The Universe: Concept that could blow your mind

Maybe I'm not understanding but this seems like a trivial statement. If temporal causal dependency exists and things were different at other times, they would be different now.

 

First off, I'm just thinking here, I'm not claiming any knowledge (isn't that what magnifier threads are for?), but I'll expand a bit.

I'm not suggesting causality, that's beyond what I can assume. I am just saying if there are infinate universes, representing every possibility, then each one would have to exist exactly how it stands. But that does not mean we don't have free will. Our decisions could spring alternate universes or each possibility could exist and depending on our decision we could be switching universes like a choose your own adventure. But the concept of infinate universes representing all permutations awesome, especially when you consider the resulting fixed nature of our universe.

I really don't know, but I was thinking about the conceps of the multiverse, as some string theorists believe. I dont understand the mathematical constructs of high level physics so I'm just going by the dumbed down versions explained in English instead. But that doesn't provide me with the means to select a theory to believe in, just ideas to think about, and I find the multiverse perhaps the most mind boggling of all the theories I've read about.


I feel like I just rambled on and made zero sense. Sorry.

 

This is sort of what some philosophers come up with when they cross the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics with Block Time. Infinite variable realities representing all possibilities exist, all equally real, and our individual minds and (separately) all other possible variations of our minds are just traversing a certain set of already existing possibilites.

The implication of which is, from my perspective a "different" you is reading this post than read the previous one.

 

perhaps this is because I'm on my second glass of Sangiovese wine.

It's a fun concept to let roam around the old melon. I'm not to familiar with Block Time, but once I post this I'll go read a bit. It'll be good to get my head out my work for a while and read something totally different.

 

If you have any good links to block time theory, please share them

 

That's 2-month-old British news. Here's one that's only 6 days old.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...o-make-contact-with-PARALLEL-UNIVERSE-in-days

 

Yes, I'd say that a purely mathematical view of the universe would mean that everything was pre-determined. There are neuro-scientists that argue that we don't actually have free will, and that we're simply robotically following brain function.

I don't buy into that idea personally, I think the mainstream scientific view tries to cut consciousness out of the equation. Once you incorporate consciousness, then you open the door for other possibilities, such as there being intention and design in the formation of the universe.

 

I can see your point here, but why would having an unconscious beginning not be compatible? I think the mainstream thinking would argue that consciousness is somewhat an anomaly of a natural byproduct of the entire process. Possibly, one's consciousness is not bound by matter, space or time.

Could be how time travel is possible. Because if your matter traveled back in time, the matter would be what it was during that time. Or in the future, matter would change to what it is during that time. Possibly only consciousness can stay the same in the different facets of time.

 

Bump.

Lately I've read stuff from Dr. Penrose on consciousness and they are looking at it from a quantum physics angle - subatomic level:



The mathmatic/supersymmetry angle is also interesting:

 

What about the law and order angle? What if terrorists get hold of the information in this thread? Has anyone thought about this? They probably get some of their intelligence info by monitoring this board. Notice that Denny strangely does not require a password to read these secrets. What is his motive? Whose side is he on?

 

Reddit gold:

 

I stopped reading at Big Bang, because I don't believe that the universe had a beginning, or that it will ever have an end. Then I read the rest anyway and my opinion is nothing is destined to be.

 

In physics, "breaking causality" means to go faster than light. Recently, Woodward's theory of causation has become prominent.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=woodwa...=-1&sk=&cvid=cc80084678fc4803aa668aa4d14157c6

 

Nick Bostrom's simulation theory is mind boggling.

His theory even had Sam Harris (!!!!) pondering an afterlife.

 

I'm sticking with Douglass Addams theories but the disclaimer here is that we humans are limited in our ability to translate senses that go beyond our tools of perception. We tend to have a need to date events and seek definitions that are time based. Segovia said it well. Just before his life ended he said he was just beginning to understand the guitar. The journey is fascinating and our questions are interesting but honestly, do we need the answers? Seems like the guys who devote their lives to the unknown end up insane and frustrated. In my decades in Asia I taught myself to speak Mandarin fairly well without learning to read Chinese characters and there was a freedom in the way I approached it. I wasn't constantly bombarded with advertising and information that had no purpose in my daily life. It was art to me, not adds for crap I had no interest in purchasing or voting for. Sometimes less is more

 

The matrix has you neo!

 

In this simulation theory, what is the afterlife? Im a bit confused.

It seems like it coincides with Dr. Gates' discovery - web brower correcting codes found in the fabric of the cosmos.

 

I don't think he actually says one way or another. It's more like, anything is possible in a simulation theory. It doesn't support Theism nor Atheism. I mean I guess you could call the being or conscious that created the simulation "God", but it doesn't mean this being is more "powerful" in a spiritual sense. I mean, it could be just a more advanced species that still dies like the rest of us. It could also support a eternal being. It could also support no being at all.

It's just a concept that we are Simmed by another intelligence or the universe itself has always been programmed to support our sim. Doesn't mean we live past death.

 

Nothing new for Harris. He's never been a rigid naturalist, unlike Dawkins.