What are the chances that we are in a 'base reality''??

Elon Musk says ~
“There is zero chance we are in base reality”

Simulated reality? Maybe. Question is .. who or what is the quantum simulator?
An upper layer of base reality? Maybe. Question is ... do we really want to reach the lowest level?


The biggest first question to ask is what exactly a base reality, a simulation, and an objective reality are.

A base reality is the idea that there are multiple layers of reality, that progressively go deeper, until you get what reality actually is.

A simulated reality is the theory that the world is created by a quantum simulator, and thus is (to some degree) indistinguishable from actual reality.

An objective reality is the world which everyone physically experiences, and thus exists.

Living in a Base Reality - Are We In A Simulation?

originally posted by: FlyersFan

A base reality is the idea that there are multiple layers of reality, that progressively go deeper, until you get what reality actually is.

A simulated reality is the theory that the world is created by a quantum simulator, and thus is (to some degree) indistinguishable from actual reality.

An objective reality is the world which everyone physically experiences, and thus exists.

I always see it as objective reality because our brains determine what that reality is. Even a tree has a level of reality, so it is all different. Then we can change our reality with a slight change in our brain chemicals, so maybe reality is just some fluid event. The other side is that it really doesn't matter as we all will die one day and that reality that the chemicals in our brain create will be gone.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Without direct knowledge of base reality, there's no point of reference to quantify deviant or artificial reality. For example, if you were born on a generational spaceship, you have no evidence Earth ever existed without external data and thus you must assume captivity is the natural order of things and Earth is a myth like Nibiru, should the captain command it.

An objective reality is the world which everyone physically experiences, and thus exists.

What evidence do we have to conclude, not speculate but accept as fact, that this reality doesn't qualify as tangible and objective?

"As we say in the near base binary, what is infinite time but a parabolic lost sock?"

a reply to: FlyersFan

There is no way to have any proof ether we are in based reality or not. Just as you cannot prove you are not a figment of my imagination and I cannot prove I am not a figment of your imagination.

Reality is what we perceive, based or not.

a reply to: FlyersFan

He should listen to his ex's music and do some '___' haha.

Maybe he already has... I suspect we don't translate reality we interpret it. Alter the chemicals and it's all a bit different. Either way death just might be the end of it all and subjective and objective reality gives the same results in the end. As far as we know anyways.

Different dogs with different tails, same old circular chase, in other words what he said.

Yes, we live in a base reality.

If the answer was no, then we would have to accept simulation theory as truth.

Simulation theory is a psychological deception if you ask me.

My biggest problem with simulation theory is that it feels like a pseudo scientific attempt to convince plebeians that "stuff isn't real so invest in our intellectual deconstruction of fundamental reality by consuming our brands because we are smarter than you" and that just puts me off the whole dialogue because it's transparently pretentious.

Not like anyone asked but really, tell me I'm wrong.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Solipsism does my head in.

The fact is, everyone not colorblind can identify blue as blue. Showing, regardless of how it really appears, we can objectively identify the same blue.

From Quora:

Q- How is sensory input converted into something the body can understand?

A - The ‘body’ understand none of the sensory inputs; it is your mind that understands them. Your mind is your intellect, emotions and instincts. When you hear a particular sound for the first time, everything about that sound is recorded on a set of memory cells dedicated to that sound. This happens by auditory nerves triggering a set of corresponding neurons to fire which in turn cause an action potential to occur within those memory cells. Numerous other inputs such as visual clues, wind currents, sunshine or rain etc are also recorded together with that sound. If then you hear a different sound, it too is recorded on another set of memory cells and so on and so on which each different sound you hear. Each time you hear any sound, your mind checks your memory to determine if it is a sound you have heard before. It does this by discharging the action potentials for all sounds in memory causing all of the original neurons to re-fire and your mind determines if the new sound matches any of those in memory.

I guess we can be considered an analog of learning AI, but I feel AI is a technological analog of us. We have 2.5 million gigabytes of memory, which is still orders beyond the 160 terabyte benchmark HP just set. 160,000 gigs is getting closer to our memory capacity.

I really don't see metaphysical implications here, just physical ones, and a realization our sensory/neurons are very computer-like.

Like with the excerpt, you encounter a situation, you're mind recalls all this input memories and actually decides (MUCH WITHOUT YOU CONSCIOUS INPUT) how to respond.

There's a unconscious bias lag in there too..

news.ycombinator.com...

"Consider an analogy. Max struck a log with his red ax, thereby causing the log to split. If Max’s ax had been green, it would have split the log just as well. But he was under strict instructions to split wood only with red axes, and he was committed to following the instructions. If his ax had been green, he would not have used it; in fact, he would have looked for a red ax and split the log later, after he found one. In this scenario, the fact that the ax is red is causally relevant to Max’s splitting the log when he does and therefore to the actual log splitting action he performed, an action that has a specific location in time. Similarly, in the imagined experiment, the fact that at t, Sam made a conscious proximal decision to press seems to be causally relevant to his pressing when he does and therefore to the actual pressing action he performs. I should add that although we do know that, other things equal, red and green axes split wood equally well, we do not know how effective unconscious decisions are. Nor do we know whether unconscious deciding (as distinct from unconscious nonactional intention acquisition) is something that actually happens. Also, for all we know, if there are instances of unconscious deciding, they are far too rare for there to be more than a glimmer of a chance that if Sam had not made a conscious proximal decision to press at t, he would have made an unconscious one."

Put that together and it's the opposite of a base reality. It's just limitations of biology in an objective world. That we learn, commit things to memory, and form unconscuous bias that decides for us, says the acquisition of all data committed to our memory is like a blank slate that we program ourselves - from an objective world - that exists regardless of how evolved sensory organs process them.

Maybe we live in a world of constant manifestation and NOTHING is real regardless of Time, Space and Perspective because nothing can ever be labelled in a static form.

All we are and all we have, are Echos. Why do you think life isn't 100% predictable, ever?

Maybe Light Particles never know what they will hit but perhaps the Lightwaves DO as they are the "advanced party". Unfortunately, the Lightwave cannot inform/report back to the Particle once it is projected because it became detatched at birth.

Like people, a Lightwave cannot be "unborn" once it leaves the Particle.

Time = Particles = Waves = Life = Momentum + Potential x Time = .....

Life is a "SLOWBURN"

Love this topic!

And let's be real our reality can't get much more base. I know, not punny.

I have a long commute. I throw music on and just think. About the day ahead or behind. A new situation or problem.

And a lot of spiritual and philosophical debates in my head.

I believe our base reality is the world we share.

The air, water, food, our gaseous moon.

I am a Christian, and I believe our individual spiritual realities are shared on this base reality.

I believe we are all born with a burden or struggle in life. It is our life's work to identify this burden or struggle and beat it.

And that is where I believe the infinite world theory comes in. Each of us processes the relationship between our shared base reality and our individual and inner struggles differently. Those worlds we create in our mind are our own. They are infinite in number, because no two lives will be the same, including past, future, and the current 8 billion or so interacting right now. But they are each a similar variation of the base reality we share.

I obviously believe these worlds interact with each other, you and I are as you read this.

I also believe there are those who understand this fact that most don't see, and exploit it for their own gain.

I do not believe the history of the world, as we are told it.

It is the story told through the winning mic. Opossing points they may have had merit are omitted from the official story. And now with this woke bs and progressive crap coupled with AI, a written history is being changed before our eyes.

I don't believe it is a simulation, but Evil spiritual war being fought on the physical plane...our base reality.

What is reality anyway. It is a perception. Everyone knows that green is green and blue is blue because we are taught to identify a color by a word. Does everyone see the same color? I doubt it. it is possible that some people see trees as blue but they are taught that trees are green, so they believe that blue is names green and everyone sees it the same way. Shades being different is also a possibility. The color of your eyes is what light is reflected back so your eyes would be blue, but how much blue is absorbed and how much is reflected? So we see things different but we identify whatever color it is by what we are taught the name is.

That is just the start of things, we have lots of perceptions and beliefs that vary, and of course, our societies and even consumerism alters our perception to fit what a small amount of people want us to believe or interpret what we see as correct.

We are programmed to believe that a movie star is beautiful because of their features....which is just programming that steers us to believe as we are led to believe. People believe in their government and society which is also programming. We do need laws to govern society so we can live without fear, yet some governments promote fear to control us.

So if we are to define reality, where do we start? I believe in laws to keep people honest and civil and so we can all live in our societies without fear and symbiotically. Lately it is getting all messed up, seems like our government is trying to promote division in our country which results in violence and deception.

So define good and bad...If you find a twenty dollar bill while walking in the store, is that good or is it bad. It is good for you but bad for the person who dropped it. A person who steals or deceives for a living likes being able to do so, it is good for them, but bad for the one who got ripped off or conned out of what they worked hard to get.

I can't say the reality we live in is real, but it is what we have to live with. I like being honest and I like being trustworthy but I do know a lot of people who are not honest and will rip someone off at the drop of a dollar. Businesses often have salesmen who are taught to get you to buy something more than you came in there looking to buy at a higher price. I am good at fending off salespeople...but I also know that some people steer you away from buying something they know is bad too without calling the product junk and getting fired for cutting down the stores products. So how can we tell if someone is trying to con us or if they are trying to help us out....it is getting real hard these days, because people are good at deceiving and some people who are selling good products are brainwashed that more expensive is always better. They have been conditioned to believe and parrot a lie...so they are not even aware they are deceiving others.

This reality we are in could be a very advanced simulation, but from within the simulation it is almost impossible to tell if you are in one. There are clues, but unless you are aware to look for them or recognize them you will never know they exist. So because of our being programmed over generations, we cannot know what is really going on.

The closest think I can say is real in this reality is something like the Ahmish people and maybe some mesonites and some low key farm communities. But even those, they have a hard time because they need to sell things just to pay taxes and stuff.

Here is our new reality, technology is not making things easier it is making things more complex. Too much change has created a nightmare when it has changed this fast. People got their nice cushy jobs sitting at a desk, then they get health problems from that, so they go out and spend money to join an exercise place to stay healthy. I personally would rather be getting paid to get my exercise and do a job which is more interesting than sitting behind a computer. I liked social interaction, working along side others doing stuff like building things and even landscaping. I enjoyed working on the farm...except for the mosquitos and deer and horse flies of course. I would much rather swim in a lake than in a pool at a health or fitness center. So once in a while you get a leach on you jumping in a lake or get swimmers itch, but at least you do not smell like chlorine when you get home.

We are being programmed by consumerism pretty much here in America, make that money move around and congregate in the pockets of the rich. Remember, that store you go to isn't usually bad, a lot of people make money on that product between the time it leaves China and gets to the stores loading dock.

I sure hope we are living in a simulation because what I have been seeing the last decade is not what I consider good, but again this is my opinion and not the opinion of a politician or industry getting rich off of us common people. The stock market is a gambling institution. Stock is not a true representation of the business these days. So where do we draw the line of what is real or not real?

For some, self-delusion may be more pleasant than facing reality. A person who imagines things are the way he would like them to be, instead of facing them the way they really are, is not reasoning on the facts, but is building on fancy. His powers of discernment are clouded.

Those who ignore the facts and delude themselves with fancy are like the proverbial ostrich that hides his head in the sand when danger nears. However, the realist recognizes that such ostrich exists in fables only, not in fact! The ostrich of reality does not ignore the fact of danger. He does not hide his head in the sand. To the contrary, he moves away from the source of potential harm so rapidly that few animals can keep up with him when he is in full flight.

Dreamers are like that proverbial ostrich. They hide their heads in the sands of self-deception and fancy when situations arise that demand a realistic facing of the facts, and actions based on those facts. Such fancy is as profitless as believing the earth to be square in spite of the overwhelming proof against such a conclusion; or like believing two plus two equals five, when the facts of mathematics show this is not the case.

“For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.” (2 Timothy 4:3,4)

“So we should no longer be children, tossed about as by waves and carried here and there by every wind of teaching by means of the trickery of men, by means of cunning in deceptive schemes.” (Ephesians 4:14)

Whether that "teaching" is about the so-called "simulation theory" or what is called "base reality" in the OP and as explained there (both unverified philosophies/ideas; the 2nd one especially being rather vague, it could mean different things to different people depending on how they interpret the term or what is said about it). Just like the word "nothing", the word "reality" is not difficult to understand, it's a simple term. If you use it as a noun, as in "a reality", then it's a synonym for "a truth", "a fact" and "a certainty". And thus unaffected by our opinions and ideas/philosophies about them, just like truth in general.

“What Is Truth?”

...

Pilate’s reply was a memorable question: “What is truth?” (John 18:38) Did he really want an answer? Probably not. Jesus was the kind of man who could answer any question asked of him in sincerity, but he did not answer Pilate. And the Bible says that after asking his question, Pilate walked straight out of the audience chamber. The Roman governor likely asked the question in cynical disbelief, as if to say, “Truth? What is that? There is no such thing!”* [According to Bible scholar R. C. H. Lenski, Pilate’s “tone is that of an indifferent worldling who by his question intends to say that anything in the nature of religious truth is a useless speculation.”]

Pilate’s skeptical view of truth is not uncommon today. Many believe that truth is relative​—in other words, that what is true to one person may be untrue to another, so that both may be “right.” This belief is so widespread that there is a word for it​—“relativism.” Is this how you view the matter of truth? If so, is it possible that you have adopted this view without thoroughly questioning it? Even if you have not, do you know how much this philosophy affects your life?

An Assault on Truth

Pontius Pilate was hardly the first person to question the idea of absolute truth. Some ancient Greek philosophers made the teaching of such doubts virtually their life’s work! Five centuries before Pilate, Parmenides (who has been considered the father of European metaphysics) held that real knowledge was unattainable. Democritus, hailed as “the greatest of ancient philosophers,” asserted: “Truth is buried deep. . . . We know nothing for certain.” [whereislogic: sound familiar? Here's another version of that philosophy and opinion, as misapplied and connected to the term "science" from the Latin scientia meaning "knowledge", a familiarity with facts/truths/realities/certainties, in this popular slogan and all its variations: "... there is no such thing as absolute certainty in science ..." (Alexander Vilenkin).] Perhaps the most revered of them all, Socrates, said that all that he really knew was that he knew nothing.

This assault on the idea that truth can be known has continued down to our day. Some philosophers, for instance, say that since knowledge reaches us through our senses, which can be deceived, no knowledge is verifiably true. French philosopher and mathematician René Descartes decided to examine all the things he thought he knew for certain. He discarded all but one truth that he deemed incontrovertible: “Cogito ergo sum,” or, “I think, therefore I am.”

A Culture of Relativism

Relativism is not limited to philosophers. It is taught by religious leaders, indoctrinated in schools, and spread by the media. Episcopal bishop John S. Spong said a few years ago: “We must . . . move from thinking we have the truth and others must come to our point of view to the realization that ultimate truth is beyond the grasp of all of us.” . . .

In many lands the school systems seem to engender a similar type of thinking. Allan Bloom wrote in his book The Closing of the American Mind: “There is one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of: almost every student entering the university believes, or says he believes, that truth is relative.” Bloom found that if he challenged his students’ conviction on this matter, they would react with astonishment, “as though he were calling into question 2 + 2 = 4.”

The same thinking is promoted in countless other ways. ... [whereislogic: such as by those who are confusing people about the terms "reality", "nothing", or "science".]

Of course, some might argue that much of this relativism represents open-mindedness and therefore has a positive impact on human society. Does it really, though? And what about its impact on you? Do you believe that truth is relative or nonexistent? If so, searching for it may strike you as a waste of time. Such an outlook will affect your future.

Why Search for Truth?

MANY religious organizations claim to have the truth, and they offer it eagerly to others. However, between them they offer a dizzying profusion of “truths.” Is this just another evidence that all truths are relative, that there are no absolute truths? No.

In his book The Art of Thinking, Professor V. R. Ruggiero expresses his surprise that even intelligent people sometimes say that truth is relative. He reasons: “If everyone makes his own truth, then no person’s idea can be better than another’s. All must be equal. And if all ideas are equal, what is the point in researching any subject? Why dig in the ground for answers to archeological questions? Why probe the causes of tension in the Middle East? Why search for a cancer cure? Why explore the galaxy? These activities make sense only if some answers are better than others, if truth is something separate from, and unaffected by, individual perspectives.”

In fact, no one really believes that there is no truth. When it comes to physical realities, such as medicine, mathematics, or the laws of physics, even the staunchest relativist will believe that some things are true. Who of us would dare to ride in an airplane if we did not think that the laws of aerodynamics were absolute truths? Verifiable truths do exist; they surround us, and we stake our lives on them.
...

originally posted by: FlyersFan
A base reality is the idea that there are multiple layers of reality, that progressively go deeper, until you get what reality actually is.

"progressively go deeper" seems like an odd word choice. I guess it seems that way to me because of the idea that "base reality" is bigger, you don't go deeper or focus on a smaller area to see the bigger picture. You actually have to let go of the the focus and step back to see the bigger picture.

A simulated reality is the theory that the world is created by a quantum simulator, and thus is (to some degree) indistinguishable from actual reality.

An objective reality is the world which everyone physically experiences, and thus exists.

These two are not mutually exclusive. There is no reason why those in a simulated reality wouldn't also be experiencing a reality where everyone experiences the same physical reality.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
My biggest problem with simulation theory is that it feels like a pseudo scientific attempt to convince plebeians that "stuff isn't real so invest in our intellectual deconstruction of fundamental reality by consuming our brands because we are smarter than you" and that just puts me off the whole dialogue because it's transparently pretentious.

Not like anyone asked but really, tell me I'm wrong.

I'm watching you! Only because I like your insights.

a reply to: rickymouse

The whole color thing is an interesting one, but not so much for it's possible subjectivness, but more for the mechanism behind colors.

If you know how light works, you know that a yellow lemon actually is everything but yellow. The yellow you see is the only wavelengths that don't get absorbed by the lemon...

If you would see the lemon in its vibrant reality, you'd realize it's actually all but yellow.

Our eyes are rooting us in a world of reflections, we can never see the thing we look at, only what it reflects back at us.

Once you realize this very fundamental mechanism of this reality you get a chance to "see" beyond sight...

Clearly none of you have done mushrooms. The brain filters reality, we are tuned to only experience a portion of it. Consciousness in turn and our emotions filter or define our reality further. One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.

originally posted by: daskakik
"progressively go deeper" seems like an odd word choice.

I'm just quoting the article.
I barely understand this.
It's really fascinating.
I wish they had a 'reality for dummies' book.

a reply to: FlyersFan

You're not alone, if you claim to objectively know, you're just another fool.

Our technology has always inspired new philosophical theories about our reality.

The Advent of computer simulation with some fundamental discoveries in quantum mechanics has opened the door wide for this new philosophical paradigm.

The search for this intangible truth is as old as humanity itself, we always came up with new more adequate theories on what that intangible reality is comprised of. All religions have their roots in those philosophical questions.
They are institutionalized ideas and philosophies, why they often struggle or decay when new proofs about our reality arise...

But there is no way anyone rooted in this vibrational state can proof anything beyond their experience of it. At times I feel like the discourse is futile, or for some even dangerous. Not having anything to root yourself in as the truth is very disconcerting.
Then again if you listen with an open mind and the aim to include all accounts and not dismiss any, you might find correlations among all the subjective accounts of said intangible reality. Which i find to be very solid and applicable to narrow it down and navigate it.

There seems to be a purposefully placed inhibitor that always roots our frequency back to our body, glimpses can be obtained but they never go beyond the subjectively proofable.

Has been like that since the dawn of linear time perception...

a reply to: FlyersFan

I have the new Mandela Effect thread. I found this guy while looking up lost or changed memories. It's pretty good.
[Youtube]Zy91V-aC5GDrCWjd[/youtube]

Meh, forgot had to add youtube videos. . .

Donald Hoffman