On Fri, 11 Dec 2015 22:51:06 +0800, The_Inquirer
Post by The_InquirerPost by Mr. B1ackOn Thu, 10 Dec 2015 16:30:38 +0800, The_Inquirer
Neither Plato (allegedly repeating the allegory Socrates
created, but that may have just been to give it added
weight) or the Buddha denied that there WAS some
kind of core "reality", that the universe was ultimately
tangible. What they said is that we - humans - maybe
any sentient thing - will never actually KNOW that
reality in its raw form. Whatever it is, it gets processed
and reprocessed by whatever senses and IQ we have
(which depend on what kind of creature we are) into
an "experience", an "impression" of reality.
could it be like ... The Matrix?
Deliberately fabricated - a "video-game reality" - some
kind of alien graduate-studies project ?
It's *possible* ...
But IMHO very unlikely.
Now very strictly speaking it all *is* a sort of
"simulation" ... I'd suggest Wolframs "A New
Kind Of Science" (peruse it, don't buy the huge
tome full of tiny type unless it's in the bargain
bin :-)
Steve Wolfram (also preuse the wolframalpha.com
knowlege engine) noticed that the the same kind of
mathematical interaction rules governing the behavior
of cellular automata and their emergent behaviors
could also describe the laws of physics on our
universe. A universe composed of "computational
cells" that interact with each other according to
relatively simple rules can generate larger-scale
phenomena, which can themselves generate even
larger-scale phenomena ... which form-up as
everything from Newton and Einstein to Bohr and
Hawking.
Now another word for those "computational cells"
might be "superstrings" ....
Thing is, this makes every cubic Planck unit of the
universe into a ultra-simple RISC computer that's
connected to all the others. In this view the universe
isn't made IN anybodys computer, it IS a computer.
We and all the rest of the "stuff" are thus products,
you might say mathematical patterns, created by the
program that's running. Theoretically, with just tiny
tweaks to how the "cells"/"superstrings" work, some
other "program" and all its emergent properties is
equally possible, but we got what we got and this
is OUR kind of reality until the universe runs down.
The really neat-o thing is that maybe a few centuries
hence our computer-science grads will certainly be
able to make pretty decent virtual universes (or at
least worlds or bits thereof) with an e-physics that
could evolve e-life - perhaps even sentient e-life.
They'll do it because they CAN ... which has always
been a good enough reason. For that e-life, it WILL
be like "The Matrix" ... and they may never realize it.
Even cooler ... it'll be superstring-based virtual lifeforms
creating a quantum-computer based e-universe within
their own "simulation", a subprogram universe so to
speak. I wonder how deep that rabbit-hole could go ? :-)
Hey, you asked .... :-)
Post by The_InquirerPost by Mr. B1ackPost by The_Inquirerbut don't you find that most people don't care about the truth until it
really hits them at their balls, and then they complain?
A zillion things to worry about every day ... if you spend
your time looking for the most absolute Truth about every
aspect you'll probably get zero things done that day. So,
we have to let it slide until some *particular* Truth becomes
especially important.
is that why SADISTICS show that 69.9% of the Singapore people don't care
that some people (including a young kid) were bullied / persecuted
political reasons?
As long as it ain't YOU ... well ..... you have lots of stuff
to do today so you'll probably just let that stat slide. There
has to be some balance between selfishness and altruism
and the balance point is usually pretty far over towards the
selfishness side of things out of sheer necessity.
Post by The_Inquirerthey won't care unless/until it hits their balls where it hurts? Just
keep them satisfied with some jobs and some crowed houses ... before
elections just throw them some goodies, remind them of how fortunate
they are ... and they (or at least 69.9% of them) won't care, right?
Post by Mr. B1ackPost by The_Inquirersame question: is it possible to reprogram or reform the cells instead
of killing them (with collateral damage to healthy sells)?
"Possible" - yes. "Practical" - probably not.
Interestingly, the Moslems seem to do a lot better
job of converting Xians and such than vice versa.
Their religion isn't any "righter" ... so something
about their techniques is clearly superior.
Post by The_InquirerThe answer is that
Post by Mr. B1ackmost Moslems aren't baddies. The remaining
question is whether ENOUGH are baddies so
our only defense is to reject them all for the
immediate future. "Jihad" has just become WAY
too popular of late for anyones comfort.
since their marketing tactics are so much far superior, why don't the
muslins turn it into a business by being marketing consultants, selling
their consultancy services, instead of relying on smuggled oil to
finance their activities?
Hmmm ... well, a number of Hindu and asian mystics have
indeed made LOTS of money (and supplicants) by selling their
religion as a sort of mental cure-all *product*. Reverend Moon
has probably been the most successful, but there are plenty
of gurus and swamis operating as well.
Given a weird quirk of human psychology, the more
things a mystic religious system asks you to give up
for "enlightenment"/"truth" the more popular it's likely
to be. Islam is a fairly strict system, a difficult challenge,
and thus oughtta sell quite well. They just need to
re-brand it ... :-)