it?
How can faster than light communiction not be possible given the evidence you have in prophecy.
You can't have fatser then light comunications because radiowaves travel at the speed of light. Furthermore, there is NO evidence in ANY prophecy, in fact I have yet to see ANY of them be fulfilled.
The past told thousands of years before it happened.
Would you be so kind as to point me to where this is foretold, can't seem to find it. By the way, this is off-topic here, so you might want to do it in another thread.
Like Israel prophesy was it would be rerooted in the promised lands 1948 yet written thousands of years before happening.
Really? Curiously I can't find anywhere where it says that. Sure, it talks about Israel returning and stuff, it never mentions that this will be the 1948 event.
Its called prophecy God communicating the future from the past to our present point in prophetic time.
And yet in all his wisdom he forgot to mention this chap named Hitler comming along and killing six million of his chosen people..... Nice fellow this god.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by johnfolton, posted 10-03-2008 11:50 PM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2008 3:44 PM Huntard has not replied

  
Agobot
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 55 of 118 (485009)
10-04-2008 5:44 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Percy
10-03-2008 8:19 PM


Re: Reality
Percy writes:
Information cannot be communicated using entanglement, and so there is no known method for information to travel faster than the speed of light.
Are you saying that no information is sent/communicated between the entangled particles?
Here is a test from Switzerland that finds that "signals" could travel at least 10 000 times the speed of light(or maybe it's that they don't really "travel" through what we think they do?):
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,403382,00.html
"New experiments with quantum entanglement suggest that reality might be overrated":
New experiments with quantum entanglement suggest that reality might be overrated | Ars Technica
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Percy, posted 10-03-2008 8:19 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Percy, posted 10-04-2008 7:05 AM Agobot has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 56 of 118 (485012)
10-04-2008 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Agobot
10-04-2008 5:44 AM


Re: Reality
Agobot writes:
Here is a test from Switzerland that finds that "signals" could travel at least 10 000 times the speed of light(or maybe it's that they don't really "travel" through what we think they do?):
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,403382,00.html
Fox News and other news outlets at the time implied in their reporting that Dr. Nicolas Gisin and his team at the University of Geneva believe that entangled particles may actually "communicate" with each other not instantaneously, but just at speeds much greater than the speed of light.
I don't know whether Gisin and his team actually believe this, or if it's just that the reporting is inaccurate, but by separating entangled particles by a greater distance than had ever been done before (seven miles) they were measuring the minimum speed that such "communication" must occur if it indeed does occur at a finite speed rather than instantaneously. The speed they measured turns out to equate to the accuracy with which their atomic clocks could be synchronized and their measurements made, and so the instantaneous "communication" postulated by quantum theory has not been overturned.
Whether the collapse of the wave function of one entangle particle is followed by the collapse of the other's simultaneously or just very, very quickly cannot be uncovered by any experiment since the "communication" could always happen at speeds greater than any experimental error could rule out.
I've been putting quotes around "communication" because the entangled particles do not actually communicate information. When one entangled particle's wave function collapses so does its partner's, but this phenomenon cannot be used to communicate information. This is because the state that a particle collapses to cannot be controlled.
Imagine that you and a colleague agree upon a code whereby positive polarity means "1" and negative polarity means "0". You create an entangled particle pair and give one of the particles to your colleague, you keeping the other, then your colleague goes to the other side of the earth and awaits your message.
You decide you want to send your colleague a "1". This means you have to send him positive polarity. Since the particles collapse with opposite polarity, you have to cause your particle to collapse with negative polarity. How do you observe your particle in such a way as to force it to collapse with negative polarity?
If you can answer that question than you have solved the problem of faster than light communication, but as of yet no one's been able to supply an answer.
Note that this is irrelevant to the question of whether the entangled particles collapse simultaneously or just nearly simultaneously. No matter which is the case, no information can be communicated.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar, clarity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Agobot, posted 10-04-2008 5:44 AM Agobot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Agobot, posted 10-05-2008 4:11 AM Percy has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 57 of 118 (485046)
10-04-2008 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Huntard
10-04-2008 5:01 AM


Re: Prophecy faster than light communication!
JF said: Like Israel prophesy was it would be rerooted in the promised lands 1948 yet written thousands of years before happening
Huntard said: Really? Curiously I can't find anywhere where it says that. Sure, it talks about Israel returning and stuff, it never mentions that this will be the 1948 event.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Israel's Independence; 14 May 1948 prophecied 2,500 years before Israel regained independence. Grant Jeffreys gives you the math from the bible in respect to the 1948 Israel Prophetic event!
P.S. How is prophecy not evidence of faster than light communication in the written Word telling us the end from the beginning.
akjv Isaiah 46:9-10 I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying, 'My council shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure,' "
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Bible tells us that God transcends time:
"In the beginning (time), God created the heavens (space) and the earth (matter)." Genesis 1:1
A being who created time, space, and matter must be able to operate outside these boundaries.
Does God back up this claim of transcendence?:
The Bible is full of prophecies that were fulfilled within Biblical time . A prophecy could deceptively be authored into an earlier scripture after the event has happened, so this doesn't offer any proof of transcendence to the modern day skeptic.
In 1988 a calculation was discovered in the Bible that accurately foretold the exact year of 1948 for the Independence of Israel over 2,500 years after the prophecy was made. The prophet Jeremiah around 600 BC predicted that because the Jews were turning away from God to idol worship and other Gods he would punish them for 70 years under Babylonian captivity (see: Jeremiah 25:11). It has been historically documented that this did indeed take place, but again this prophecy could have been written in the Bible after the 70 years were fulfilled.
Ezekiel, another prophet, was also alive at this time, further prophesied in Ezekiel 4:3-6 that God knew that his people still would turn away from Him. Ezekiel was given a mathematical calculation, which clearly stated the number of years that this punishment lasted would equal 430 years. When we subtract the initial 70 years of punishment from the 430 years, we end up with 360 years of punishment that has been added to the initial 70 years.
How long a Year?
It has been determined that Biblical Prophecy uses a 360 day per year rule, not 365 days per year.
See: #Y94
What happened at the end of the 360 prophetic years of punishment? The people of Israel failed to repent of their sin and disobedience again. No further words in the Bible are given on this, but Grant Jeffrey found a solution to the calculation at an earlier point in the Bible.
Leviticus 26:18 "And after all this, if you do not obey Me (God), then I will punish you seven times more for your sins."
360 prophetic years x 7 = 2520 prophetic years = 907,200 days
Independence
Working backwards from the day of Israel's Independence; 14 May 1948 A.D. and subtracting 907,200 days using the Calendar Converter, we get 15 July 0537 BC. A date when only a small percentage of the Jews returned back to Judah (What is now Israel) when released by the Persian king Cyrus. If we go back a further 70 years of 360 days (the initial time span prophesied by Jeremiah) we get 17 July 0606 B.C. The year 606 B.C. has been historically verified as the year in which Israel lost their Independence (a link for more in-depth analysis is provided later in this paper).
Grant Jeffrey, the researcher who discovered the calculation, made a slight mathematical mistake in his calculations in which the correct start year of 606 is used, but he used 70 years of 365 days-per-year for the first part of the prophecy, which throws out the rest of his calculation by one year which would have given us a final answer of 1949 and not the correct 1948 - one year off (he should have used 70 years of 360 days-per-year). I applied the 360 days to the 70 years and came up with the correct answer of 1948.
Telnet Communications - High Speed Internet & Home Phone Solutions
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Huntard, posted 10-04-2008 5:01 AM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Admin, posted 10-04-2008 5:03 PM johnfolton has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12995
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 58 of 118 (485052)
10-04-2008 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by johnfolton
10-04-2008 3:44 PM


Re: Prophecy faster than light communication!
Prophecy is way, way off-topic. Please take it to the appropriate thread.
A few days ago over at Windsor castle I expressed concerns that this thread had bypassed the thread approval process by being posted to the [forum=-14] forum. Just to make the topic clear I'm moving this to the [forum=-2] forum, which is where QM issues are usually discussed.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2008 3:44 PM johnfolton has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12995
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 59 of 118 (485055)
10-04-2008 5:03 PM


Thread moved here from the Coffee House forum.

  
Agobot
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 60 of 118 (485094)
10-05-2008 4:11 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Percy
10-04-2008 7:05 AM


Re: Reality
Percy writes:
I've been putting quotes around "communication" because the entangled particles do not actually communicate information. When one entangled particle's wave function collapses so does its partner's, but this phenomenon cannot be used to communicate information. This is because the state that a particle collapses to cannot be controlled.
Yep, the measurement problem cannot be avoided currently and information is impossible to be sent but still the entangled particles appear to conflict with the property of relativity that information cannot be transferred faster than the speed of light.
Because the topic is "simulation" and i see you've raised concerns that this topic sounded "nutty" to you, do you really believe you could explain the weirdness of the quantum world with layman logic and general everyday common sense and intuition?
Which of the following scenarios does not seem "nutty" to you and would not make you angry and force you to "report" them as eccentric and why:
1. Many(infinite) number of worlds
2. Eternal universe with infinite number of Big Bangs
3. The Universe sprang out of the uncreated.
What makes any of the above 3 more likely and logical than a simulation and why?
How could you decide if we live in a simulation or not without delving into QM and what we know as "reality"? What exactly is so wrong with that?
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Percy, posted 10-04-2008 7:05 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Percy, posted 10-05-2008 7:26 AM Agobot has not replied
 Message 62 by Percy, posted 10-05-2008 7:46 AM Agobot has replied
 Message 64 by onifre, posted 10-05-2008 1:07 PM Agobot has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024