My concerns are not of this world - thoughts on Simulation Theory; Mandela Effect & Flat Earth.

Ahh yes, the Jupiter brain theory, look it up if you want to.. quite fascinating.

What if just everything is Maya (Illusion), the way it works is that you come to this world, pure, from birth till death you are bombarded with all kinds of impulses which alter the very structure of your brain, which make you change your perception. The newly found perception reinforces Maya, maintaining the Illusion, but going deeper down the rabbit hole. You will notice things that acknowledge your Maya, further increasing the set timeline for you as a being.

It's not for nothing they say, try have three positive thoughts for every negative one. What we call reality is a hallucination generated by a billions of brains in tune one a specific set of Maya, which we all agree upon.
People that think differently and search other way will experience things the 'regular' people do not experience, and which is not of their world because of that. If that is a complete illusion I do not know, maybe these experiences only become availlable to the people who open up to it. Is it real? Maybe, atleast for you as experiencer.

If you look at how the media plays people, in no time you have a whole lot of people believing something, akin to predictive programming, they program your unconcious brain to manifest the conscious and reality that they wish but manipulating your creative energy, as we are creator beings, but we give our energy to 'false gods' and 'world leaders'.

I'm not saying there is or isn't a god, I do believe there is a source of energy with an unlimited amount of expressions, I wouldn't go to deep down the rabbit hole, even if it does not create a bad situation for you, your perception of the world will be bad and you will feel bad because of it.

My advice: Do what you do best, if you believe you are a good person and like to help people. Spread positivity. Not conspiracy theories, even though they need to be heard too, to get a full view from the reality as we experience it collectively.

I do believe we are in some form of simulation.

I believe in an energy consciousness.

I think some choose to be here, choose their challenges, and choose how much free will and how much is controlled.

I don’t think everyone is here by choice.

Does it matter if its a simulation? Define life. Define simulation. You still feel, and you still influence.

The question is still the same isn’t it?

Why?

a reply to: wdkirk

Maybe that's what drives consciousness. The everlasting pursuit of that which cannot be obtained.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Luttsy

I didn't know we had experiments which could detect rotation or movement of the Earth?

Here you go


This 'experiment' is repeated daily

a reply to: Vector99

That not detecting motion. The camera remains stationary.

I hadn’t seen an experiment which could directly detect the Earth rotation or motion.

I’ve seen attempts to frame the motion of the Earth such as stellar aberration, parallax and the Doppler effect however when factoring relativity you can explain these observations using a stationary Earth as an inertial reference frame.

The ring laser gyros are the first time I’ve seen an instrument capable of measuring tilt and spin.

a reply to: Grenade

The Coriolis effect is the deflection of a projectile caused by the Earth's rotation. Typically a projectile will have to travel over 1000 yd (915 m) to observe the Coriolis effect. When using artillery and Naval guns, the Coriolis effect is observable. The accuracy of a shell is dependent on correct calculations of the Coriolis effect. With small arms the Coriolis effect tends to be minor while the spin drift plays a greater role.

The Coriolis effect is at its maximum at the North and South poles and negligible at the Earth's equator because of the angular velocity of the Earth's rotation. It tends to be important in arctic warfare scenarios as you are closer to the poles.

The Coriolis effect was conceived by the French scientist Gaspard-Gustave Coriolis in 1835.

guns.fandom.com...

“ The Coriolis effect was conceived by the French scientist Gaspard-Gustave Coriolis in 1835.”

Shrugs….

a reply to: neutronflux

Again it’s a indirect calculation not a direct measurement.

Tbh it’s not something I’ve put much research into. Happy to learn from others who have.

As far as I was aware we couldn’t detect motion of the Earth through space. Cheers for enlightening me.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: neutronflux

Again it’s a indirect calculation not a direct measurement.

In that it’s an actual calculation the results in increasing accuracy of real life items like battle ship gunner and used for weather modeling.

What is the Coriolis effect?

The Earth's rotation means that we experience an apparent force known as the Coriolis force. This deflects the direction of the wind to the right in the northern hemisphere and to the left in the southern hemisphere. This is why the wind-flow around low and high-pressure systems circulates in opposing directions in each hemisphere.

www.metoffice.gov.uk...

Is there a more accurate system of modeling weather patterns that ignores the rotation of the earth?

a reply to: neutronflux

I’m not debating the “apparent” force. I was debating our ability to measure it directly.

Again, thanks for the info 👍

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: neutronflux

I’m not debating the “apparent” force. I was debating our ability to measure it directly.

Again, thanks for the info 👍

Are you saying it’s effect on naval gunnery and “ deflects the direction of the wind to the right in the northern hemisphere and to the left” cannot be “measured”?

a reply to: Grenade

Did you see that big glowy thing? That's the sun, it travels from one side to the other. So either the earth is rotating, or its sitting completely stationary with everything revolving around it.

If it's stationary and everything revolves around it, then we need to figure out how it is that we can see Venus and Mercury both in front of, and behind the sun. If everything revolves around Earth, it wouldn't make much sense that Venus and Mercury revolve around the sun, which they would absolutely have to be doing so be able to see them both in front of and behind the sun.

Fun fact, since we know the diameter of earth, and have created measurement units such as time and velocity, we can accurately determine the speed the earth rotates!

a reply to: Vector99

Calculating, measuring and detecting are not the same thing. I don’t think you even understand relative motion based on your last post so please don’t patronise me.

a reply to: neutronflux

I’m not saying that at all.

Please read the following:

en.m.wikipedia.org...

I agree the Earth is rotating, I agree it’s orbiting the sun and I agree it’s an oblate spheroid.

Can people please read each poster individually and stop casting aspersions onto folk.

My point is more eloquently described here:

“ All of these phenomena demonstrate Earth's motion relative to other objects. It is important to note that according to the theory of relativity, we can always move to a reference frame in which the Earth is not moving--i.e., its "inertial" reference frame. So it is technically possible to define a reference frame in which the Earth does not move, while the Sun, planets, and stars orbit around the Earth, but making this reference frame consistent with our observations of Doppler shift and parallaxes would be very complicated. It is much simpler to explain our observations in a reference frame where the Earth does move, and Occam's razor directs us, as scientists, to use the simplest explanation whenever possible. ”

curious.astro.cornell.edu...

Simulation is literally not the only model that explains observable reality. There's the perfectly workable model that has the Earth, along with the other planets in our solar system, orbiting a sun as part of a galaxy amongst a bunch of other galaxies.

The mechanics of that model work perfectly well.

Planes reference their height above the ground beneath them using air pressure and/or radar. They plot courses with compass bearings. They take on fuel loads based on distance on a globe, not some flat projection. They don't have to make constant adjustments because that's not how flying works.

The fact that you can't remember which James Bond film has the famous teeth scene should tell you how unreliable human memory is.

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
Recent years gave us the Mandela Effect & Flat Earth conspiracies – what are the implications?

Recent years you say?

from Wiki

The flat Earth model is an archaic conception of Earth's shape as a plane or disk. Many ancient cultures subscribed to a flat Earth cosmography, including Greece until the classical period (323 BC), the Bronze Age and Iron Age civilizations of the Near East until the Hellenistic period (31 BC), India until the Gupta period (early centuries AD), and China until the 17th century.

Flat Earth was debunked in antiquity...

a reply to: Grenade

Playing devil's advocate to a former poster's observation, if we are fixed in place with a stationary inertial reference frame, there is no reason why we could not observe an illusion surrounding our environment which is such that we can observe the apparent orbits around the sun of the other planets in our apparent solar system. As I mentioned, the potential reality of flat earth is based upon an Earth/Heavens illusion of vast complexity & weird geometry. The fact that our astronomical observations seem to demonstrate a universe which is organic, based around the scattering of stars in a galaxy with planets revolving around them, does not discount the fact that this could be a complex & deliberately mind-bending illusion rendered by a computing machine of immense processing power. And nobody has responded to the actual weirdness surrounding NASA, for example, which appears to demonstrate that there is a conspiracy of silence in that organisation, and in other space-faring agencies the world over. Astronomer's instruments can be deceived by the illusion, but when we venture into space itself, the illusion would become terrifyingly apparent, and the entire edifice of planetary/space exploration would be locked down in a cult of secrecy which is tighter than the proverbial.....

Listen everyone, I would be remarkably happy if the planetary model can be sufficiently & unequivocably proven by debunking every single one of the oddities highlighted by the 'research flat earth' movement over the past few years. I would be equally happy if the Mandela Effect had never entered my conscious awareness, if I did not perceive directly hundreds of the noted effects discovered by consciousness explorers over the past few years. But the problem is, these two anomalous subject areas have me deeply unnerved, and it is only possible that they could have any measure of reality, if our environment itself were a total & complete simulation which can be edited by the controller/s of the rendering machine/s.

The comment about Maya makes a degree of sense - perhaps we ourselves drift into an alternative reality as we give attention & question the apparent weirdness, anomalies, paradoxes & seeming conspiracies. Perhaps our collective reality is a consensus illusion, but by choosing to focus on occulted matters, we are activating some sort of manipulation of the local fabric of the illusion. M'eh, it truly is baffling. I sincerely hope I can convinced myself particularly of the planetary model, whereas the Mandela Effect is immutable, like riding a bike - once you've perceived the Effects, you can't put the cork back in that bottle. What this means from an ontological perspective, I am unsure - but I pray I can figure it out & resolve the questions to a reasonable degree of certainty & solidity of perception.

Flat-earth is the default way of thinking for cavemen and children. Those that are diligent enough to want to understand the heavens, can learn the truth about our reality and apply this knowledge to things like farming.

Mandela effect is a psychological deception that preys on people's inability to accurately remember certian details about the past. It uses cherry picked instances in attempts to convince.

Simulation theory is the most convincing of the three for two reasons.
1. Stimulations seek to reproduce reality.
2. Reality operates within natural laws that are consistent throughout the universe.

Believing any three of these can disadvantage a person in a number of ways. People that fall for false beliefs about reality and more likely to have difficulties finding good employment and keeping good friends. To believe that one's reality is somehow controlled or manipulated by other beings, is in itself a psychological manipulation that creates fear and doubt over reality the future, instead of the empowerment that comes from knowing and acting upon the fact that we have the most control over our realities and futures.

Some people will not only, not throw pearls to the swine, some people will actually throw poisons (deceptios) to the swine (ignorant, lazy, gulible people), in attempts to keep the swine down through being disadvantaged.