The Universe Solved

 


Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Checkmate..... Options
ShadowWind
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 4:59:40 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 8/18/2013
Posts: 40
Points: 120
Checkmate….Inception.

I find myself comparing this dream field we live in, an inception, with the game of chess. The game of chess is filled with strategies and emotional content. The game teaches us valuable life skills as well, and one of these involves…..observation.

It would seem we have the pieces of the game coming into place. We are solving the riddle of our purpose and existence. Now that we have figured out the game play, what would be the ‘checkmate’ point of our journey? As have any with the inception idea, there is an acceleration of time that is moving to the endgame. There are many ideas as to how the game will end…or begin….

The checkmate point involves the human journey evolutionary process by which we are an extension of the game masters. We need to reconcile the fact that we are ‘pawns’ in a very real world, facing physical and psychological challenges. The ‘inception holodeck’ is designed as a dream field where we are given ‘life’ and set upon an adventure. These adventure protocols are set within our DNA blueprint. Our lifespans and adventures have been probably planned in advanced, with room for probability and freedom of course direction. There exists extreme emotional content we face, the happiness and the tragedies. The stability of life and the surprises that come along when a maelstrom enters into our life.

We find ourselves jockeying for a position in this life instead of maybe just living a life of being an excellent neighbor, friend, and dedicated family member. We keep on seeking, searching, inquiring, and hope we can find solutions to whatever questions and emotional issues facing us. We need to remember the common fact that we are family, the human family and the game masters are waiting for the moment when we place down the weapons and realize that we have to create a harmonic accord or face a checkmate point by the game masters.

Where do we go from here?
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 5:18:26 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
According to your philosophy, who are the game masters?
ShadowWind
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 7:52:47 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 8/18/2013
Posts: 40
Points: 120
My viewpoint is that we may be the game masters, the legends, the heroes, and the myths we have read about. We are the treasure waiting to be opened and discovered. Humanity has seeded it's history within the matrix of the planet in the form of 'time capsules'.

Think of these as messages in a bottle that you have come upon by happenstance, or maybe by synchronicity. You open the bottle and read the messages( my posts) and are given insights. The messages may have been written for you, or perhaps BY you from the past or future giving you insight. You may be the author of the program and story line. We may find that we are the ancient court jesters, the poets, the philosophers that have no agenda, but are just game masters of curiosity, and that the evolution of the characters involve discovering the depths of emotional content that humanity has displayed, the drama of humanity.

The planet Earth may have been designed as a universal, Hollywood set that has seen cultures of the game come and pass, leaving their stories seeded within the planet to be discovered, and we have been created to satisfy notions that this project may be an exercise in exploring attitudes of personal character. The program may have been designed to evolve....similar to an AI, but highly complex and may not be comprehensible, in order to see what the outcome is, with limited interference by the game masters.

And finally,it would seem we are trying to reconcile our existence and purpose through a 'creator', and the folklore. This may only be a clue as to what we really are and why we have come upon this plane of existence. We may come to find that "we are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of the dream."



Perhaps we may be the game masters themselves, given the inception protocols. We may find that 'we are the music makers and the dreamers of the dream.'
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 10:48:50 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
You mention that we are an extension of the game masters. I'll take it one step further and say, we are all extensions of the Logos. Metaphorically speaking, think of it as our own individuated consciousness attached by an umbilical cord to the Logos. Synonyms for the Logos are: The Absolute, The Void, The Unfathomable, Above and Beyond All Space and Time, or the Ultimate Source of all Knowledge = The One Source.

The idea that we are all extensions of the "One Source" could be the reason why subatomic particles are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them as discovered by Alain Aspect [Alain Aspect is a French Physicist noted for his experimental work on quantum entanglement]. It is not because they are sending some sort of mysterious signal back and forth, but because, their separateness is, in fact, an illusion!
ShadowWind
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 11:46:58 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 8/18/2013
Posts: 40
Points: 120
Absolutely :)
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Saturday, August 31, 2013 6:32:40 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
Sorry folks, I've edited my post to read "metaphorically speaking" instead of "hypothetically". Gosh my English sucks at times!
jim
Posted: Saturday, August 31, 2013 10:58:59 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 817
Points: 2,454
Hi ShadowWind,

Don't think I have welcomed you to the Forum yet, so - Welcome! It is always great to have new insights and perspectives being contributed to the forum. That is what keeps it alive!

Honestly, I haven't fully read everything that is on here, but I do feel compelled to offer a couple thoughts and this seems like a great post for that.

One of the questions I am always asked is "who did it? who programmed it?" And of course, the answer is that we have no idea. There are a couple of logical categories of possibilities though:

1. Us in our apparent future (Bostrom's posthuman scenario).
2. Some other intelligence.
3. It evolved and there was no programmer entity per se.

The first two are the easiest to understand and therefore, perhaps the reason that we typically gravitate to those solutions. One thing that has always bothered me about #1 is that life seems to be rather mundane for a long term simulation, so it is hard to imagine a future humanity that would be so interested in a simulation that is in their past. Would most of us want to experience a long term simulation in the 1940s? Probably not. Of course, the problem with that line of thinking is that it is logic that comes from a 2013 human mentality, which is admittedly never going to be too far from our comfort zone. A clue that might lead us to a decision about which category the programmer is in is the evidence for the purpose of it all. At first glance it might seem that we are simply trading one unanswerable question for another, but that is actually not the case. There is a tremendous amount of anecdotal evidence around purpose - shamanic lore, NDE research, OBE accounts, Edgar Cayce's documented trances, historical documentation of statements of mystics, documented statements about "what goes on in between lives" from past life regressions. Amazingly, these are strongly correlated. As a scientifically-minded person, I can't ignore that and consider a meta-analysis of this data to be great evidence for purpose - the purpose being evolving consciousness. But that makes little sense in scenario #1.

Scenario #2 fares only a little better from a logical standpoint. In that case, the actual programmer would have to have created a massive simulation (way beyond our apparent physical reality) where the outcome is to evolve consciousness. But to what end? What satisfaction does the programmed get out of this, other than possibly power or entertainment. Such an advanced mind would certainly have a better motive. Again, unfortunately, I am trying to apply 2013 human logic to something that would, in this case, be so far beyond my comprehension as to be almost pointless. Still, fun to speculate about.

But #3 is appealing on a number of levels. It doesn't require anthropomorphized motive. It doesn't require a prime mover. It only requires something that we already have in evidence - a process of evolution. Or, to use a less sticky term, a complex system process whereby profitable outcomes are reinforced and less profitable outcomes are not. Everything in evidence appears to follow this process. Tom Campbell and others have put forth this theory.

One of the apparent truths that I find very interesting, especially as it relates to this post about Inception, is the idea of consensus reality. Our dreams are not at all a consensus reality - hence our minds are free to mold them however we see fit, for the purposes of learning or evolving perhaps. Our physical matter reality, in contrast, is a highly consensus reality because for it to be effective at its purpose, we must all experience largely the same thing. Mutual lucid dreams fall somewhere in the middle - a weak consensus reality. Interestingly, there is really a spectrum of "level of apparent fixedness of reality." Quantum Mechanics research has shown that there is nothing at the 100% fixed and of that spectrum. Realizing the existence of this spectrum and how it plays into our ideas about what all is really going on is some of my current research and thinking.
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Monday, September 02, 2013 9:27:09 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
By the way, the Void is beyond explanation, since it is not really a Void at all. It is a perpetual paradox!!
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Saturday, September 07, 2013 10:00:00 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
And furthermore, science can never explain how something can come into being from absolutely nothing. Why? Because there is no physics of non-being. If there was truly nothing, then there could never be something. If there was ever nothing, then there would be nothing still. This is from the classical philosophical formulation, "ex nihilo nihil fit" or, "Out of Nothing comes Nothing". But there is something even though it may be immaterial and, the only immaterial, timeless, spaceless, entities known are abstract objects and disembodied minds. I believe that abstracts objects such as logical laws and mathematical principles existed "timelessly" prior to the origins of the Universe. They are, however, causally effete.

jim
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 12:54:32 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 817
Points: 2,454
Thanks, "Bot" - very interesting points. I've had to chew on these for a bit. :)

In general, the "Out of Nothing comes Nothing" idea makes a lot of sense. What do you think of Steven Kaufman's idea that the void was "absolute existence" and that reality evolved from this state by self-relationship?: http://unifiedreality.com/what_is_URT.html It is indeed mystical, but is effectively something from nothing with a little bit of logic.

I think I have a different view on logical laws and mathematical principles existing timelessly. To me, math and laws comes second - they are an attempt to model or describe behavior. The true "law" may be Tom Campbell's "Fundamental Process", the tendency to evolve toward more profitable states.. All other laws are derived. In this case, and coupling the idea above, there would be no laws prior to the first instance of absolute existence referencing itself. Once that "spark" happened, the Fundamental Process became the only law. All other laws derive from that once existence is complex enough to form patterns. In general, I have a problem with infinity, including concepts of "timelessness." But that's just me. :)
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Monday, September 09, 2013 5:07:15 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
jim, you've left me with a lot to chew on as well :)

Unfortunately, I'm not getting off to a good start as the link you provided doesn't seem to work :( . Also, I'd best buy and read TC's book to give me a better understanding of this "Fundamental Process" you mention.

jim, "timelessness" might just mean the absence of physical time. However, it is possible that in addition to physical time there is another kind of time - metaphysical time.

And, furthermore, Stephen Hawking believes physical laws as pre-existing the origins of the Universe. In his book, the Grand Design, Stephen argues that the big bang rather than occurring following the intervention of a divine being was inevitable due to the law of gravity. "Because there is a law of gravity the universe can and will create itself from nothing", he writes. "Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist".

Unless, I am not interpreting this correctly - Why is it rational to see gravity as pre-existing the origins of the universe and exerting causal influence "before" time began but not rational to extend the same privilege to a divine being (or mind)? Stephen's reasoning seems flawed (inconsistent). He will not allow for a divine being (mind) what he allows for in the case of gravity.
jim
Posted: Monday, September 09, 2013 7:46:10 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 817
Points: 2,454
Sorry about the link. It didn't like the period at the end of it. Fixed now!

Yes, Hawking, like most scientists, comes at this from the standpoint of methodological materialism, an a priori assumption that there is nothing spiritual. It is scientific dogma of sorts, as unprovable and illogical as most religious dogma. But, because he starts with assumption, he has to come up with something that fits into known scientific laws in order to explain the universe.

Philosophically, you are correct - there is no more reason to assume that gravity pre-existed the universe than any other force or prime mover. Certainly, since science can NOT explain what happened at the supposed big bang (even with all of our theory, it breaks down at the singularity, and there are theories galore the attempt to reconcile quantum mechanics and relativity), and acknowledge that laws of physics may have even changed as the universe evolved, it is only logical to conclude that the conditions prior to the big bang may be outside the scope of known physics. It is like if I create a simulation with rules of gravity and maximum speed limits, I can do that from a reality with no such rules, easily. But such thinking implies either intelligence or a level of reality beyond what we can comprehend, both of which are non-starter ideas for most scientists. Too bad for them. :)
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Thursday, September 12, 2013 1:14:37 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
jim, thanks a lot for fixing the link. :)

From what I could glean from the synopsis I reckon that the whole of Kaufman's book might be worth a read. He sounds as if he could be a man after my own heart. :). I'll let you know what I think after I've finished reading the book.
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:21:32 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
And, perhaps I should have added: "..............and since abstract objects are causally effete, the cause of the universe must be mind". :)

I take comfort in the knowledge that the English Physicist James Jean shares my viewpoint too!!

"The Universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine"- James Jean.
ShadowWind
Posted: Thursday, September 19, 2013 8:41:52 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 8/18/2013
Posts: 40
Points: 120
" I think...therefore I am..."
mortimer
Posted: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 10:54:26 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/27/2008
Posts: 35
Points: 105
Location: Scotland
"Bot"-tee-licious wrote:
And furthermore, science can never explain how something can come into being from absolutely nothing.


What about the 0=2 equation?

0 = (+1) + (-1)

If 0 is a state of "absolute zero" and +1 and -1 cancel each other out, then how does one explain that +1 and -1 are actual things/concepts in themselves?

Perhaps the absence of something is the cause of something?

Paradoxical, I know, but one might think of matter and anti-matter.

In that sense, the universe itself could indeed be mind, as you suggest "Bot", since from a state of absolute zero the first glimmer of existence might merely be the concept of the simplest of basic arithmetic, which would suggest the first concept of intelligence. From there it only needs to expand and become more complex.

It's hard for me to describe what I mean in words, but I hope you get the picture.

media underground
jdlaw
Posted: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 7:03:58 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2008
Posts: 280
Points: 755
Location: USA
ShadowWind wrote:
" I think...therefore I am..."
... or the higher level simulation realization -- I think therefore I might become.

(This is a higher level free will - objective self awareness.)

I also like the idea that we actually are -- our own gamemasters. However, we purposely set our games up so that we don't remember the before game. After the game, we can always go back and review how well we layed out the program for ourselves and how well our characters performed. The goal is to achieve better self awareness through passing out of the programming realm and into the program. Sentience is a thing we think we have here, but it really is just developing. We chose to do this before we entered the game, because when presented with the option of being an NPC (non-player-character) it was a little boring and too omnimpotent inflated for most of our likings. On some go arounds of course we do choose to be NPCs (angel or god like universal personalities of our choosing) but at least for me - not this go around ... of course you would have no way of telling the difference ... if I were some kind of angel, I wouldn't tell you about it. Also realize that in the program space (some call "Akashic Field") we are completely outside this time and space. We likely have more than one game going on (multiple realities - multiple mortal existences).
Techne
Posted: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 7:21:50 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 9/2/2011
Posts: 54
Points: 180
this all may be a result of the transfer of mind into the computer. The idea of becoming data would of course limit the emotional impact. The sim would be almost nothing more then an series of events designed to stir up emotional impact. What else would it be for? I don't think it's a soul leveler of some type. But rather an emotional generator of sorts. If it is a sim made by "future\past" humans. Then it really only has this level to play. To think by merging with machines we would become some type of god like the god we try to define now is kinda just not possible. Gods of a simulation that recreates things we lost and love... sure. But gods bent on relearning how to be holy or something just doesn't seem quite right. Or like raising new souls through a learning simulation, why? What would you need more of them for? This is to regain things we gave up. Its hard, it's tough, an unbeatable game, it's how we like it.
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Thursday, January 02, 2014 9:07:05 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
First of all I would like to take this opportunity to wish everybody - 'A Happy New Year'!!

To mortimer, jdlaw and Techne - thanks for all your wonderful insights. Welcome back jdlaw, long time, no hear!


mortimer wrote:

0 = (+1) + (-1)

If 0 is a state of "absolute zero" and +1 and -1 cancel each other out, then how does one explain that +1 and -1 are actual things/concepts in themselves?



mortimer, I do get the picture, thanks :)

What you have written reminds me of the I-Ching's (IC) merit as a powerful binary fractal program with the first level in the bifurcation process being but a simple 1 dimensional line.

Let me explain!

The IC Hexagram can describe a position in both space and time (i.e the 4th Dimension) - this comes about as polarity in space progresses from a point to a line (unigram) to a plane (bigram) to a cube (trigram - space) and then finally to a tetra-cube (hexagram- space-time).

At the starting point (level 0) in this hierarchal tree-like system we have the static point. This denotes the realm of the Absolute- no time, no space and no dimensions. A stream of Consciousness emanates from this point.

At the first level of bifurcation there are 2^1 = 2 possible outcomes, notably, yin (0) and yang (1) to give width and the line [i.e polar opposites, akin to mortimer's concept of (-1) and (+1)]

At the second level there are 2^2 = 4 possible outcomes, viz, yin/yin, yin/yang, yang/yin and yang/yang to give width and depth and the 4 co-ordinate vertices of the plane.

At the third level there are 2^3 = 8 possible permutations of yin and yang, viz, yin/yin/yin, yin/yin/yang, yin/yang/yang ...... and so on, to give width, depth and height and the 8 co-ordinate vertices of the cube.

These polarised cubes can then join together to form a 3D grid-like array or Matrix of cellular automata. Matter in motion is an illusion caused by the shifting of stable particle-like information patterns from cell to cell or cube to cube in 3D cellular automata space. The Hexagram (comprised of 2 trigrams stacked on top of each other) can be symbolic for matter in motion. By configuring a space cube (lower trigram) with a time cube (upper trigram) we end up with a 4D space-time cosmic tetra-cube. The tetra-cube can be thought of as the 4D analogue of the cube.

The mathematical system of the IC is a highly efficient and compact shorthand for a kind of mathematics to help us describe the nature of space, time, matter and energy, at a deeper level, paradoxically. The I-Ching is a highly efficient MasterCode, with layers upon layers of meaning, both qualitative and quantitative, embedded within its structure.

Too much to cover all in the one post, sorry!!

EDIT: Space-time is not a Euclidean space. See alteration in my subsequent post dated 12 Jan 2014.
"Bot"-tee-licious
Posted: Thursday, January 02, 2014 1:57:18 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/22/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 245
Location: Scotland, UK
Oops, mortimer, I think I've totally misconstrued your post. I posted too soon without taking the time to properly digest what you wrote. Too much New Year's booze has totally scrambled my brains!!

Out of nothing= "absolute zero" can arise something i.e +1 and -1, which are definitely actual concepts in themselves. You say -" Perhaps the absence of something is the cause of something". This is a very interesting point. I'm now totally confused!! Can you leave me awhile to think this over? Are you, in effect, saying that mind/consciousness/intelligence developed from the state of "absolute zero" and that mind or consciousness didn't always exist in another Realm, outwith space and time?

In my post above, I assumed that an intelligence or mind already existed to initiate the bifurcation process, so it bears no relevance, whatsoever, to the contents of mortimer's post. Sorry folks!!
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Universe Solved Theme Created by Jim Elvidge (Universe Solved)
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.2 (NET v2.0) - 9/27/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
This page was generated in 0.154 seconds.