Philosophical argument come and criticize so that I may find the gaps.

Premise 1: Virtual worlds begin with information influx from "nothing."

Premise 2: In a virtual world all event and objects are made up of a minimal quantity that cannot be reduced.

Premise 3: In a virtual world everything has a maximum rate limited by a finite processor.

Premise 4: In a virtual world space is full of processing and space as a processing network can create a 3D surface capable of curving.

Premise 5: In a virtual world time has malleable properties.

Premise 6: In a virtual world every object created by the same code is identical.

Premise 7: In a virtual world all points are the same distance from the source of their simulation.

Premise 8: In a virtual world the field of vision is the only area of that world created, everytime the field of vision changes what is being created changed.

Premise 9( revisit premise 1): The reality we observe began with information influx from a single point.

Premise 10(revisit premise 2): The reality we observe has Planck Length and Planck time.

Premise 11(revist premise 3): The reality we observe has a maximum speed, the speed of light in a vacuum.

Premise 12(revisit premise 4): The reality we observe shows that space can curve.

Premise 13(revisit premise 5): The reality we observe has malleable time based on speed and the distance from massive bodies which correlates to load effects.

Premise 14 (revisit premise 6): The reality we observe shows that all quantum particles are identical to each other.

Premise 15(revisit premise 7): The reality we observe shows that when a cesium atom releases two photons in opposite directions quantum theory will entangle them which correlates to two programs merge to run to points. One program is spin up and spin down distance doesn't matter because they are the same distance from the source.

Premise 16(revisit premise 8): The reality we observe shows when matter is observed it causes the the wave function collapse and matter gains what has been coined locality.

Premise 17: The reality we observe is a Virtual World.

Premise 18: Virtual worlds are dependent upon information processing happening outside the system.

Premise 19: A conscious mind is the system upon which this reality depends for its information input.

Now I know this is not flawless by any means. Its really just something I am kind of messing around with, but I do believe if this argument is correct and reality is virtual it will at least make the prediction that Dark energy and Dark Matter will never have particles that are found to explain them. If space is expanding in a virtual world it is the addition of new space. New processing points receive input but no output. So what we call dark energy is the addition of a new processing point therefore it receives input "new space" but outputs nothing.

'Premise 19: A conscious mind is the system upon which this reality depends for its information input.'

A conscious mind? But, as opposed to what?

An unconscious mind?

👣

a reply to: BlueMule

I suppose I could have said a consciousness..

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Well, what do you think of this.

18: Virtual worlds are dependent upon unconscious information processing and conscious information input.

👣

a reply to: BlueMule

I like that very much sir. At least at first glance. Will definitely add it to the thoughts

I like your ideas here. I'll be following this thread to see where it goes.

S&F

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Hey I must be doing good to get a compliment from you lol...

a reply to: BlueMule

I thought about what you said and Premise 18 seems to be important in order for premise 20 to logically follow.

What do you think of :

18. Virtual worlds are dependent upon unconscious information processing and a transcendent conscious information input.

As its not simply conscious input in a virtual world. Any virtual world we create, one would consider our conscious information input as both transcendent and immanent no?

Sounds like we are somehow in the same page. This kind of thought has been lately discussed in various threads.

This ones are mine.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is Hermetism revisited.

originally posted by: BlueMule
'Premise 19: A conscious mind is the system upon which this reality depends for its information input.'

A conscious mind? But, as opposed to what?

An unconscious mind?

👣

A conscious mind is what the system needs in order to function. Not just an "operator" playing sim. But an operator wanting the system to be sustainable.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Well, what do you think of this.

18: Virtual worlds are dependent upon unconscious information processing and conscious information input.

Like I said above, if the operator want the system to be sustainable, He needs to input a set of conscious information in order for the system to keep going. Input unconscious information by using conscious information.

OK I will play devil's advocate. Love it

Premise 1: Virtual worlds begin with information influx from "nothing."

Doesn't make sense. "Information" is not defined, neither "nothing". Are we talking about computers or more generic? Information cannot originate from "nothing". What is the "nothing" you talk about here?

Virtual worlds on computers "begin" with the execution of a simulation program.

Premise 2: In a virtual world all event and objects are made up of a minimal quantity that cannot be reduced.

Minimal quantity of what? Information? This premise is often false in the computer world. Many codes can be redesigned to become shorter while keeping the same function.

I think what you mean is everything (virtual and real) MAY be described with a minimum amount of information

Premise 3: In a virtual world everything has a maximum rate limited by a finite processor.

*processor speed

Premise 4: In a virtual world space is full of processing and space as a processing network can create a 3D surface capable of curving.

Doesn't make sense. Full of processing? what does this mean?

Premise 5: In a virtual world time has malleable properties.

Vague. Which properties? Do not confuse speed and time.

Premise 6: In a virtual world every object created by the same code is identical.

False. The same incremental code create always bigger numbers for example. If the code contains a condition check, the result can be different.

Premise 7: In a virtual world all points are the same distance from the source of their simulation.

Define distance and define source of simulation.

Premise 8: In a virtual world the field of vision is the only area of that world created, everytime the field of vision changes what is being created changed.

Untrue. Virtual reality doesn't need a virtual observer to exist. It can be simulated without being displayed.

Premise 9( revisit premise 1): The reality we observe began with information influx from a single point.

Untrue. The reality we observe begins as a mental construction. Imagination can create reality using existing memories. Like in dreams.

Also the big bang singularity (still not proven) wasn't a "single point" it's a classical misunderstanding. The singularity could very well be infinite.

Premise 10(revisit premise 2): The reality we observe has Planck Length and Planck time.

Meaningless. Develop your thought. Planck Length and time are not precisely defined and only theoretical.

Premise 11(revist premise 3): The reality we observe has a maximum speed, the speed of light in a vacuum.

Speed isn't a property of reality. Speed is a property of an object.

Premise 12(revisit premise 4): The reality we observe shows that space can curve.

Define space and define curve.

Premise 13(revisit premise 5): The reality we observe has malleable time based on speed and the distance from massive bodies which correlates to load effects.

Speed is a function of time, not the opposite. Also time and perception of time are not the same thing.

Premise 14 (revisit premise 6): The reality we observe shows that all quantum particles are identical to each other.

Do you mean subatomic particles? Also having similar properties and being identical is not the same thing.

Premise 15(revisit premise 7): The reality we observe shows that when a cesium atom releases two photons in opposite directions quantum theory will entangle them which correlates to two programs merge to run to points. One program is spin up and spin down distance doesn't matter because they are the same distance from the source.

You compare apples and oranges. Photons and computer programs are hardly comparable.

Premise 16(revisit premise 8): The reality we observe shows when matter is observed it causes the the wave function collapse and matter gains what has been coined locality.

Pseudo science. Matter will still exist without being observed, this can be easily proved through various experiences.

Premise 17: The reality we observe is a Virtual World.

Premise or conclusion?

Premise 18: Virtual worlds are dependent upon information processing happening outside the system.

Define system. The computer running the simulation is a part of the system so obviously the simulation doesn't depend on external information processing.

Premise 19: A conscious mind is the system upon which this reality depends for its information input.

Computer programs are part of this reality and they don't need consciousness for information input.

Heck, a bacteria can process information without consciousness.




I know the "we live in the matrix" theory is popular around here, unfortunately it's mostly pseudo science based on the misinterpretation of the holographic principle, typically because sensationalist websites declared that this principle means bull# such as "the universe is a computer simulation!".



Basically your theory and conclusion sound extremely confused, and the concepts you invoke seem to be misunderstood.


Voilà I hope you won't be too mad at me You ask for criticism and I strongly believe that a valid but constructive criticism is more valuable than a feigned admiration.

I recommend you to read more on the concepts you talk about here, and in time you will refine your theory

a reply to: Develo

Not offended at all. You critique was fair and I knew from the get go their were a lot of flaws. I tried to be as simple as possible so that I could pin point what areas needed to be defined more clearly and your post definitely helps.