my theory of our world imagined
#1
Posted 17 November 2004 - 10:06 PM
An example is the recent Soviet City, i thought up for someone. It has government, rebels, civilians all trapped in a Soviet controlled zone, surrounded by an Iron Curtain. Like a contained Eco system.
If we then take this a step further and think that there is an alien with a brain powerful enough to imagine everything each person is thinking within that city.
We then stretch further to an alien which can imagine a universe and every living thing within it. Every species, ever movement and every thought. This imagination is the Earth we all live in and we are all thoughts of another being.
I don’t believe this, but i'm interested in what other people think of it.
Makes me think of The Matrix. At least you could escape from the Matrix, this your stuck in.
#2
Posted 17 November 2004 - 10:46 PM
I dont believe either, but the imagination of the world is essentially a wrap around of God. Instead of us perceiving God to be this external being which created the universe and watches over it, we are instead part of God living in his "brain"/"imagination".
The problem with this theory is that of choice. If we are essentially someones imagination then every choice we make is not a free one, but one chosen for us by our creator. Of course you can never prove that we do have choice or that all our decisions are made for us by this external being. Another arguement against it is that with a growing universe, the "memory" you would need to keep the universe alive would increase. Assuming this being is finite, there will be a point where it cant add any more to the universe, it cant change the universe since it doesnt have the "memory" to do it. Because of this it would need to flush out the existing universe and start again. But then ultimately if it has to die why create it in the first place? Its like writing a book, only to get to the end of the book, tear out all the pages and write a new book. Theres no real point to it other than self fulliment. For me its bizarre to think that I exist just for someones enjoyment.
The problem with any theory is that noone ever knows the answer. And should it really worry us how we got here, where we go when it ends. The important thing is what we do now.
*EDIT* I forgot to say how both this and Jane's/Sarah's Theorems are Paradoxal. If we're someones imagination and are controlled by someone else, why ever make us think that there is someone controlling us. Why would someone tell you they were controlling you? And if they can make us think this, why cant they make us find a way to prove it. Because you thought of this idea, is almost a proof its not true.
Edited by AdmiralGT, 17 November 2004 - 10:49 PM.
#3
Posted 17 November 2004 - 11:20 PM
My City example comes in here. I thought of the City and have written it down on paper.Another arguement against it is that with a growing universe, the "memory" you would need to keep the universe alive would increase. Assuming this being is finite, there will be a point where it cant add any more to the universe, it cant change the universe since it doesnt have the "memory" to do it. Because of this it would need to flush out the existing universe and start again. But then ultimately if it has to die why create it in the first place? Its like writing a book, only to get to the end of the book, tear out all the pages and write a new book. Theres no real point to it other than self fulliment. For me its bizarre to think that I exist just for someones enjoyment.
The being could have been creative and made us up for an arcade game. The game has been programed and fellow beings are playing it, he no longer needs to hold us in his head, so we no longer exist. He's now thinking up a new game for the gam0r beings to play.
I'm not currently thinking of the city in my head. It's on paper, waiting for someone to read.
#4
Posted 18 November 2004 - 03:25 PM
But the way you describe it is very confusing. So much so that I barely understood it. Especially in your first post. I didn't really see where it was going, even at the end.
Nor do I like the idea that my choices are not mine. I don't believe in fate because I don't like the idea I'm a hamster running a set course through a maze. ¬_¬
#5
Posted 18 November 2004 - 03:45 PM
Most people can imagine their perfect partner. How they look and act. Story tellers like myself can think up simple places, stories, people and events. A Being with a powerful mind could think up a huge and complex universe and everything that goes on within it.
This Being could think up and Earth and all the billion people on it. The Being could then give us our thoughts. Our world is the imagination of another Being.
I don’t believe any of this bollox, it is only a theory.
You don’t have to look at this like Spiral Dream and assume that all our thoughts are made for us. We could be using part of the Being’s brain to make our own thoughts. We make our own choices using the brain of the super Being, in the setting it has given us.
I don’t think up stories as an experiment. I think them up for enjoyment. The Being might be doing the same.
#6
Posted 18 November 2004 - 07:02 PM
I, like you, write stories. I create fictional universes with fictional characters in them. Therefore on that level I can understand what you're getting at, now I get the gist of the argument
If the being was capable of thinking up a universe as diverse as ours, with as much variety of life, species, etc, and it is able to simultaneously process over 6 billion thoughts (either through its own devising or whether we are using it to process our thoughts the way we might use a computer to process other forms of data) of one species on this one planet, I would not like to know just how powerful this damn being is. And if he's doing most of this for enjoyment, I won't go into just how damn sick he is. I mean, I can find shit on the internet of some very, very sick-minded individuals. But to have X amount of these sick stories going off in one's head simultaneously...doesn't bear thinking of.
Are you suggesting this universe is fictitious? Or that we are actors in a never-ending story?
"life is not a rehearsal. At least I hope it's not, because I'd hate to go through all this crap once every day and twice on Saturdays"
#8
Posted 18 November 2004 - 11:18 PM
#10
Posted 19 November 2004 - 08:24 PM
#11
Posted 19 November 2004 - 08:29 PM
#12
Posted 19 November 2004 - 10:09 PM
Organism to cell, cell to atom, atom to proton, neutron, and electron, then to quarks, muons, and gluons, and then on to strings.
#13
Posted 21 November 2004 - 05:13 PM
My theory of the world:
Organism to cell, cell to atom, atom to proton, neutron, and electron, then to quarks, muons, and gluons, and then on to strings.
I'm certain there is something very interesting between the subatomic and the strings.
Spiral, how do you define "sick" ? I'm trying to find out what you compare it with - for one cannot say "this is very sick" when he doesn't compare it with anything.
You need a kind of zero-point, like centigrade is attached to the melting point of water. If the zero point in the definition "sick" is the normal everyday life of a "traditional" human being, is this an objective point of view with which you have the ability to draw conclusions effectively?
#14
Posted 21 November 2004 - 05:22 PM
And neither have strings...
Edited by MSpencer, 21 November 2004 - 05:26 PM.
#15
Posted 21 November 2004 - 11:02 PM
And neither have strings...
You are correct (if there is such a thing, as that has of course not been seen as well).
But then again, electrons have never been seen as well.
#16
Posted 21 November 2004 - 11:59 PM
sometimes do you ever feel life, doesn't exist I mean you wake and think why is there reality instead of nothingness?
I thought I was the only one, its fucking weird isnt it? You cant explain it but all around dosent seem real, its like a waking dream, a daze of sorts.
Corrupt program now requires constant reboots and does not function at all in majority of instances. Designed with a web browser component to replace AOL, it has exceeded our expectations by being more crashy and unreliable and with worse tech support. We didn't think it was physically possible! A general product recall is advised; when it does function it seems to require background processes Girl 0.1Beta to stave off further crashes. Will someone PLEASE remove that code, and insert Backbone 1.9 in its place? That's assuming we even bother to continue this prog.
#17
Posted 22 November 2004 - 01:01 AM
its all a bit mental.
#19
Posted 22 November 2004 - 11:14 AM
#20
Posted 26 November 2004 - 07:01 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users