Here's the Real Explanation of ET -- Not What You're Expecting

reply to post by RedDragon


Okay well I think you are wrong with your maths, or rather you are leaving out important parts of your equation... Please correct me if I'm wrong.... So think of it like winning the lottery. You buy 1 ticket, what are the chances of winning? I know the chances are very slim, not quite 1 vs infinity but very very slim indeed... So lets say there was 1 planet (like the one lottery ticket) I think your equation would be right... But we already know there is quite a few more than one planet! Lol

So you can liken that to having more than one lottery ticket... More than 1 possibility to win/create life...

Now what are the chances of winning the lottery if you have an infinite number of individual tickets? Isn't your equation then reversed? And you would be guaranteed to win? So imagine there are an infinite number of planets, what does that do to your equation? Even if the number is not infinite the vastness of the ammount of planets would surely effect your equation... Would it not?

Seems to me like you bent the data to suit your theory.

Edit: I see what you did, by mentioning reality you manipulated the result... So what is reality? It is something we observe right? Or things that we observe to be correct... Like peter pan does not exist in reality, he is just a fiction made up by humans. Unless you can show me peter pan and I can observe him flying and not getting older and what not... If you could then I would have to admit peter pan now exists in reality...

So reality is something that we an observe and prove... Now if you had another life form on another planet which had no contact with us they would have their own reality! Would they not? They have not obervered us yet so our realities havent merged yet. Making them 2 distinct realities... Of course I am speculating that this other life exists... BUT using your logic there is near infinite planets and possibilities of life the chances are more in favour of there being life than not, right?

So it throws off your assumption that there is only 1 reality, doesnt it?

Originally posted by antar
I have seen them, they are live and just as much a part of the physical world as we are.

personally..

I think what people are expercing/expericed are holograms, very sophisitcated/extreme high-tech ones however..not what us earthlings have come to know.. some on the lvl of STNG

There's only 1 real reality

reply to post by RedDragon

yes that is right there can only be one, the rest are extensions of the one.But that doesn't make the extension not one. They are parts of the one, just take this analogy. A mother 44 years old with an adult mind gives birth to a child with an infantile mind. It hasn't reached the age of the mother so it is not the same. If the mother is one, and the child is 0.1 it is not as real as the mother. But its true potential is to be so, so what I am saying is that there is a potential in a simulation to become one.What comes out of 1 can at some point become one, it is not a guarantee but it is possible. But if one does not believe it to be so and does nothing to grow in to one it will not be so. A simulation will stay as a simulation. Something pointless without a true direction.

reply to post by RedDragon


Somebody's been watch the Matrix Trilogy over the weekend!

reply to post by RedDragon


We don't see other alien species because The Inhibitors stop them getting here.

Most of his books take place in the ''Revelation Space'' universe, where by the 26th century humans have achieved slower-than-light interstellar travel, and find themselves needing to discover why all the other intelligent species they find evidence of seem to have gone mysteriously extinct.

Originally posted by RedDragon


But we know that even with current technology, we'd populate the entire galaxy in a few hundred million years tops just going from star to star using slow multi-generation spaceships. So, if they exist all then they have to be already here; we'd already be there. That means.. something is stopping them from making contact. Or they don't exist.

Helios 2 reached 150,000mph traveling towards the Sun even at that speed the nearest star is 19,000 years away it would take a LOT longer to populate the Galaxy than you think at that speed its about 475M years to cross the galaxy without stopping, 200–400 billion stars in our Galaxy you are well out!

reply to post by RedDragon

You could design the simulation to do whatever you want to do. What are you trying to say?

What I'm 'trying to say' is that the world we live in is detailed and complex beyond our ability to fully conceive it all. I personally regard the simulation theory as a 'dumbing down' of what is actually something far more nuanced and interesting.

A question.

Would your 'simulation' exist in a physical reality somewhere? If so, I regard the idea as adding unnecessary layers of complexity. If physical reality exists to contain this supposedly 'simulated' reality, then why can't this just be a physical reality in the first place?

The simulation idea is very old. Ancient Indian texts suggest that we're living in a simulation (of course it doesn't use those words, but words of that time when brought to modern context indicate a simulation by modern terms). It's a possibility. I also like the idea about the mechanical nature of any possible visitors, I've thought about it myself. That's how we will be exploring the galaxy.

this century hopefully and computers will exceed human intelligence trillion-folds and more.

the biggest smartest computer now or in the future will never come close to the complex nature of the human brain

our brains consist of over 100 billion nerve cells ....The complexity of the connectivity between these cells is mind-boggling. Each neuron can make contact with thousands or even tens of thousands of others, via tiny structures called synapses. Our brains form a million new connections for every second of our lives. The pattern and strength of the connections is constantly changing and no two brains are alike.

It is in these changing connections that memories are stored, habits learned and personalities shaped, by reinforcing certain patterns of brain activity, and losing others.

yes a computer can calculate quicker than our brains but that's because it has been programmed to do so ..hell even a monkey can do problem solving better than a human in certain situations

our brains or so complex any computer trying to simulate a human brain would fry it self under the work load
not to mention the storage space needed been as the human brain is infinite

reply to post by RedDragon


Here is a possibility why ET's could travel to earth very easily... or us to them.

Time travel - Link: www.huffingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by RedDragon
1) Why is ET not physically here? Radio-wise, duh of course they won't be using radio. That's the interstellar equivalent of intercontintentally sending messages in bottles over the ocean.

Maybe this argument doesnt work.
Humans still like to throw messages in bottles into the sea.
Humans still like to use an awfully large amount of "outdated" things for entertainment purposes.

We have cars, but many still use horses for recreation.
We have guns, but many people still play with swords.
We have the internet, but many still use morse code to communicate.
We have internal combustion engines, but many still operate steam engines.
etc...
Record players, Antique cars, Sailing ships, old WW1 biplanes, and many more, all kept alive by humans who choose to use them for recreation purposes as opposed to practicality or efficiency.

Given how outright technologically simple, lightweight and easy "radio" technology is, you have to therefore assume that aliens either...
1. - are forbidden to use it.
2. - have no interest / curiosity in old technology, like humans do.
3. - dont exist.

Maybe number 2?

If this is true then whats to say ET didn't make the simulation of the universe to travel around. Knowing it would take to long to travel the whole universe and every planet, they make a simulation of it and can jump in and out like a virtual reality machine. And they just havn't been here. 1. because there more interesting places in the universe than earth and 2. because they may not have just got round to here yet.

I find it hard to think that nothing has been here though, if they haven't our govts have machines that we don't know of.
Like machines that are made of light.

reply to post by RedDragon


your views assert that the laws of physics that we use are correct and definitive. However a biological being could theoretically travel these distances if that being had the ability to travel faster than light, either by propulsion or by using an Einstein-Rosen bridge. your views are correct if ET was ruled by the same laws of physics as we are, which if they have had the ability to reach earth, they most definitely do not.

Originally posted by RestlessNRG
reply to post by RedDragon

 

your views assert that the laws of physics that we use are correct and definitive. However a biological being could theoretically travel these distances if that being had the ability to travel faster than light, either by propulsion or by using an Einstein-Rosen bridge. your views are correct if ET was ruled by the same laws of physics as we are, which if they have had the ability to reach earth, they most definitely do not.

I'm saying they're not going to be biological because 'natural' selection will select against it, not because of any laws of physics.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by RedDragon

 

You could design the simulation to do whatever you want to do. What are you trying to say?

What I'm 'trying to say' is that the world we live in is detailed and complex beyond our ability to fully conceive it all. I personally regard the simulation theory as a 'dumbing down' of what is actually something far more nuanced and interesting.

A question.

Would your 'simulation' exist in a physical reality somewhere? If so, I regard the idea as adding unnecessary layers of complexity. If physical reality exists to contain this supposedly 'simulated' reality, then why can't this just be a physical reality in the first place?

All simulations must exist in the real reality. This is a physical reality. We really do exist in the real universe. However, our entire universe is just some notches on a storage device. We exist in the same sense your character exists when you play a video game. But you're right about one thing; there are several layers. Not only are we a simulation, we are almost definitely a simulation inside of a simulation inside of a...

When we create our simulations, beings inside of them will make their own, who will make their own.. We're somewhere in the chain of beings that have already done this.
If you're actually smart enough to escape this simulation, you probably just escaped to one level higher out of an amount of levels that decascades upwards.

If all simulations have the same number of simulations (law of large numbers makes this a valid assumption) then the amount of simulations at each level is represented by a pyramid. You could calculate the amount of simulations at each level as 2^(L-1), where L = level.




Actually, if you could somehow get an estimate of size of any layer of this pyramid, you could use that to get an approximation of how many layers deep we are. The complexity/ size of any simulation on average is going to be the square-root of the level above it. Just make an inverse of the 2^(L-1) with whatever you determine on complexity and you have now calculated how many layers deep we are.

reply to post by RedDragon


Your theory relies on a set of premises which are flawed therefore making your entire theory flawed.

For starters ‘Sentience’ and intelligence/computing power are not the same thing. While they rely to a certain degree on each other, they are still describing two distinct things. Sentience is self awareness. No matter how many trillion calculations per second your super computer beings can make, do you really think a computer will ever ‘be aware’ of its own existence as a distinct being? Will your computers ever experience humor or sadness? Sure you can program them to ‘laugh’ or act sad given a certain set of stimuli, but will that computer ever feel sad or happy.? I don’t think so, which in turn means a computer will never imho become a sentient being by itself.

At any rate we will never become irrelevant to a supercomputer because it is simply a tool, a machine, built to serve us. It has no sense of what is or isn’t relevant except when it comes to doing what it is programmed to do. And it is humans which will be doing the programming.

Given the choice, would you completely replace your own body with that of a computer if it meant losing your identity as you? I doubt it. Sure they may be able to transfer your memories over to this machine, but all you’ll have then is essentially a highly intelligent robot containing a nonstop recording of your entire life as experience through the senses. But you are more than the sum of simply your experiences as channeled through your genetic personality’s disposition.

This is why aliens in all probability do exist in the flesh and is also probably why some people have seen them. I’m quite sure any beings capable of actually visiting Earth would also have the capabilities to remain hidden.

As to why they haven’t revealed themselves to us on a large scale who knows. But if I were an advanced being looking at the state of global affairs today I’d want to remain hidden as well.

Your simulation mathematics is completely ridiculous. You think that just because there are an infinite possible ways this universe could have turned out (assuming this is in anyway true) that our odds of actually existing outside a simulation is one over infinity? That is the stupidest thing I’ve read all week…sorry. There is absolutely no logical sequence as to how you came to this conclusion. You haven’t even explained why a simulation would exist in the first place or why if one did we’d exist within it.

Lastly, your mosquito/transcending the simulation example is also crazy. For starters you are not escaping a simulation by manipulating objects within it according to the rules the simulation has laid down. Unless you learn to fly or walk through walls you still exist within the simulation and the laws within it that govern what is and isn’t possible…. no matter how may mosquitoes your torch attracts. Secondly even if a super computer could manipulate us to do what it wants… it has no ‘wants’ cos it is simply a machine. Its ‘wants’ are governed by the programming of an actual sentient being such as a flesh and blood human.

I appreciate a well-argued post, however:

Originally posted by RedDragon
..
My personal opinion is that we're living in a simulation. ..

Why?

It's easier for you to grasp a simulation than reality? Step away from your computer mate.

Btw., who created the universe that the guys who created the simulation that houses our simulated universe, lives in? You see, you're just pushing the bigger questions in fornt of you, while adding more unlikely elements to the equation. Thus your proposition is even harder to get one's head around than reality.

reply to post by RedDragon


I think therefor i am.

Its not mine but i believe it fits.

Originally posted by RedDragon
We don't see aliens because our simulation doesn't include them.

Isn't there a DLC to include 10 alien species?

Implying of course that the little green guys are even extraterrestrial at all.