I’ve been reading a lot of stuff relating to reality. One very common theory that I find interesting is the one where we are threads of consciousness having an experience. My favourite writer on this topic is Tom Campbell who is known for his OBE skills. He writes that all experience is a kind of digital holographic reality and based on certain probabilities and rule sets (ie the matrix) and rendered to our consciousness like an xbox renders a Halo experience to a player. Anyway my thought is that maybe our awake experience and our dream experience are being rendered to us from the same “xbox” but each have different levels of probabilities and rulesets. Our awake reality has a very fixed rule set (ie gravity) and therefore an apparent impossibility to fly. Whereas in our dream state the rule sets are not as fixed (ie ease of flying). Claims that people can actually levitate in the awake reality suggest that maybe they have enough mental energy to overcome the stronger probability rule set of gravity in our awake life.
Say for example that if all realities are rendered via a “central digital consciousness computer” then just as we interact with other players in awake reality then it would be so in the dream reality and shared dreams would be possible. In fact in a digital world the other players could either be AI or other real people playing online. An AI player could be rendered to appear and act like someone you know or it could be them for real.
I consider the reality and the dream world as two different dimensions. As you said, they’re ruled by different set of rules. It’s fact, that our dream world is connected with our experiences in real life, and very ofted the dream scheme, dialogues, adventures or characters are built on what we subconciulsy thought through the day. I experience it a lot, when during the day in real life I have some problems to solve or think a lot about some cases, and the dream are exactly about these problems or cases. Of course there are also dreams not related to them, but I’m sure these are connected with my other feelings or emotions, or, like the Freud said, with our subconciously desires.
When I enter the dream world I feel like entering another world, like in fantastic games or movies, where anything can happen. It’s as I think the only world possible (so far) technique to experience adventures in other reality. It’s wonderful.
About mental energy - I believe it’s possible. In history the were many people who could levitate, do telekisesis, or show other unbelieveable actions. Of course many of them, definetely the most part, were just cheating, but I think that particular individuals were doing what they were doing because of the bigger mental energy, they used their subconcious power (and, what I want to add, the subconcious is VERY POWERFUL)) to achieve different goals. And those, who doesn’t believe in this “brain power” I just want to remind for example the “placebo effect”. The placebo is a drug, which doesn’t have any medical or curring effects (it can be e.g. water with specific colour or just a sugar like glucose), but when doctor, while giving to a patient, is saying, that it is a “powerful medicine which surely get you better”. There were a lot of cases when patient are getting better from illness after eating placebo, and that’s the proof that our mind and subconciousness has a great power and influence on our abilities, like treating own body. Maybe if someone could learn how to use fully aware this mind powers, who knows, maybe we’ll find a great source of knowledge in our mind.
The dream world is made by our brains, the subconsciouness. It’s a virtual reality, where you can do anything you want.
The awake reality, is a real material world, where we can’t do everything, because the rules of physics apply. In contrast to our dream world, the real world isn’t generated by any brain, subconsciousness, or any kind of Xbox. It’s a material world, and while I understand your ideas that it may be similar to “The Matrix”, frankly this is not possible.
Hi paulius. I used to think exactly what you are saying but Im not so sure now. After doing alot of research and reading on the topic, the holographic reality makes so much more sense to me. However I remain open to all possibilities.
I haven’t yet had a lucid dream, but many people say that the ability to change things in them is relies on the expectations of the dreamer. Who’s to say that the reason the real world isn’t changeable is because we simply don’t expect it to change according to what we want? I realise this isn’t really a falsifiable theory, because the only way to disprove it would be to find someone who truly and completely believes that they can change something and then have them fail, but it’s still an interesting thought.
Part of the reason I say this is because you say that dreams are created by the subconscious, while waking life is “a real material world”. According to EWLD/LaBerge, the only real difference between waking life and dreams is that the sensory input in waking life is constant, whereas in dreams it isn’t as stable. In a way though, both dreams and waking life are creations of our subconscious.
All I’m saying is that for me, it’s kind of tough to place such a distinct barrier between the two. Also, this helps me to really question reality when doing RC’s, so there’s that added bonus
Ah, but how would mental energy confer a change in probability? One other materialistic theory is that mentality itself is just a product of these rules, and apart from our own pride, why would we think otherwise? And going by some social interactions and my own gaining of maturity/insanity/brainchangey, I’m wondering if most of us even play the same console. Or, if a SD requires figuratively phishing or cookie-grabbing someone’s MMO account.
Who knows? All I can say is that I will never take anyone else’s word for anything. Things I’m uncertain about would be whether this experience is dream or reality and whether other people are real or just creations. Very hard to ever know, all I know is that dreams and “reality” feel equally real and of varying importance so I will address both of them in a serious way.
Ok, let’s say that the universe we live in is simulated by some sort of a computer. We should suppose, that the computer exists in a real material world, which we are not aware of.
Our universe is infinite - it started as a big bang & generated infinite amounts of space. lots of physical mattery and energy.
Now to simulate the universe in a computer, to simulate INFINITE amounts of matter, energy and space, you would need INFINITE amounts of computer space (Hard disk/RAM etc), since infite amounts of something cannot fit in a finite amount of available space. To make a device, capable of storing infinite amounts of information, you would have to use infinite material to create such device. If you want your hard disk to store infinite amounts of information, the hard disk should be infinitely huge.
So in conclusion: It’s impossible to build a computer, which simulates a Universe, since such computer would be infinitely big.
Have you ever considered that our visible universe is, although large, not actually infinite? It would take a jump out of a belief paradigm to be open to that.
Actually the universe isn’t infinite, it’s finite and still growing. (It’s also likely there are more of them). But I agree that considering the amount of information in our universe it’s much more likely that it just exists and isn’t being simulated.
On the other hand there are plenty of clues that dreams aren’t a real ‘world’ and are being created by our brains.
I agree that our visible universe is finite (It’s around 27 billion light-years, as far as I’ve heard), because the limited speed of light. However, talking about the whole Universe, it’s infinite and has no boundaries. It is possibly curved or spherical in shape, therefore, it has no boundaries, just like the Earth. You can’t reach the edge of the Earth, even if you wanted to.
Even if the Universe had an end, it would be impossible to reach it, because of the speed the Universe is expanding. Even the speed of light, the limit of all motion in space, wouldn’t be enough, since space can grow faster than that.
Still, it would be too simple to imagine a 2D, finite universe, which is expanding. The universe is a lot more complex than that. And, regarding the topic, simulating such complex universe, with immense quantities of energy and atoms, billions of simultaneously happening proccesses would be certainly impossible.
What about tuning in to an equally complex and energetic universe that’s been pre-simulated in parallel to the one that we usually experience? I watched a documentary about parallel universes from the BBC, and thought interdimensional travel was the next step, but no, apparently it was creating a universe from scratch (well, from any spare branes) now that M-theory’s more or less figured out. Really, isn’t just making a wormhole to the next-door universe so much easier? No?
Impossible or not, some mad scientists were trying anyway.
I’ve heard of parallel universes, which can possibly be created when one travels backwards in time. Those two universes are identical to eachother up to the point, when you traveled back in time. There’s a theory, that once you travel back in time, a new universe is created, with a new history, affected by your actions. Therefore, once you enter a parallel universe, there’s no possibility of getting back to the original one.
What you meant was probably not parallel, identical universes, but multiple, independent ones? That would be certainly pssible, since a theory about that was recently debated between scientists. Still, there’s no way to prove it as we can only observe 27 ly of space around us. There’s always room for fantasy though
I really wonder why some people tend to discuss things here which they don’t really know anything of. I mean, how did you get your knowledge about “the holographic universe” and all that stuff?
Have you studied physics for 20 years? Or is it more like you read about one and a half books with the title “what scientists don’t want you to know” or something rather new-agey?
If theres anyone with a degree in physics, neurosciences or anything else related to universes and dreaming, I’m sorry.
But really. Can’t you stop trying that hard to flee from reality? Why don’t we stay on the ground of verifyable facts for now, and if someone’s that keen on discovering more behind lucid dreaming, please go to a university and do REAL research.
It’s already amazing enough that a human can LD. There’s no need for these tedious speculations about new age “theories”.
Now, if you’re annoyed about my behaviour: Please note that I think that ALL of this new age stuff rather belongs into “beyond dreaming” rather than anywhere else in the forum.
EDIT: Now, I don’t mean EVERYONE in this thread. I guess it’s obvious who I mean with “new-agey” - those having utterly wrong ideas without even a little bit of any kind of evidence.
For ‘matrix theory’ to become possible, you don’t have to simulate the infinite universe, only the universe we can perceive and have the capacity to expand and heuristically create the rest. The computer therefore does not need to be infinite outright, it can be finite and simply expand, and have the ability to be increased and upgraded as required, something which our computers have.
I’d argue your conclusion is premature, if the universe in which the computer is present is truly infinite, then it is possible, resource wise to construct an infinity big computer to run such a simulation. That we can’t perceive that doesn’t mean we should declare it impossible.
This is a bit self-negating in my opinion, how can something expand more quickly than the fastest possible motion, in doing so it proves that it is not the fastest possible motion. I’d also say saying we know ‘the fastest possible speed’ is a little presumptuous, even though I understand the reasons for making that statement, I.E it requires infinite energy to travel faster than this. That is based on our current models, perhaps its reasonable to take this as the case today, but to say its some fixed truth or declare it the limit of all motion in space is a bit unscientific.
I would cede validity here if anyone in the topic were trying to claim scientific backing for their standpoint that we might be living in an undetectable computer system, since it is clear that such a theory by definition can’t be tested by science, and therefore can’t be scientific. So far all I’ve seen is a somewhat distasteful display from a few trying to force a empirical viewpoint.
You’re really assuming about the people having this discussion here. I’d hazard to say to the point that you are being insulting. That somebody may be of the opinion that empiricism doesn’t fully explain or that it misses things in the world around us, does not mean they are fleeing reality.
I am not claiming that Empiricism isn’t useful, so please don’t reply that I’m being disrespectful to the scientific viewpoint. Such thought is immensely useful, but its silly to say it being useful makes it a universal truth. Scientific method forms useful models, it does not disprove or diminish thoughts such as the ones discussed here.
The fact you label views as “utterly wrong” only serves to show you are not being scientific, just using science in a somewhat perverse way to try and give yourself validity.
You attack people for discussing things without evidence. To wrap this up and try and get my point across; show me your evidence that the universe is strictly logical and can be described logically and completely and/or that everything that happens in the universe produces predictable measurable evidence. (If you find yourself trying to answer this, please don’t, it means you missed my point.) It’s a belief that this is the case, not a scientific fact. However well founded and reasoned you feel it is, it is a belief.
I believe that both the dreaming reality and waking reality have the possibility to intertwine and coexist simultaneously. Its like all of existence is a multidimensional web and depending on your ability to become aware of and see multiple perspectives is how you come to understand the connection of what at first appears to be seemingly random coincidences, and interactions, becomes one.
What I mean by perspectives is not only human, but animal, plant, and things. If you treat waking life like a dream then that mind set will follow you into your dream reality, much like a reality check. When I wake up in the morning and review my dreams, to understand it more I take my consciousness and put it in to the other characters and objects of my dream and then perceive the dream from that perspective. It is possible to do this because every piece of your dream IS a part of you, you created it. For example if I dream of a menacing DC or a Snake that I am frightened of, when I look back on the dream in waking life I would put my consciousness into that menacing DC or snake and look at myself and ask the DC what it is thinking. It more then likely does not see it’s self as menacing but is interested in grabbing your attention allowing for you to face your fear and grow. The next step is using this same idea in waking life. Become consciously aware in your waking life. Look around and put your consciousness into an object and see the room or place from it’s point of view. How does that change your reality? You can do this with animals, plants, use your imagination. I especially like to use this techneque when I am at odds with someone or something. I try to put myself into them as if the situation was a dream. For me this has been amazing. I know that I come from a place of love and when i see life as everyone coming from the same place there is no room for hate. Everything is an experience we as individuals are the sum of our experiences but we have the ability to go back to the the place behind ego the place where we all began as babies a place of pureness of experience. When I was little I called it that piece of me that knows i exist. Some people call it the light or Soul. I go back to the soul place and try to experience life from that perspective because that allows for everything and infinite space. This is how we create our realities. When you start to change your perspectives in waking reality you will do it automatically in dream reality because it becomes a way or experiencing life which is all realities.
GreenDragon, if you read my quote carefully, you will notice that I said “the speed of light, the limit of all motion in space”. I don’t negate myself, because I never said that space should follow the same physic laws as the objects in space.
No particle, according to A. Einstein’s relativity theory can move faster than light in space, because such motion needs infinite energy which is impossible to gather. If you deny this statement, you’re denying A. Einsteins theory of relativity and you’re denying the most important core of all our today’s physics theories.
However, space itself can expand faster than light, since it’s not a particle, it’s the universe itself. There is evidence, that during the big bang space expanded a lot more faster than light. Space follows other rules of physics.
It depends largely on what you describe as the universe, I see the universe as the matter of the universe, which means the same theories which mean you say “things can’t go faster than the speed of light in space” mean that matter can’t move faster than the speed of light when expanding. For me the universe is expanding, means the matter within it is getting more spread out. The effective border of the universe is where the matter stops. (assuming it does) Beyond that point I don’t see a technique for theorising what is there, since there is no way to observe that area to the best of my knowledge.
I’d refrain from using “the time of the big bang” as a source for your argument, it seems to be the case that the laws of physics as we know them, did not entirely apply to that time, making it a poor citation to back your position. It only backs the point I was trying to make in the first place, that the ‘laws’ we perceive are not fundamental truths. They are theories, not that this in any way dilutes them, or makes them level with religious or metaphysical theories in terms of usefulness.
The universe is not matter, it’s simply the universe. Universe isn’t made of any particles, rather, it contains particles. But the universe is not matter and not a particle. Otherwise, it wouldn’t expand like that, faster than light, since matter can’t move that fast.
While inside the universe, matter moves below the speed of light. Since the universe is expanding, the space, where the matter is situated in also expands. This may create an illusion that matter moves faster than the light of speed. Still though, matter itself doesn’t move faster than light.
While we can’t visually observe our Universe, it is easy to explain it in physical terms and theories. It is simply logical that the universe has no border. If it’s hard for you to visualize, try imagining a balloon. It will be the universe. Now draw a few dots on the balloon, this will be the stars, galaxies etc. Now try to blow the balloon. You will see, that the distance between matter, the space is getting bigger - the balloon is expanding. However, it has no border. If you travel in a line through the universe, you will travel across the surface of the balloon. This means, that you will never reach a border. This is the same principle, that is applied to the Earth. You can’t go to the Earth’s edge. It simply doesn’t exist.
Actually, when discussing such subjects, it is mandatory to use theories like the Big Bang theory. If you don’t argument your statements with theories, your statements are useless and not proven.
I explained my perspective regarding what I believe the Universe is. I have neither the time nor inclination to do extensive research on the topic, but a casual reading of the wikipedia article ‘Universe’ seems to indicate my opinions are somewhat normal. (Whether yours are also or not, is not my concern.)
Sounds a lot like the extra dimension theorising to me. I’m not sure I agree that it’s simply logical that the universe has no border though. Sounds a lot like supposition to me. However much the theory makes sense we can’t observe that far using any known method (as far as I am aware), that seems to me to rule out the application of scientific method, leaving only theorising and conjecture. Surely its better to admit that this is something we, for the time being, don’t know.
Sure, but the context you brought it up in was stretching a point. You used a time where it is known that the normal laws of space and time as we understand them, do not apply. To push your argument that the universe can expand faster than the speed of light. That it did so during this time, doesn’t provide a solid base for argument on whether it continues to do so now. I also never asserted that the universe was incapable of travelling faster than the speed of light, or indeed that matter never could, in fact I said the exact opposite. I pointed at an apparent disparity I saw in what you were saying, which you have explained by showing you describe ‘the universe’ differently to how I do.
