Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
God And Reality

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by George Elliott on May 10, 2008 04:22:06 UTC

The idea, that we are in a virtual reality, has been spreading more quickly since 1993.
On the off-chance that this idea has not yet come to your attention, the details of it can be found at:
Wikipedia, overview
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulism
Nick Bostrom, 2002
http://www.simulation-argument.com/
Brian Whitworth, 2007
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/2008/01/vr-hypothesis.html?DCMP=NLC-nletterbanner&nsref=blogtech

In addition to those arguments, one way to explain the apparent fact that space and time and mass and energy are quantized would be to say that their quantization is a result of the fact that the 3-D monitor, in which our virtual reality is displayed, has a finite spatial screen resolution, and a finite repetition rate.

However that might be, it remains that known virtual realities are not self-originated. If they were self-originated, then they would be natural realities, that is, realities without an originator. It also remains that known virtual realities are not self-sustained. If they were self-sustained, then they would have become natural realities which is a contradiction by definition.

So if it were the case that this were a virtual reality, then it would logically follow that there is an originator of this virtual reality. It would also logically follow that this virtual reality would have a sustainer. In the case that the originator of this virtual reality were to be a character in another virtual reality, then the ultimate sustainer would be the originator of the virtual reality in which all other virtual realities were nested.

An additional result, if this were to be a virtual reality, would be that it could be tailored to each character. That is to say, not everybody would necessarily experience the same version of this virtual reality. They would, if this were a natural reality; but not necessarily in the case that this were to be a virtual reality.

This list of consequences to this being a virtual reality is not complete. For instance, on the topic of UFOs, many aspects of that topic can be immediately understood if we suppose that this is a virtual reality. Ditto for visions, Fortean events, time travel, faster than light travel, and many additional topics which otherwise remain incomprehensible.

One interesting consequence is that this idea offers an explanation of why, when anything unusual happens, we immediately turn to the nearest person and ask, "Did you see that?" We do that as if we innately know that this is a virtual reality, and that we therefore might not all experience the same version of it.

However that might be, the idea that this is a virtual reality seems to have the potential of explaining many circumstances which have otherwise baffled us. So let us closely examine this idea in order to get the maximum possible benefit from it.

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    Google
     
    Web www.astronomy.net
    DayNightLine
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins