#Login Register
The Vigilant Citizen Forums
The Illusion of Existence Explained


10-19-2015, 08:52 AM #1
Mint05
***
Marshall
Status: Offline Posts:256 Likes Received:168
Ordinary people would describe the world in similar way to the game so called "Minecraft" -- that the world is made of bits and the void. They try to describe the emergence of this world with the famous theory so called "The Big Bang". But unfortunately, this theory has it's flaws, and in the world of quantum physics, the rules are different.

Let's start by mentioning the ingridients which this world is made of, described on "the standard board of physics". In physics, four fundamental forces of nature are mentioned. These are: The strong force, the weak force, the electromagnetic force and the gravitational force. From the quantum physics point of view, the common thing with all these forces of nature is that they all related to energi which this world is made of, and in physics, we learn that the energi can't be created or destroyed -- it can only be converted to different forms of energy. So the question is: What is energi?

The strong force is responsible for the strong nuclear force, in other words, this is what makes an atom an atom, a tight pack of particles (nucleons) sitting in the nucleus with the electron cloud. We and the Earth are made of particles. But what are particles? Is this just the bits like in the game Minecraft or something else? To find the answer, the physicists made a an intresting experiment the so called "The Double Slit Experiment" and the result was amazing:



Now, as I understand, the reason why the observer collapsed the "wave behave of electrons" simply by observing the electrons might be due to illusion -- the observer can't really observe the electrons being the waves. But I'm not sure. But the truth is that the particle physicists describe everything in waves. The so called "particle forms" are just used in quantum physics to describe phenomenons. In other words, matter doesn't really matter. But the waves isn't something which do exist, they are simply the transport vessels of energy, "bendings of fabric", and their function is described by mathematics. Then, it means that there is no such thing as existence, all is simply the illusion of mathematics. Like the things you see in your computer, they are the illusion of mathematics. This is why the word "mathematic" sounds like "math magic", the magic of math, the illusion of math. There is no such thing as the "Big Bang", matter or existence. All is the illusion of your mind. "The all" just always was, the oneness, and we are the derivate of the oneness, the divisions. If God exists, we are simply part of Him, all is God, and the reason why God could exist is because "in this oneness" everything is possible. He must be our "Great Architect". "The Architect" who created this mathematical matrix.



In addition, I want to add that there doesn't seem to be such thing as time, future or past. Future is just our creation and I can repeat the past, how much as I want. And I don't believe that the time exist in the fourth dimension. The time is just the construct of our conciousness and the illusion of movement. In this dimension, you sleep and wake up; it feels like the time went through a wormhole. There is just movement, the waves of math.

Ask questions, if you need things to be more clear.

Thank you.
This post was last modified: 12-13-2015, 09:22 PM by Mint05.
The following 2 users Like Mint05's post:
  • Hex, Trenton

10-19-2015, 11:05 AM #2
Briandao
*****
Chaplain
Status: Offline Posts:1,118 Likes Received:1636
(10-19-2015, 08:52 AM)Mint05 Wrote:  Common people would describe the World in similar way to the game so called "Minecraft" -- that the World is made of bits and the void. They try to describe the emergence of this World with the famous theory so called "The Big Bang". But unfortunately, this theory has it's flaws because in the World of quantum physics, the rules are different.

Let's start by mentioning the ingridients which this World is made of, described on "the standard board of physics". In physics, four fundamental forces of nature are mentioned. These are: The strong force, the weak force, the electromagnetic force and the gravitational force. From the quantum physics point of view, the common thing with all these forces of nature is that all describe the different forms of energi which this World is made of and in physics, we learn that the energi can't be created or destroyed -- it can only be converted to different forms of energy. So the question is: What is energi and where did it come from?

The strong force is responsible for the strong nuclear force, in other words, this is what makes an atom an atom, a tight pack of particles (nucleons) sitting in the nucleus with the electron cloud. We and the Earth is made of particles. But what are particles? Is this just the bits like in the game Minecraft or something else? To find the answer, the physicists made a an intresting experiment the so called "The Double Slit Experiment" and the result was amazing:



Now, as I understand, the reason why the observer collapsed the "wave behave of electrons" simply by observing the electrons might be due to illusion -- the observer can't really observe the electrons being the waves. But I'm not sure. But the truth is that the particle physicists describe everything in waves. The so called "particle forms" are just used in quantum physics to describe phenomenons. In other words, matter doesn't really matter. But the waves isn't something which do exist, they are simply the transport vessels of energy, "bendings of fabric", and their function is described by mathematics. Then it means that there is no such thing as existence, all is simply the illusion of mathematics. Like the things you see in your computer, they are the illusion of mathematics. This is why the word "mathematic" sounds like "math magic", the magic of math, the illusion of math. There is no such thing as the "Big Bang", matter or existence. All is the illusion of your mind. "The all" just always was, the oneness, and we are the derivate of the oneness, the divisions. If God exists, we are simply part of Him, all is God, and the reason why God could exist is because "in this oneness" everything is possible. He must be our "Great Architect". "The Architect" who created this mathematical matrix.



In addition, I want to add that there doesn't seem to be such thing as time, future or past. Future is just our creation and I can repeat the past, how much as I want. And I don't believe that the time exist in the fourth dimension. The time is just the construct of our conciousness and the illusion of movement. In this dimension, you sleep and wake up; it feels like the time went through a wormhole. There is just movement, the waves of math.

Ask questions, if you need things to be more clear.

Thank you.

I think I broke my brain. 

Great post!

"I ain't 'tryina' preach, I believe I can reach but your mind ain't prepared, I see you when you get there" - Coolio
The following 1 user Likes Briandao's post:
  • Trenton

10-19-2015, 12:49 PM #3
Mint05
***
Marshall
Status: Offline Posts:256 Likes Received:168
(10-19-2015, 11:05 AM)Briandao Wrote:  I think I broke my brain. 

Great post!
Haha. The blame is on "The Great Architect", not me.

10-19-2015, 01:16 PM #4
Riddler
*****
Chaplain
Status: Offline Posts:1,911 Likes Received:4434
yeah.....no

it's fun and interesting, these scientific discoveries on these 'tiny' levels and the research on matter, behaviour, and the search for patterns and stuff, but most of it is a 'scientifically' accepted theory based upon an army of information, theories and possibilities. in other words; the most probable theory explaining something that has been researched.
i won't delve into the point that it simply means that most of all of that is but a 'theory', based upon earlier research that concluded into another theory - the 'new' theory of a 'new' discovery thus has been calculated and based upon the information gathered from a (totally) different 'theory'. You see, it's like a house made of theories, supported by a lot of scientific facts, but not neccesarily the actual correct answer.

to put it shortly;

just because matter behaves different than once assumed does not equal God does not excist Rolleyes jeesh why does it always have to turn into anti-God.

if any, it only shows the intense complexity of even the tiniest particles which really shows that it is a product of intelligence and design, not a product of accidents.

so as i started my reply.

yeah.....no

"The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout ‘Save us!’ And I'll whisper ‘No
------------
----------------------------------------------

10-19-2015, 01:39 PM #5
Mint05
***
Marshall
Status: Offline Posts:256 Likes Received:168
(10-19-2015, 01:16 PM)Riddler Wrote:  yeah.....no

it's fun and interesting, these scientific discoveries on these 'tiny' levels and the research on matter, behaviour, and the search for patterns and stuff, but most of it is a 'scientifically' accepted theory based upon an army of information, theories and possibilities. in other words; the most probable theory explaining something that has been researched.
i won't delve into the point that it simply means that most of all of that is but a 'theory', based upon earlier research that concluded into another theory - the 'new' theory of a 'new' discovery thus has been calculated and based upon the information gathered from a (totally) different 'theory'. You see, it's like a house made of theories, supported by a lot of scientific facts, but not neccesarily the actual correct answer.

to put it shortly;

just because matter behaves different than once assumed does not equal God does not excist Rolleyes jeesh why does it always have to turn into anti-God.

if any, it only shows the intense complexity of even the tiniest particles which really shows that it is a product of intelligence and design, not a product of accidents.

so as i started my reply.

yeah.....no
No, there is some kind of true and better explanation for that which compromise our reality. The more puzzle bits you have, the more clearer picture you will get. I may have made errors, but I think this is much better explanation than any others I've heard, and I'm not alone thinking that all is just math. It must be obvious thing that all is just illusion of your senses. "The Double Slit Experiment" was a bang on, on understanding our reality.

Come on, I'm not anti-God. After all, he created us and gave us the light. This dimension is just the part of the multi-dimensional World. The user "Hex" has made intresting points on the so called "spirit dimensions"; that "we are more" than we think.

Exactly, "The Great Architect" has used beautiful and precise equations. Smile
This post was last modified: 10-19-2015, 01:41 PM by Mint05.
The following 3 users Like Mint05's post:
  • Goku, Hex, Trenton

10-19-2015, 06:40 PM #6
Mint05
***
Marshall
Status: Offline Posts:256 Likes Received:168
.....
This post was last modified: 11-26-2015, 03:18 PM by Mint05.

10-20-2015, 11:26 AM #7
HongKongHoward
***
Marshall
Status: Offline Posts:182 Likes Received:450
I have a question for all the forum people out there.

Do you believe that the universe literally has no end? Do you think that it wraps around onto itself like the inside of a sphere? Or that it goes on for ever and ever?

One of the most interesting implications of an infinite universe is that technically speaking there is no objective point of reference for any observer. There is no cosmological landmark that is built into the fabric of space that an explorer could use to orientate himself, there are only objects in space (planets, stars etc) which have no fixed position.

This in turn raises the question: If you move in space with no objective reference point, have you really gone anywhere?

If anyone is familiar with the computing concept of circular memory, you will know that it is impossible to implement direct addressing with this type of memory architecture. Every reference you make to an instruction or data that is stored in this kind of circular storage has to be in reference to another instruction or piece of data. In other words, you cannot reference "memory block 3569" directly or any other memory block because there is no first block and no last block (no alpha and no omega) to start counting from, in memory that wraps around back onto itself.

What I am trying to say, is that in a space that is infinite, all times, all places and all people are actually the same times, same places, and the same people (despite what it looks like from our localized vantage point).

"You can find in a text whatever you bring, if you will stand between it and the mirror of your imagination. You may not see your ears, but they will be there." - Moral, by the Cat

10-20-2015, 01:50 PM #8
Mint05
***
Marshall
Status: Offline Posts:256 Likes Received:168
(10-20-2015, 11:26 AM)HongKongHoward Wrote:  I have a question for all the forum people out there.

Do you believe that the universe literally has no end? Do you think that it wraps around onto itself like the inside of a sphere? Or that it goes on for ever and ever?

One of the most interesting implications of an infinite universe is that technically speaking there is no objective point of reference for any observer. There is no cosmological landmark that is built into the fabric of space that an explorer could use to orientate himself, there are only objects in space (planets, stars etc) which have no fixed position.

This in turn raises the question: If you move in space with no objective reference point, have you really gone anywhere?

If anyone is familiar with the computing concept of circular memory, you will know that it is impossible to implement direct addressing with this type of memory architecture. Every reference you make to an instruction or data that is stored in this kind of circular storage has to be in reference to another instruction or piece of data. In other words, you cannot reference "memory block 3569" directly or any other memory block because there is no first block and no last block (no alpha and no omega) to start counting from, in memory that wraps around back onto itself.

What I am trying to say, is that in a space that is infinite, all times, all places and all people are actually the same times, same places, and the same people (despite what it looks like from our localized vantage point).
Good questions...

It could be that the universe is hollow, like we exist on or under the surface of a torus, with no bounds. I think this is also a proof that the universe is an equation in harmony. You could play around thinking on how energy, waves, math and such, dance in this universe... The simply "Big Bang Theory" has its flaws and it doesn't sound right.

You may look at these:




http://www.librarising.com/hollow/holuniv.html
This post was last modified: 10-20-2015, 01:52 PM by Mint05.

10-20-2015, 05:13 PM #9
HongKongHoward
***
Marshall
Status: Offline Posts:182 Likes Received:450
(10-20-2015, 01:50 PM)Mint05 Wrote:  Good questions...

It could be that the universe is hollow, like we exist on or under the surface of a torus, with no bounds. I think this is also a proof that the universe is an equation in harmony. You could play around thinking on how energy, waves, math and such, dance in this universe... The simply  "Big Bang Theory" has its flaws and it doesn't sound right.

You may look at these:




http://www.librarising.com/hollow/holuniv.html

Thanks Mint, although I don't subscribe to the hollow earth theory (although I certainly don't discount the possibility of large empty caverns).

I think conceptually there is a difference between thinking of the universe as being a certain shape (sphere, torus etc) and the concept of a universe that has no shape but emanates outwards endlessly for all eternity.

In the infinite shape model that the links you provided suggest that the universe is not infinite (because it has a shape that could be theoretically observed if we made it outside) but that it only seems infinite because we dwell within a form that has no defined edges and wraps around unto itself.

The trouble with imagining the universe this way is that it assumes that there is an "outside" to the universe from which the "shape" of the universe could be observed.

The "shape" model of the universe as such is more in line with the "reality is an illusion" theory since it implies that we are stuck on the inside of a geometrically smooth space (the inside of a sphere or torus) which gives us the illusion of infinity.

If the universe is actually infinite unto itself then it would have no definite shape because no observer would ever be able to get "outside" of it to observe it's shape.

Personally I don't think the universe would have a definite geometric shape. I find it more likely that the universe is a symbolic expression of various trigonometric functions and the interactions between the dipoles of these "waves".

Sine and Cosine and Tangent are the designations given to the relationship between angles of triangles of any size. (or rather, triangles are symbolic representations of mathematical synthesis).

On a graph the relationship is described using a line that alternates between 1 and -1 and intersecting at 0 (x-axis) in the general case (ie. triangle with an x-axis side length of 1).

Sine specifically (because cosine is the same thing from a different y-axis starting point) is the mathematical denomination given to the relationship between 1 and -1 (and by default the corresponding scale-able ranges) which the line always reaches 1 and -1, crossing 0 for a triangle of any size.

This is the simplest example which I think is represented in this reality as the "synthesis" and also "decomposition" (which is the opposite). The coming together of two (or more) distinct entities to form a new distinct 3rd entity is the very first chemical reaction type that you study in high school (followed closely by decomposition, the separating of one whole entity into two or more distinct entities). This relationship is also expressed in many ways in "macro" life. You can see it in our institutions (marriage is symbolically a synthesis, and divorce is the decomposition) and in every other relationship where co-operation and the eventual dissolution of said co-operation are necessary. 

I'm just speaking out of my ass, but mathematics might be the only thing that exists and the universe might be the infinite paper on which these functions play out their relationships (since functions by definition are relationships that work for any range of data for any domain).

Ps. Naboo (of Star Wars fame) is a planet with a hollow honeycomb filled with water as it's core. Probably the most frightening concept I can imagine. Imagine exploring that place? *shudder*

"You can find in a text whatever you bring, if you will stand between it and the mirror of your imagination. You may not see your ears, but they will be there." - Moral, by the Cat
The following 1 user Likes HongKongHoward's post:
  • Goku

10-21-2015, 05:41 AM #10
Goku
*****
Chaplain
Status: Offline Posts:1,286 Likes Received:3082
(10-20-2015, 05:13 PM)HongKongHoward Wrote:  Do you believe that the universe literally has no end? Do you think that it wraps around onto itself like the inside of a sphere? Or that it goes on for ever and ever?

My understanding is that the Universe is finite but the non-existence we're expanding into has the potential to be infinite but because we are unable to see passed the edge of the Universe due to not being able to break the light barrier, we will never know - or at least in this lifetime.
 
Nobody likes infinity because of the possibilities it entails and also because we can't quantify it.

In regards to the shape of the Universe, I'm still not sure - it's most likely a sphere inside a torus - we're still not sure if the acceleration of expansion is speeding up or slowing down.

 This is because basic physics tells you things with a Mass, have gravity, and with gravity comes Orbits. We know Galaxies orbit other Galaxies and that some even collide into each other to make even bigger Galaxies - what happens if there is another universe orbiting ours and we eventually collide?
This post was last modified: 10-21-2015, 08:01 AM by Goku.