Is our Physical Reality an Illusion?

[kyle_baron]

Space is the underlying reality. If you look at the thickest piece of steel or concrete in our world, it's full of empty space. From atoms to quarks, this is the physical. Once you get inside a quark, there's nothing physically left, but a tiny energy string (something's got to move the quark). I read in The Elegant Universe (p.130) that if the space within an atom were the size of the physical universe, then the energy string would be the size of a tree (Planck Length 10 -33cm). Because strings are energy, and act like music (wavelengths, frequencies, amplitudes, and resonances) I'm thinking that space is like a Musical Data Storage Dimension.<br /><br />My other question is Can space tear? From what I've read in the book "The Elegant Universe" it can tear, but is instantly repaired by the energy strings. The other idea presented in the book is that space is constantly being torn and repaired (Quantum Foam) beneath the Planck Length. I'm looking for Scientific, Philosophical, or Biblical answers or opinions. Thanks. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[tplank]

Yes, it is all in your head.<br /><br />Except of course in that case, your head doesn't exist either.<br /><br />Wait- Houston, I think we have a problem here. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>The Disenfranchised Curmudgeon</p><p>http://tonyplank.blogspot.com/ </p> </div>

 

[aetherius]

Reality must be an illusion. The universe and its creation are too complex to be real.

 

[doc_harra]

You may like to read my post Titled : Could nothing start a chain reaction ?<br /><br />Yes it is definable, And dose define, It dose exist, And it dose not exist, it is a single contradiction in it's self, as is the last statement, this is it's nature, Going somewhere from nowhere for infinity<br /><br /><br />(NOTHING)(SOMETHING)(NO)(YES)(0)(1)(-)(+) = THE SAME THING ? EVERYTHING <br /><br /> 101011111101011010110101111011101010101010101 <br /><br />There are also some post's on infinity

 

[colesakick]

We’ll get booted to phenomenon with this kind of discussion, but it’s one worth having just the same.<br /><br />In another thread is the idea that our reality is a kind of computer simulation. The analogy is such a good match to what we know about life that it makes one feel a little weird. <br /><br />Suppose that what we call real is nothing more than a Star Trek type hologram (a simple hologram is made of two interfering laser beams which distribute information ubiquitously in their interference patterns, the universe would require a more complex hologram) and we were programmed to be as smart as those who made the holodeck. <br /><br />Say were trying to back engineer our own reality (study physics) and that a holodeck is what our reality is really based on. You would notice how “intelligent” matter seemed to behave (since it is computer generated) and how all matter and laws of physics seemed to be involved in our own existence, to cause and form it. You would also notice that everything is related and somehow connected, that vector locality loses its meaning when you sample matter (quantum non local effects between particles), that bonding matter (which are simply interfering energy waves before they bind) cancels interference patterns and creates coherent states (stable reality). In time you would notice that DNA, the building block of life, conforms to recursive mathematics, its fractal and looks an awful lot like any set of computer algorithms. Form and structure itself would seem to resolve algorithmically too (Golden Mean, recursive pie). Also you would notice that nature contained both information and memory, like your own mind and begin to wonder, is reality simply a thought in someone’s mind, or is it the result of someone’s thinking programmed into a quantum computer that is generating the hologram we perceive to be real?<br /><br />I questioned a researcher about a paper he wrote that builds on the idea that the genetic code is really just that, a computer <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Intellectual honesty means being willing to challenge yourself instead of others </div>

 

[kyle_baron]

Yes, it is all in your head. <br /><br />Except of course in that case, your head doesn't exist either. <br /><br />Wait- Houston, I think we have a problem here. <br /><br />Illusion- An erroneous perception of reality. I didn't mean that our physical reality didn't exist. However, I did find your post amusing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[kyle_baron]

Reality must be an illusion. The universe and its creation are too complex to be real. <br /><br />The most HONEST answer, so far. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[kyle_baron]

Isn't there a better place to post a question like this? Take it to the Dali Lama. <br /><br />Ok, Thanks, I'll give him a call. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[kyle_baron]

What is real, and what is an illusion? <br />This is a big philosophical question. I of course depends on how we define the expression "real". <br />We could possibly go on forever discussing that term, and it is a very interesting one. <br /><br />In science / physics we continously search for a kind of truth or "reality". We want to find out how we can explain and predict how nature works at all levels. <br /><br />What is "real" in an atom? Is a photon real? Is space real? I think the question might be wrong. <br /><br />Reality is what we as humans find in the everyday relation between us and physical properties in our surroundings. <br />In other words: Reality is not a term we can use as a description on the universe as a total. Reality is just a word, and must be used to describe OUR reality. <br /><br />Its like asking: Is a rock a rock? Or what is it "really"? We can explain the rock down to quarks, but when we do this it stops beeing a rock. It soon becomes a pile of strange stuff we cannot truly relate to. <br /><br />The universe came from something that we cannot truly understand. Does that make the Big Bang singularity unreal? <br />The universe will probably change to something that cannot support life in a distant future. Is it interesteing to discuss what is real or not when there is no life in the universe? <br /><br />My humble conclusion is that the word "reality" cannot be used to describe physics. <br /><br />A most well thought out answer. Thank you. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[kyle_baron]

In another thread is the idea that our reality is a kind of computer simulation. The analogy is such a good match to what we know about life that it makes one feel a little weird. <br /><br />Suppose that what we call real is nothing more than a Star Trek type hologram (a simple hologram is made of two interfering laser beams which distribute information ubiquitously in their interference patterns, the universe would require a more complex hologram) and we were programmed to be as smart as those who made the holodeck. <br /><br />Say were trying to back engineer our own reality (study physics) and that a holodeck is what our reality is really based on. You would notice how “intelligent” matter seemed to behave (since it is computer generated) and how all matter and laws of physics seemed to be involved in our own existence, to cause and form it. You would also notice that everything is related and somehow connected, that vector locality loses its meaning when you sample matter (quantum non local effects between particles), that bonding matter (which are simply interfering energy waves before they bind) cancels interference patterns and creates coherent states (stable reality). In time you would notice that DNA, the building block of life, conforms to recursive mathematics, its fractal and looks an awful lot like any set of computer algorithms. Form and structure itself would seem to resolve algorithmically too (Golden Mean, recursive pie). Also you would notice that nature contained both information and memory, like your own mind and begin to wonder, is reality simply a thought in someone’s mind, or is it the result of someone’s thinking programmed into a quantum computer that is generating the hologram we perceive to be real? <br /><br />An equally thorough, and highly abstract answer. That thought never occured to me, and I'm a big fan of Star Trek. Thanks. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[colesakick]

I almost hate to entertain it mysylf, but have nowhere else to go with what's in my mind to date. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Intellectual honesty means being willing to challenge yourself instead of others </div>

 

[newtonian]

kyle_baron - You posted:<br /><br />"I'm looking for Scientific, Philosophical, or Biblical answers or opinions."<br /><br />I prefer to avoid philosophy, since it often involves speculation rather than observation or things indicated by scientific study of cause and effect.<br /><br />Since the Bible, and Biblical astronomy, is a field I have done extensive study on I will give answers from that source - as you asked for this.<br /><br />For one thing, Genesis 1:1 indicates God created the heavens and the earth in [the] {or 'a'} beginning. Science has confirmed that both the earth and our universe had a beginning. This is therefore a reality.<br /><br />However, earth is indeed so tiny as to be almost an unreality compared with our universe - as noted by other posts this depends on how one defines 'unreality.'<br /><br />Note that in the following Biblical context, we are as an unreality - not that we are actually an unreality - it is emphasizing how small we are:<br /><br />(Isaiah 40:12-17) . . .Who has measured the waters in the mere hollow of his hand, and taken the proportions of the heavens themselves with a mere span and included in a measure the dust of the earth, or weighed with an indicator the mountains, and the hills in the scales? 13 Who has taken the proportions of the spirit of Jehovah, and who as his man of counsel can make him know anything? 14 With whom did he consult together that one might make him understand, or who teaches him in the path of justice, or teaches him knowledge, or makes him know the very way of real understanding? 15 Look! The nations are as a drop from a bucket; and as the film of dust on the scales they have been accounted. Look! He lifts the islands themselves as mere fine [dust]. 16 Even Leb´a·non is not sufficient for keeping a fire burning, and its wild animals are not sufficient for a burnt offering. 17 All the nations are as something nonexistent in front of him; as nothing and an unreality they have been accounted to him.<br /><br />

 

[doc_harra]

I was going to type you guys a really long and interrogate explanation, And a formula demonstration of a calculation being answered by (universe 1.0), One that is being answered with a large range of diversity, Along these lines, Theorizing how we (Universe 0.1 at present) Is a kind of small pocket calculator, One that is so complex that it could compute any calculation that could be possibly calculated, And in addition also the incalculable plus the most infinitely incomprehendable or/and, The extremely improbable calculations, And not only dose this pocket calculator solve these infinitely incomprehensible or/and the extremely improbable calculations, It also gives a novel visual interpretation To-boot, Like the stars revolving in a mathematical patten (They contain huge amounts of calculations no doubt), And of course the mathematically correct Random chaos events too !. And wait for it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Even the un-Trumpable humorous visual display of humanity, So just think next time you are taking so many steps down to the shops or use (how ever much gas) and buy this item and that item and so on, And maybe even including calculations like : the wight of a certain item's or perhaps even the shopping isle you walk down, Also maybe even how many letters are in the clerks sir name or exactly how long your baby toe nail is or is not, Or how long it feasible could be given certain parameters, This could all be part of a grand sum that has been entered into the calculator (getting lost I am)<br /><br />Hay and it all makes a megga cool calculator that sits in some dudes pocket !, And must be fab viewing, Hope you understand what i am going on about, Sorry i did not show a really mad improbable calculation list, That demonstrated how thru all these so called random actions occurring everywhere, It was acutely solving questions on infinity + the incomprehendable to us or/and the extremely improbable calculations, Quite likely as well the mundane ones too (easy), and you c

 

[rfoshaug]

<pre><br /><br />Public Sub Universe()<br /> 'Universe version 1.0<br /> Big_Bang() <br /> Do<br /> Load(Star)<br /> Load(Planet_System)<br /> Load(Life) <br /> Do<br /> Create_Silly_Humans_Who_Believe_They_Live_In_An_Illusion()<br /> Loop Until Time = Up<br /> Explode(Star)<br /> Unload(Life)<br /> Unload(Planet_System)<br /> Unload(Star)<br /> Loop<br />End Sub<br /></pre> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff9900">----------------------------------</font></p><p><font color="#ff9900">My minds have many opinions</font></p> </div>

 

[doc_harra]

I LIKE that rfoshaug, what is it going to run on ?

 

[rfoshaug]

It can run on anything from a multi-building supercomputer to a Casio calculator, but you need at least 952 quadrillion terabytes of memory, or you risk a run-time error, which would be bad for the universe. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff9900">----------------------------------</font></p><p><font color="#ff9900">My minds have many opinions</font></p> </div>

 

[doc_harra]

I just came up with it runing on Space, Maybe Hmmmm <br /><br />RAW DATA = MATTER ?, Motion is raw data being run/processed ?, Space facilitates raw data being run ?<br /><br />Run [uiniverse 0.1] <br />Now just hit the enter key.<br /><br />Sorry dude lost my chain of thought went off on another mad one and totally forgot,<br /><br />Its running on that rectangle out of 2001 a space odyssey !<br /><br />It must have fallen out of a god's pocket or just out of a pocket and got lost ? somewhere, Ahhhhh or maybe 2001 space odyssey was showing what happens if you get a runtime error, It crashes on its self. <br /><br />This may not be such a bad thing as sometimes you need to start again, And if truth be told better too ! as well, Take a leap<br /><br />I now see the beauty of the film, coz it makes no sense you can tie anything into it, Depending on your interpretation.

 

[kyle_baron]

Note that God cannot even be contained in our universe: <br /><br />(1 Kings 8:27) 27 “But will God truly dwell upon the earth? Look! The heavens, yes, the heaven of the heavens, themselves cannot contain you;. . . <br /><br />This may mean that our universe is one of many "heavens" withing a much larger universe or "heaven of the heavens." And even this much larger universe with its multiverses cannot contain God. Biblical context shows God dwells in still another heaven. <br /><br />This may not just be a matter of size, btw. Additional dimensions may also be involved. Theoretical physicists have proposed this possibility, both in various "String" theories and also various collision of brane models for the origin of our universe. <br /><br />These models may indeed be unreality as they go beyond observation and into speculation, similar to what philosophers often do. <br /><br />However, the heavens (plural), earth (singular), man and God are all realities - albeit we cannot see God but rather prove his existence by cause and effect the same as scientists have proved the existence of many extrasolar planets by cause and effect. <br /><br />There is much more in the Bible on this - but I will stop here in the interest of time, brevity and to await your response. <br /> <br /><br />It's good to know that someone in this group, has such detailed knowledge of the Bible. You're interpretations of the passages are also carefully thought out. I ALWAYS read your posts, and THINK about them. Thankyou. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[kyle_baron]

I was going to type you guys a really long and interrogate explanation, And a formula demonstration of a calculation being answered by (universe 1.0), One that is being answered with a large range of diversity, Along these lines, Theorizing how we (Universe 0.1 at present) Is a kind of small pocket calculator, One that is so complex that it could compute any calculation that could be possibly calculated, And in addition also the incalculable plus the most infinitely incomprehendable or/and, The extremely improbable calculations, And not only dose this pocket calculator solve these infinitely incomprehensible or/and the extremely improbable calculations, It also gives a novel visual interpretation To-boot, Like the stars revolving in a mathematical patten (They contain huge amounts of calculations no doubt), And of course the mathematically correct Random chaos events too !. <br /><br />Huh? We're only a human calculator? Quite an unimaginative answer. I think we've covered the first part of my question on illusion, reality, and space. How about the second paragraph in my first post, involving the tearing of space? Or should I start a new thread? Or am I the only person in this group that has any knowledge of the tearing of space? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[doc_harra]

O K<br /><br />I did ask you to read my <font color="green"> Could Nothing start a chain reaction ?</font>Post<br />Hope wont get told off bringing it to you !<br /><br />further more<br /><br /><font color="red"> Huh? We're <font color="purple"> only </font>a human calculator? Quite an unimaginative answer. I think we've covered the first part of my question on </font><font color="orange"> confusion </font><br /><br /><font color="yellow"> Maybe humans are some of the more complex calculations or perhaps we help facilitate solving and even deduce some of the queries </font><br /><br /><font color="yellow"> And i cant see where i said ONLY in this way, If I have steered the topic in this direction its because, Who am i to judge the importance of humanity compared to say the universe </font><br /><br />Could this be the most fundamental contradiction ? As even Nothing hold's a (time) as nothing IS something in it's self thus creating (matter) and of course (space) <br />By nothing in it's self creating substance, like infinity or being some what define able, And infinity although being very elusive still remains partially measurable (more substance), <br />Or perhaps having an infinite amount of nothing eventually it creates mass, And if it was finite that that would most definitely be mass, <br /><br /><font color="red"> You may say why dose something not just pop out of nowhere anytime ?,</font><br /><br /><font color="green"> Perhaps a infinite amount of nothing would first be required to kick start the chain reaction, Creating Mass at the rate that the larger body of Nothing spread's through infinity, Making new ruptures in the fabric of Nothing unlikely, </font><br /><br /><font color="green"> Or this matter in our universe may be moving along to form a total sum of mass (The main contradiction to Nothing) Spu-ing through a rupture to form the balance of the two (our universe) chicken and the egg qu</font>

 

[doc_harra]

In addition you will always find the words like maybe or perhaps and even possibly around such areas of statement in the text <br /><br />As I believe evolution can show how complexity can evolve from the simple maybe we still are Only ?, Compared to evolution down the road !

 

[doc_harra]

Huh? We're only a human calculator? Quite an unimaginative answer<br /><br />I can also see what you mean, I know its improbable unlikely unrealistic (and a hole string of words like that), but never the less may not necessary be impossible (lots of nullifying words like that) , I remain open minded perhaps there is A God of some sort in some respect Perhaps us. ? <br /><br />Or maybe your mind added this when you were not looking or vice versa think I'm here maybe ! are you there ?<br /><br />Will i ever get to stop typing perhaps maybe and those other armband words ? ,I think I hope not. <br /><br />Coz < perhaps and maybe you can easily chuck on NOT,<br />Oh god it feels like I'm morse-ing out the Hal sound, On and on perhaps maybe NOT perhaps maybe NOT perhaps maybe NOT..................

 

[newtonian]

kyle_baron - on tearing of space - that is an IF.<br /><br />Consider this illustration of the expansion of space:<br /><br />(Isaiah 40:22) . . .There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers, the One who is stretching out the heavens just as a fine gauze,. . .<br /><br />If you stretch a fine gauze, some tears in the threads and filaments can occur.<br /><br />this type of tearing loose is confirmed, and further commented on in the Bible:<br /><br />(Job 38:31) . . .Can you tie fast the bonds of the Ki´mah constellation, Or can you loosen the very cords of the Ke´sil constellation?<br /><br />Thus the bonds can be loosened, perhaps analagous to the tearing of threads and filaments in a fine gauze.<br /><br />Now, whether space itself can tear - I do not know.<br /><br />If you read on in Isaiah 40:22 you will note that the universe is also compared to a tent. A typical tent in those times could contain more than one cloth material.<br /><br />The "tent of meeting." i.e. the sacred tabernacle, was a rectangular prism in shape. Tentcloths intersected along straight lines and also at points more than two cloths could intersect.<br /><br />Could this compare with how other dimensions can react with out 3-d (4-d with time) universe?<br /><br />If so, a point intersection would roughly be similar to a singularity.<br /><br />That would not be actually a tear - but close enough to mention in response to you.<br /><br />I trust you realize we are going from interpretation to speculation!<br /><br />There is much we do not know. And much we are learning.<br /><br />This is an exciting time for astronomy as increased data pours in and models are either confirmed or disproven or at least shown to be tenable or unlikely.

 

[newtonian]

doc_harra - I do not believe in macro-evolution.<br /><br />I do believe in micro-evolution - however, this is withing genetic limits - all life reproduces after their own kind - albeit "kind" is a much broader term than "species."<br /><br />Microevolution involves mutations - but purely random mutations are usually harmful and often result in sterility. However, many mutations are not purely random but are a certain math set of variations using an informational template.<br /><br />These types of mutations are often beneficial - for example: antibiotic resistance in bacteria or variation in the influenza virus. That would be beneficial for the varying life form - not necessarily beneficial for us!<br /><br />The main point to note is that random changes can only be informational if they are favored by an informational template.<br /><br />For example, abiotic synthesis of proteins will produce statistical proteins which are of little use to life.<br /><br />Life cannot exist without complex informational proteins, and these cannot be synthesized by purely random chemical synthesis - they require informational or intelligent input or direction.<br /><br />Another point you focused on is the math calculations involving different universes with different properties and laws as if our universe could simply be part of a purely random or chance set of variations.<br /><br />This does not hold up if you actually do the math, nor does it explain why laws exist at all which govern our universe.<br /><br />Laws require a lawgiver.<br /><br />And the math ratios required for life are extremely fine tuned.<br /><br />For example:<br /><br />"Fine-Tuning<br /><br />The four fundamental forces come into play both in the vastness of the cosmos and in the infinite smallness of atomic structures. Yes, everything we see around us is involved.<br /><br />Elements vital for our life (particularly carbon, oxygen, and iron) could not exist were it not for the fine-tuning of the four forces evident in the univer

 

[doc_harra]

newtoian you said<br /><br />"Microevolution involves mutations - but purely random mutations are usually harmful and often result in sterility. However, many mutations are not purely random but are a certain math set of variations using an informational template." <br /><br /><br />"These types of mutations are often beneficial - for example: antibiotic resistance in bacteria or variation in the influenza virus. That would be beneficial for the varying life form - not necessarily beneficial for us!" <br /><br /><br />Like eyes and limbs, Do these informational templates suggest predetermined mapping or direction ? And perhaps what some of may seem purely random mutations, That to many may only appear to be usually harmful and often result in a undesired way (Depending on perspective !)<br /><br />what I'm saying why map random mutations that may seem to be usually harmful and often result in sterility ? ?<br /><br />you also mentioned<br /><br />"This does not hold up if you actually do the math, nor does it explain why laws exist at all which govern our universe."<br /><br />I know there was probably a lot i did not mention, May have been lost or did not account for/think of, maybe to hard to grasp or mention just yet, perhaps some kind inter-cal ?<br /><br />not to mention<br /><br />The incalculable plus the most infinitely incomprehensible and total chaos,<br />Hope that makes tiny bit of sense prob need to read 100 more time first<br /><br />I'd like to sleep on this one for a bit, Then should be able to give some sound and maybe a few plausible but perhaps improbable answers<br /><br /><font color="yellow"> "nor does it explain why laws exist at all which govern our universe"</font><br /><br /><font color="green"> Copy and paste Now, As my be heavily edited but hopefully corrected next time <br />Parra_doc<br />This may just be residual information (? gniyas ma I tahw I wonk neve I oD) posted anyway !</font><br /><font color="red">COULD I HAVE A MAD LAUGHING CRAZY pos</font>