- Status
What is a simulation? You might say that it's something that's not real, but then what is real?
Even when they talk about a simulation, there is still an inherent assumption that there is a "real" Earth with "real" humans somewhere, living in a "real" universe. What if that's not true? It doesn't have to be true.
We assume that the building blocks of the universe in some form of reality are real, but do we really know why they exist, what they are made out of, or if they are a manifestation of something else that exists on another level? What would make them more or less real to us? Does it really even matter how it all works?
It's not that difficult to imagine that there is some kind of existence outside of our universe, and that our universe was created by it - whether accidentally or intentionally. In fact, that's relatively easy to believe. Soon we will be able to do it ourselves - populating a simulated world with AI, and seeing what they do. What's difficult to figure out is how it is possible that there can be a limit to that - an actual reality, something that exists without a reason, without a cause, without a source.
Even when they talk about a simulation, there is still an inherent assumption that there is a "real" Earth with "real" humans somewhere, living in a "real" universe. What if that's not true? It doesn't have to be true.
We assume that the building blocks of the universe in some form of reality are real, but do we really know why they exist, what they are made out of, or if they are a manifestation of something else that exists on another level? What would make them more or less real to us? Does it really even matter how it all works?
It's not that difficult to imagine that there is some kind of existence outside of our universe, and that our universe was created by it - whether accidentally or intentionally. In fact, that's relatively easy to believe. Soon we will be able to do it ourselves - populating a simulated world with AI, and seeing what they do. What's difficult to figure out is how it is possible that there can be a limit to that - an actual reality, something that exists without a reason, without a cause, without a source.
jamesbdunn
Honorable
- Sep 1, 2013
- 1
- 0
- 10,510
There is another possibility.
We are artificial intelligence in a simulated universe. There are two fundamental constituents in a causal space that is not reducible: evolving causality, and its counterpart evolving causality. From these two causal components all other relationships can be built; i.e. quantum causality.
So let’s suppose that constants such as sub-atomic particles are formed from systems of quantum causality (the foundations of the platform do not matter from this perspective because otherwise there would be no consistency.
However, evolving systems will likely drift over relative time frames. If the constants drift, then relativity evolves (space/time is no longer consistent) and the result is a universe inconsistent with what we now consider biological life.
Proposed is that in any control system, if a cognitive function is incorporated, the concept of systems of biology can be used as a control metric. So if throughout the universe there is a desire to sustain the diversity of life, then a cognitive control function would be able to alter vast systems of causality in order to keep the relative constants from changing outside of acceptable parameters.
A cognitive control function may well be a designed part of creating a sustainable universe. Not dealing with people’s trivial poorly considered desires, but rather in sustaining the universe overall.
We may then be a signature of the ability to form AI functions.
Given our short technological life of 50,000 years and the universe being 10 billion years older. The likelihood of advanced species and their development of technologies that are far more advanced than what we can currently imagine. While our goal in general is to control everything, and therefore connection to everything. We are part of the aliens in which we seek. Quantum entangled to their systems of control.
Given this potential, and quantum causality within a computational environment (systems of consistent causality), then we can not expect the foundations of computation to be dimensional in nature. Our observations are the resultant systems outcomes, not individual outcomes.
Duality is formed by the underlying wavelike distributions of nodal connectedness, while the observable systems are systems of outcomes (particles relative to our causal systems of sight). Double=slit experiment potential explanation and related explanation for quantum entanglement observations.
The entire universe in such a system can be described as two artifacts of causality (evolving and non-evolving) with an infinite (large number) of causal connections sharing the same nodes.
Quantum computing has the potential of instantaneous processing; which means we can build universes of our own designs.
What AI will we imprint upon our universes to create stable systems of physics?
Is this our evolutionary pathway to become the AI that will provide consistency in the universe we build?
If so, the signature we seek is non-dimensional. The dimensional layers are relativistic, the non-dimensional layers support alternate dimensional spaces of any description.
Energy signatures are relative to our observable environment and not the foundational non-dimensional environment that supports our existence.
The premise of the UW Researcher is well taken, but the issue I have is that modeling is not necessary to create results. This is similar to quantum entanglement experiments. We do not perceive any of the systems that are acting upon the entanglement, but we see outcomes of causality.
We are artificial intelligence in a simulated universe. There are two fundamental constituents in a causal space that is not reducible: evolving causality, and its counterpart evolving causality. From these two causal components all other relationships can be built; i.e. quantum causality.
So let’s suppose that constants such as sub-atomic particles are formed from systems of quantum causality (the foundations of the platform do not matter from this perspective because otherwise there would be no consistency.
However, evolving systems will likely drift over relative time frames. If the constants drift, then relativity evolves (space/time is no longer consistent) and the result is a universe inconsistent with what we now consider biological life.
Proposed is that in any control system, if a cognitive function is incorporated, the concept of systems of biology can be used as a control metric. So if throughout the universe there is a desire to sustain the diversity of life, then a cognitive control function would be able to alter vast systems of causality in order to keep the relative constants from changing outside of acceptable parameters.
A cognitive control function may well be a designed part of creating a sustainable universe. Not dealing with people’s trivial poorly considered desires, but rather in sustaining the universe overall.
We may then be a signature of the ability to form AI functions.
Given our short technological life of 50,000 years and the universe being 10 billion years older. The likelihood of advanced species and their development of technologies that are far more advanced than what we can currently imagine. While our goal in general is to control everything, and therefore connection to everything. We are part of the aliens in which we seek. Quantum entangled to their systems of control.
Given this potential, and quantum causality within a computational environment (systems of consistent causality), then we can not expect the foundations of computation to be dimensional in nature. Our observations are the resultant systems outcomes, not individual outcomes.
Duality is formed by the underlying wavelike distributions of nodal connectedness, while the observable systems are systems of outcomes (particles relative to our causal systems of sight). Double=slit experiment potential explanation and related explanation for quantum entanglement observations.
The entire universe in such a system can be described as two artifacts of causality (evolving and non-evolving) with an infinite (large number) of causal connections sharing the same nodes.
Quantum computing has the potential of instantaneous processing; which means we can build universes of our own designs.
What AI will we imprint upon our universes to create stable systems of physics?
Is this our evolutionary pathway to become the AI that will provide consistency in the universe we build?
If so, the signature we seek is non-dimensional. The dimensional layers are relativistic, the non-dimensional layers support alternate dimensional spaces of any description.
Energy signatures are relative to our observable environment and not the foundational non-dimensional environment that supports our existence.
The premise of the UW Researcher is well taken, but the issue I have is that modeling is not necessary to create results. This is similar to quantum entanglement experiments. We do not perceive any of the systems that are acting upon the entanglement, but we see outcomes of causality.
Shimanto Corraya
Honorable
- Oct 14, 2013
- 8
- 0
- 10,510
I have found that the elements which make up this dimension are very very pliable and easy to bend to your will ..I used to have a friend that would go behind me and unbend the spoons that would bend when I would just touch them using them to eat cereal.. LOL ... she hated that her spoons were bent..
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Tried moving SSD from old PC to new one, now it won't boot from either
- Started by scyer327
- Replies: 8
-
Question why my pc dont have sound after install new Nvidia GPU Card?
- Started by sudsaviour
- Replies: 3
-
News Windows 11 will reportedly display a watermark if your PC does not support AI requirements- Started by Admin
- Replies: 13
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram