What I don't like is when they do the updates.


PairTheBoard

when the conglomerate of solitary otter brains can't help but wrap themselves in kelp
tidal balloon abalone anchor belt
fried with spam and bologna

I've done some simulation in my time, although nothing as complicated as the Universe, and mostly non-conservative systems. In my opinion, the wave-particle duality is a pro-simulation giveaway. The simulation frameworks I worked with were pretty hands-on simulation-wise in the sense that you always wrote parts of the simulator yourself in a way. E.g. you could add error rate information to a simulated signal to simulate signal errors in your system, and switch that on or off depending on what you wanted from a simulation run.

So therefore I think waves and particles are just two types of representation of the simulation assets in our Universe, and depending on what is needed atm, the (different parts of the) simulation engine use(s) one or the other.

And no matter what you simulate, it is always good practice to simulate just what you need to save resources; that's what raytracing is all about. So for stuff like double slit experiments, there is some code in the simulator that says

if(length(ObserversPresent()) > 0)
useParticle()
else
useWave()

when on the agenda does perceptive ability of each particular human organism enter into the discussion?

It doesn't. As we are part of the simulation, they let us see what they want us to see.

I've performed the experiment and can confirm the code is there, AMA. Not necessarily because of this, but in addition to it, I do unironically believe we're living in a simulated environment. I hate the term simulation so better phrasing would probably be that I believe we're on a rendered substrate that is certainly malleable by something or some higher intelligence. Donald Hoffman's theories regarding consciousness being fundamental are certainly interesting, too.

In keeping with OP's intention, I'd say the fact that we're now pretending men are women, anti-Zionism somehow isn't anti-Semitism (and Hamas are the good guys), we're going to get another 4 years of Trump, etc. I'd say the simulators are just cranking the dials on our plane of existence for the halibut.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

That is, if everything we learn is expected and within boundaries of what we thought, then we probably aren't experiencing truth, but instead a notion of what we perceive truth to be.

A simple observable example.

Steph Curry had arguably the greatest shooting performances ever, in the only meaningful 2 games of this Olympics for team USA. I cannot think of anything any single player has ever done comparable in a major bball event, scoring (which is obv the most important metric) or otherwise.

Yet MVP Goes to Lebron.

I explain it this way. What Curry did was borderline unbelievable to virtually any observer not familiar with his ability, and even those who are familiar would dismiss his performances as a fluke.

But Lebron's performances were believable, within normal bounds because we have been conditioned to expect that high level of performance. Since we can dismiss Curry's performances as essentially a circus act, we fall back on the bona fide performance of Lebron as sufficient for MVP because this is what we expected.

Do you believe particles w/ no mass are limited to the speed of light?

This extends to the idea of photons having mass. The smartest man I ever met in my life (met him at WSOP, knew inorganic chemistry like the back of his hand) told me it was inherently obvious that photons have mass. Yet this contradicts what modern science believes i.e., zero mass photons.

I mean, isn't this basically undebatable regarding our perception and how we're experiencing "reality" itself? We have no idea what a true, objective reality would be as we're never interfacing with it. Everything is happening inside our heads with our brains parsing the electromagnetic data into what it thinks is going on.

DMT allowed something to scramble that and transform all the objects in my room into something else in a split second. That kind of showed me how fragile my understanding of a firm, rigid reality is, haha. I think more and more evidence will keep pointing toward this reality being computational in nature and rendered by something.

I think it reverts to how we perceive randomness and the unknown.

For example if my world only contained outcomes all within a band of 3 sigma distribution, then I might sense nothing was wrong because I don't understand true randomness. Even though my day-to-day life would be unaffected.

I agree with you that our brains attempt to convert everything we experience to something we can comprehend. But if we can comprehend everything we experience, then we probably are not experiencing the full spectrum of random outcomes, that is what we cannot comprehend.

would you say the location for me to surrender my arms is clearly marked or might it require some sort of hunting?
and, to be perfectly clear, the only arms i possess are those connected directly to my shoulders by skin and bone

There's no conceivable way for us to know for certain if light is in space-time or the other way around, that space-time is in light. If the latter, what we see as a bunch of white dots on a black wall are instead holes in a perception screen basically preventing us from seeing an all white wall. Same goes looking at the moon on a dark night. What we see as an object in the sky is just a sliver of all the light out there that's left after our perception screen filtered or blocked the rest of the light out. Same thing with the double-slit experiment. Of course with that view there's no photons, slits or moon out there or even an out there because all that out there means in that context is a 2-d visual perception screen. In other words, what we think of as empty space surrounding the moon is a potential to see light if it were there, ie, the quantum field isn’t out there; it’s our field of vision as seen through a screen or mesh. In that sense our field of vision is like all the pixels on a computer screen, with some lit up and others dark.

You are in my external world and I am in yours.

gecko toes support this opinion

I'm in the natural simulation camp. As in quantum fields are the virtual soup from which our senses transduce (read "create") perception-based "realities," that are actually virtual. No need for an advanced species to be manning the machine. The cosmos itself is the quantum computer.

Maybe we're a screensaver.

five senseless thought exercises
four senses removed from each
three humans born into only one of see smell hear taste touch
what reality might each of their perceptions transduce

or maybe screensavers are the ones manning the machines

David Hume solved all this years ago. But almost no one listened. His book wasn’t even burned. It floated up into the ether and hovered over the earth like a cloud.

The matrix is your oyster

I wonder how much Red Pills would go for on eBay.


PairTheBoard

Not much individually. Basically they're all in isolated 1-dimensional worlds, with one experiencing nothing but colors, others nothing but tones, inertia, flavors and scents. It's the coordination of those perception dimensions that give rise to what we think of as reality. But at the end of the day the visual and audio are tactile too, in that photons touch the eye and sound waves touch the ear drum. And just as with our sense of touch, all those touches get converted into electrical signals and pass through the nerve channels to the brain. From there our perceptual apparatus takes electrical signals from one channel, compiles them and presents them to our mind as a visual screen, another channel is experienced as audio, etc. With the addition of a vibrating joystick to provide the experience of mass, not unlike a computer in the sense that all our perceptions are essentially encoded electrical signals.

yes yes yes
and each has a unique perception that should not be discounted in the context of the quoted post

thoughts on quantum activities are better expressed not with a popular vote mentality
but considering the individual selections of every single entity with that ability to choose