zep73 Posted August 5, 2018 Author #426 Share Posted August 5, 2018 1 hour ago, danydandan said: What's the Sims? The Sims Official Website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarMountainKid Posted August 5, 2018 #427 Share Posted August 5, 2018 So, in this simulated universe, what about free will? What parameters are pre-determined? Are there any parameters set to pre-determine outcomes? In other words, is there a plan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 5, 2018 #428 Share Posted August 5, 2018 28 minutes ago, sci-nerd said: The Sims Official Website. Well.......... That's the saddest thing I've ever seen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 5, 2018 Author #429 Share Posted August 5, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, danydandan said: Well.......... That's the saddest thing I've ever seen. Not a gamer myself. I find games trivial and banal. Pointless. But it is the first attempt to simulate human life, although it is very simple and limited. I think the game itself is nearly 20 years old. Edited August 5, 2018 by sci-nerd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted August 5, 2018 #430 Share Posted August 5, 2018 1 hour ago, sci-nerd said: Not a gamer myself. I find games trivial and banal. Pointless. But it is the first attempt to simulate human life, although it is very simple and limited. I think the game itself is nearly 20 years old. You're certainly right when it comes to the Sims. Completely pointless. But I enjoyed the Zelda games very much. Problem with games is they steal your life. Harte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 5, 2018 #431 Share Posted August 5, 2018 4 hours ago, sci-nerd said: Not a gamer myself. I find games trivial and banal. Pointless. But it is the first attempt to simulate human life, although it is very simple and limited. I think the game itself is nearly 20 years old. Board games are fun and educational. I recently read an interesting article detailing that 'gamers' ( I'm a big RPG gamer) are generally more morally considerate than non gamers also that in certain cases gamers are better at certain hand eye coordination activities. So calling them trivial and banal I think is incorrect. You should play a game called Detroit Become Human it's incredible storytelling at it's finest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 5, 2018 Author #432 Share Posted August 5, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, danydandan said: So calling them trivial and banal I think is incorrect. No no, not them as in the players! I mean the games themselves. From my POV. My daughter is a big fan of the Detroit game. Edited August 5, 2018 by sci-nerd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 6, 2018 #433 Share Posted August 6, 2018 (edited) 15 hours ago, sci-nerd said: No no, not them as in the players! I mean the games themselves. From my POV. My daughter is a big fan of the Detroit game. I know you meant the game, I also meant the games. They can do the same thing as books and movies, they have the ability to expand your knowledge, work your brain and help your creativity. The games that I have issues with are the mindless repetitive ones. The makers of the Detroit game have made some great story driven games that would put most movie and book writers to shame. Edited August 6, 2018 by danydandan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edenlog Posted August 7, 2018 #434 Share Posted August 7, 2018 On 8/5/2018 at 1:56 AM, Rlyeh said: None of this shows the universe is a brain or behaves as one. I am not trying to prove anything, I am merely sharing my point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edenlog Posted August 7, 2018 #435 Share Posted August 7, 2018 (edited) On 8/5/2018 at 8:49 AM, StarMountainKid said: So, in this simulated universe, what about free will? What parameters are pre-determined? Are there any parameters set to pre-determine outcomes? In other words, is there a plan? I think yes and no, the pre-determined nature of reality are the laws of physics, or the inherent way 'objects of existence' behave and their own unique makeup. While the outcome of these laws interacting is not set. For example, we can see this in biological creatures, they have a set makeup that keeps them from forming into another species, yet at the same time this is not always a perfect outcome due to genetic mutations. A plan would be the objects in existence , the parameters of change are the way these interact and human intelligence can discern different modes of interaction to generate a specific outcome. Because human thought is rooted in duality, duality being a law of nature, to think this or that is only half the picture, I personally will make a conscious effort to see this and that. (duality for example: hot and cold, up and down, right and left, summer and winter, light and dark, order and chaos, matter and energy, good or bad, particle or wave, negative and positive.) Edited August 7, 2018 by edenlog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 7, 2018 Author #436 Share Posted August 7, 2018 My current study of supersymmetry so far has shown me similarities with the holographic principle. In both of them there are equivalents of information ("matter") both here - in our universe - and "not here". In supersymmetry it's another dimension, in HP it's outside the perimeter of our universe. If any of you have a different understanding, please do tell! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 8, 2018 #437 Share Posted August 8, 2018 12 hours ago, sci-nerd said: My current study of supersymmetry so far has shown me similarities with the holographic principle. In both of them there are equivalents of information ("matter") both here - in our universe - and "not here". In supersymmetry it's another dimension, in HP it's outside the perimeter of our universe. If any of you have a different understanding, please do tell! The only similarities is both are basically unfalsifiable. It's the scientific equivalent to 'God of the gaps argument'. The only thing it predicts that might bare fruit is that the three forces, electromagnetism, weak and strong nuclear forces, at high engry may have the same strength. This might lead to an insight to a grand unified theory. I don't think it's predictions regarding dark matter are falsifiable, I don't think the LHC has discovered any similarities between fermions and bosons. They are very different particles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted August 8, 2018 #438 Share Posted August 8, 2018 4 hours ago, danydandan said: The only similarities is both are basically unfalsifiable. It's the scientific equivalent to 'God of the gaps argument'. The only thing it predicts that might bare fruit is that the three forces, electromagnetism, weak and strong nuclear forces, at high engry may have the same strength. This might lead to an insight to a grand unified theory. I don't think it's predictions regarding dark matter are falsifiable, I don't think the LHC has discovered any similarities between fermions and bosons. They are very different particles. Many aspects of the Standard Model appear to make it unfalsifiable as well. Not to mention the ugly fact that experimental evidence contradicts some of the Standard Model's predictions. But we go with the model anyway because it works, usually. If Superstring Theory can be developed to that level, the inconsistencies won't matter, in the same way they don't in the Standard Model. It may very well be that the future of cosmology and high energy physics will henceforth be rife with unfalsifiable predictions because of our own limitations and the limits of experimental observation. Harte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 8, 2018 #439 Share Posted August 8, 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Harte said: Many aspects of the Standard Model appear to make it unfalsifiable as well. Not to mention the ugly fact that experimental evidence contradicts some of the Standard Model's predictions. But we go with the model anyway because it works, usually. If Superstring Theory can be developed to that level, the inconsistencies won't matter, in the same way they don't in the Standard Model. It may very well be that the future of cosmology and high energy physics will henceforth be rife with unfalsifiable predictions because of our own limitations and the limits of experimental observation. Harte Absolutely agree with that. I think our biggest issue is our limitations of observation, this creates massive errors in experiments. It seems the bigger we go we get more error, and the smaller we go we get more error. Error is the bane of my work at the moment, recently we have been working with silicon nitrate for CMOS applications. It's unique as it displays both classical and quantum applications. Classical, as it can lead to broadband dual frequency comb spectroscopy. Quantum, it allows us to generate nonclassical states of light on a photonic chip. The issue is experimental error in non classical applications, it appears mathematically solid, but experimentally uncertain. I have doubts regarding super string theory, maybe because of my own ignorance, but it's very outlandish in some aspects. I'm a proponent of M-Theory which incorporates the consistent aspects of superstring theory. Edited August 8, 2018 by danydandan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 10, 2018 Author #440 Share Posted August 10, 2018 On 8/8/2018 at 10:37 AM, danydandan said: The only similarities is both are basically unfalsifiable. It's the scientific equivalent to 'God of the gaps argument'. The only thing it predicts that might bare fruit is that the three forces, electromagnetism, weak and strong nuclear forces, at high engry may have the same strength. This might lead to an insight to a grand unified theory. I don't think it's predictions regarding dark matter are falsifiable, I don't think the LHC has discovered any similarities between fermions and bosons. They are very different particles. This is also a reply to your post in the monks PK thread. So you're saying that the different mathematical theories are nonunifiable? Even though they all attempt to decribe the same reality, but sometimes from different perspectives? I know that sup-sym is about particles, and that the hol-prin is about events, but events are made from particles, and the goal of science it to unify all theories. So how can addressing similarities between them be wrong? Isn't it the dream of science to reach a TOE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 10, 2018 #441 Share Posted August 10, 2018 18 minutes ago, sci-nerd said: This is also a reply to your post in the monks PK thread. So you're saying that the different mathematical theories are nonunifiable? Even though they all attempt to decribe the same reality, but sometimes from different perspectives? I know that sup-sym is about particles, and that the hol-prin is about events, but events are made from particles, and the goal of science it to unify all theories. So how can addressing similarities between them be wrong? Isn't it the dream of science to reach a TOE? There are no similarities, that's my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 10, 2018 Author #442 Share Posted August 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, danydandan said: There are no similarities, that's my point. I disagree. I'm not saying you are wrong, but maybe your perspective is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 10, 2018 #443 Share Posted August 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, sci-nerd said: I disagree. I'm not saying you are wrong, but maybe your perspective is. Its not. Ask any high energy physicist, that's where I got my opinion from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 10, 2018 Author #444 Share Posted August 10, 2018 26 minutes ago, danydandan said: Its not. Ask any high energy physicist, that's where I got my opinion from. Okay, you win the argument. For now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 14, 2018 Author #445 Share Posted August 14, 2018 (edited) I just saw Infinity War, where the fate of the intire universe is at stake. Cool movie btw! And then I thought to myself: What could possibly endanger our whole universe? Well, IF this reality is virtual, and the point of making it is us NOT knowing it's virtual, the only threat to it would be the truth! Like this thread! If a majority of people started to believe it's virtual, they'd probably have to end it, because they didn't make it for that purpose. Brings a new meaning to the term "hanging by a thread" Edited August 14, 2018 by sci-nerd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted August 14, 2018 #446 Share Posted August 14, 2018 (edited) Wrong again. It's only HALF the universe at stake. LOL Harte Edited August 14, 2018 by Harte Because of the wonderful things he does! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 14, 2018 Author #447 Share Posted August 14, 2018 23 minutes ago, Harte said: Wrong again. It's only HALF the universe at stake. LOL Harte Don't be a spoiler! I was technicly right, if you think about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 14, 2018 #448 Share Posted August 14, 2018 41 minutes ago, sci-nerd said: Don't be a spoiler! I was technicly right, if you think about it You can't be technically correct, and half wrong at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted August 14, 2018 Author #449 Share Posted August 14, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, danydandan said: You can't be technically correct, and half wrong at the same time. SPOILER WARNING! Okay, if half the universe's population is wiped out, will that not affect the other half? Thus: "the fate of the entire universe is at stake" Edited August 14, 2018 by sci-nerd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted August 14, 2018 #450 Share Posted August 14, 2018 6 minutes ago, sci-nerd said: SPOILER WARNING! Okay, if half the universe's population is wiped out, will that not affect the other half? Thus: "the fate of the entire universe is at stake" No, surely it only affects the decimated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now