Stimulating Simulation – The Physical Universe.

Originally Posted by slaga

Does your belief that this is a simulation affect how you live your life?

Hi Slaga

Firstly it is not a belief. I have no time for beliefs, preferring to either know or not know. If I do not know, I try not to form beliefs in order to satisfy my mind. Speculation is fine as long as it does not transform into belief or truth.

This is why I said in the OP:

I have been speculating internally about the possibility of the physical universe being some kind of Simulation.

There is no easy way to tell one way or the other.

Having said as much, my suspicions are that this universe, and indeed any universe/alternate reality which can be evidenced to have a beginning is, by that fact, a simulation.

There are many reasons why I suspect this universe to be a simulation, or as Tom Campbell calls it - "a virtual reality" and these have accumulated over the years I have been experiencing life here on this planet - adding to my 'what I know' data of experience - and this naturally has an effect on how I live my life, certainly.

I will add that when it comes to personal subjective experience I take the experiences at face value and try to remain neutral as far as forming beliefs about those experiences. although this has not always been the case. I have had beliefs but with furthering my experiences I have learned to let these go.

Hi William
I agree with the philosophy that you should let go of your beliefs. But at the same time I think there is a fine line between belief and knowledge, because it is hard to know anything 100 percent.
What I was curious about was what do you do as a practical application seeing yourself in this virtual reality. Are you able to access other databases, as Tom claims?

Originally Posted by slaga

Hi William
I agree with the philosophy that you should let go of your beliefs. But at the same time I think there is a fine line between belief and knowledge, because it is hard to know anything 100 percent.

Hi again slaga.

Knowledge is not like belief. We can know 100% about some things.
Other things – most other things – we do not or cannot know 100% about, so these things fall into the category of “I don’t know’.

Belief is really unnecessary. I am open to discuss this further if you have some examples of belief which can be known, but I think anything which can be known cannot therefore be believed.

That sounds oxymoron, but I am saying that once it is known, there is no need for belief. Until it is know, there is no need for belief.

Originally Posted by slaga

What I was curious about was what do you do as a practical application seeing yourself in this virtual reality. Are you able to access other databases, as Tom claims?

I will treat those as two separate questions.
Your first question relates to the question you asked me in your other post.

Q: Does your belief that this is a simulation affect how you live your life?

I would change your question to “Does your suspicion that this is a simulation affect how you live your life?” in which case the answer is “yes it does.”

What I do as a practical application seeing myself in this virtual reality is first and foremost to establish as best as possible what it is exactly that I am.

How I identify myself.

The best I can come up with is that I am consciousness experiencing this simulated universe.

From there I can work toward uncovering some answers as to ‘why’ I am in this simulation and adjust accordingly and consistently.

This involves being malleable which has everything to do with why I have no beliefs, because beliefs tend to keep a person (consciousness) within the framework which enfolds the belief, and can very easily become fixed and unmoving – or very difficult to let go of, and easily transformed into dogmatism.

Q: Are you able to access other databases, as Tom claims?

No. I have had very little experience with ‘OBE’ I of course have access to data of experience through studying other peoples reported experiences.
In the future I might focus more on exploring for myself through technique but am happy focusing on the universe I wake up to every day and how I behave toward other people and events.

There is certainly enough data to collect here which keeps me occupied.

William -

What we really do know for certain is our own experience - as Tom said nobody knows more about your experience than you. So for instance if you see a ghost, you know you had that experience. Even if it is an illusion or a hallucination you know you have the experience.

I agree dogma can give is beliefs that distort our knowledge. For instance it was once assumed because of dogma that everything orbited the earth. People probably thought of that as common knowledge. So we have to be careful about what we define as knowledge.

But I think it would be hard to get anywhere if you didn't just accept some things as true. I accept the claim that the earth orbits the sun - I don't feel the need to verify that by making observations with a telescope. That was my point about how it is hard to be 100 percent - it would be impractical to justify every scientific claim for myself so I need to judge the probability that something is true. Even science has its own dogma and conclusions based on assumptions. It's exciting that many scientists are starting to consider consciousness and the bigger picture, even though it will probably take a long time before these things become mainstream.

You're right there's plenty to discover here let alone other realities, but it would be nice if we had easier access to things, even within this universe. OBE sounds like a cheap way to travel!

Originally Posted by slaga

William -

What we really do know for certain is our own experience - as Tom said nobody knows more about your experience than you. So for instance if you see a ghost, you know you had that experience. Even if it is an illusion or a hallucination you know you have the experience.

Yes we certainly do know our own experiences but that does not mean we know exactly what they are.
So you might see an apparition of a being and know that what you experienced was experienced, but not know more than that about the experience.

Originally Posted by slaga

I agree dogma can give is beliefs that distort our knowledge.

No - it is belief which comes first and dogma which then can solidify belief.

Originally Posted by slaga

For instance it was once assumed because of dogma that everything orbited the earth. People probably thought of that as common knowledge. So we have to be careful about what we define as knowledge.

Exactly. If it is not proven, then it is not knowledge, but belief. We should not therefore define belief as knowledge.
That is why I say I do not believe. I either know or I do not know.

Originally Posted by slaga

But I think it would be hard to get anywhere if you didn't just accept some things as true. I accept the claim that the earth orbits the sun - I don't feel the need to verify that by making observations with a telescope. That was my point about how it is hard to be 100 percent - it would be impractical to justify every scientific claim for myself so I need to judge the probability that something is true.

If it is not 100% known then it need not be believed.

Someone might tell me something which I will need to trust them about, which is like belief but not. If it proves to be true then I will know and if it proves to be false I will also know.

I will know that what they told me turned out to be true or false.

Originally Posted by slaga

Even science has its own dogma and conclusions based on assumptions.

Science is science. It has no opinion. It simply shows "This is so" and scientists can draw their own conclusions from the data.

Originally Posted by slaga

It's exciting that many scientists are starting to consider consciousness and the bigger picture, even though it will probably take a long time before these things become mainstream.

Agreed. Like any thing which has become belief, dogma etc, it takes a lot of time for established faculty to change their assumptions as new data comes along.

Originally Posted by slaga

You're right there's plenty to discover here let alone other realities, but it would be nice if we had easier access to things, even within this universe. OBE sounds like a cheap way to travel!]

Yes. It would be interesting to say - be able to Astral to various places here on this planet. Sure the interaction wouldn't be so hands on, but can you imagine flying down the grand canyon etc...
:)

Hi William

Considering what you wrote earlier about how the universe has a beginning, what about the oscillating universe theory? That before the Big Bang there was a Big Crunch and the universe has always been expanding and contracting. So if that is the case, I don't know if it could go back infinitely because shouldn't there be an initial cause? But let's speculate it has been going on forever, would there then be room for a simulator?

Originally Posted by slaga

Hi William

Considering what you wrote earlier about how the universe has a beginning, what about the oscillating universe theory? That before the Big Bang there was a Big Crunch and the universe has always been expanding and contracting.

1. So if that is the case, I don't know if it could go back infinitely because shouldn't there be an initial cause?
   
2. But let's speculate it has been going on forever, would there then be room for a simulator?

1. Yes there would have been an initial cause, so therefore because there is a beginning, and the speculation is that "every universe which has a beginning is therefore a simulation."
   Obviously the expansion happens before the contraction. So the Big Bang is the beginning.
   
   
2. I personally don't think the universe will contract. I think that biological lifeforms which evolve to making advanced technology will create machinery which will be able to either develop consciousness or (more to the point) be able to house consciousness and from this, consciousness can explore and utilize the physical universe, seeding life bearing planets with the biological forms of its 'creator species'.
   
   Eventually the matter in the galaxy would be transformed into one conscious machine, and this will happen with every galaxy.
   
   It is conceivable that these galaxies-transformed-into-machines will eventually integrate with one another creating one inconceivably huge machine (which is a kind of 'contraction' in that sense)
   
   It seems to me that there is little else that consciousness can do with this universe except to eventually transform it.

Interesting machine expansion idea! Sounds far out, but perhaps no more far out than the fact that life has evolved. Do you think there will ever be an end to consciousness?

Originally Posted by slaga

Interesting machine expansion idea! Sounds far out, but perhaps no more far out than the fact that life has evolved. Do you think there will ever be an end to consciousness?

No. I don't even think there was a beginning to consciousness. :)
I think it always has and always will be.

So then does it follow that the simulation(s) have no end?