The nature of Reality

[Ostronomos]

Do not be misled by naysayers and atheists. They do not have a firm grasp of reality. And are not humble enough to embrace the idea of their own epistemological limitations. See the following:

 

[Quintessence]

Alternatively, all humans have a "firm grasp of reality" - nay, more than that, all biological organisms do - because if they didn't they would die and fail to survive.

 

[Ostronomos]

Alternatively, all humans have a "firm grasp of reality" - nay, more than that, all biological organisms do - because if they didn't they would die and fail to survive.

That is only on a superficial level of reality. Survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual or Quantum level. QM implies that there is a deeper level of reality. It is the height of hubris to assume you have anything more than that.

 

[Nakosis]

Do not be misled by naysayers and atheists. They do not have a firm grasp of reality. And are not humble enough to embrace the idea of their own epistemological limitations. See the following:

I first came across this concept in grammar school. Created in 1956 by Issac Asimov in the short story "The Last Question".
I did not realize at the time how foundational this would become part of my thinking.

 

[Quintessence]

That is only on a superficial level of reality. Survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual or Quantum level. QM implies that there is a deeper level of reality. It is the height of hubris to assume you have anything more than that.

Well, if you want to define reality in very impractical terms, have at it. Grasping this so-called "deeper level" is pretty irrelevant for life and living. Over-intellectualize all you want and smear it as "hubris" - all living things are going to continue to use their senses, successfully navigate the reality around themselves, and continue to survive and flourish. Seems like a pretty firm grasp of what actually matters to me.

To add - I'm neither an atheist nor a "naysayer." I grappled with deep ontological questions before I even turned ten. And while it is in principle true that nobody knows crap about anything (granting certain epistemological assumptions), that's neither a practical nor relevant nor viable approach to life and living. There is no use to wandering about in circles constantly muttering 'I don't know' then proceeding to walk off the cliff that you doubted was actually there.

 

[Ostronomos]

Well, if you want to define reality in very impractical terms, have at it. Grasping this so-called "deeper level" is pretty irrelevant for life and living. Over-intellectualize all you want and smear it as "hubris" - all living things are going to continue to use their senses, successfully navigate the reality around themselves, and continue to survive and flourish. Seems like a pretty firm grasp of what actually matters to me.

To add - I'm neither an atheist nor a "naysayer." I grappled with deep ontological questions before I even turned ten. And while it is in principle true that nobody knows crap about anything (granting certain epistemological assumptions), that's neither a practical nor relevant nor viable approach to life and living. There is no use to wandering about in circles constantly muttering 'I don't know' then proceeding to walk off the cliff that you doubted was actually there.

Fair enough. And I might add I tend to avoid confrontation where possible. This is not a competition for who's right.

 

[Twilight Hue]

That is only on a superficial level of reality. Survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual or Quantum level. QM implies that there is a deeper level of reality. It is the height of hubris to assume you have anything more than that.

You do realize theory , scientific or not, is not a reality past its concept.

 

[River Sea]

@Ostronomos

The actual word in each letter
Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe (CTMU)
The ctmu self-simulation theory of the universe
Chris Langan was the first to use the term self-simulation in the context of reality theory

Chris Langan was extremely busy due to needing money to eat and sleep, so wouldn't be starving to death, so as Langan studied CTMU, the study of eating, sleeping, and physical needs dominated in order to pay rent (meaning to work in order to pay rent is a study, even if not a study). Compared to Gandhi starving himself while communicating his language, how would this be in CTMU? Can you show me in detail what it'll look like?

Studying is an example. What would have happened if Chris Langan lived with needing less money on these free campsites so he could have more time to study and share about CTMU? This is why I claim that studying to pay rent causes, according to Chris Langan, a hindrance to communicating, yet failed in his study to learn ways of needing less money, compared to Gandhi, who starved himself and claims to help communicate. I have a feeling I'm failing at articulating this.

Referencing who did Gandhi study from what philosophy?

What did Muslims think about Gandhiji and the thought of living with Hindus?

Did Gandhiji follow Sankara's philosophy? If so, what was it about Sankara philosophy that taught how Gandhiji thought and led? Was it mandatory that one be taught the Sankara philosophy, or could a person in India find a different philosophy to learn from?

Further questions due to Gandhi starving himself vs. Chris Langan, who did not starve himself but made sure he was physically full by making sure these needs were met through a lack of time because of a lack of how? What is learning?
Gandhi was able to communicate through his starving physical body, whereas Chris Langan was unable to do so due to:?

Can we study this in extreme detail through the Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe (CTMU), the language of the physical bodies of Gandhi and Langan, and its effects?

I notice that Chris Langan uses the word paradox, which means a situation, person, or thing that combines contradictory, and so this is why I'm using Gandhi and Langan in this paradox study through the CTMU to understand more.

So let me see if I can use this word paradox in a sentence.

What is the paradox between Gandhi and Chris Langan's physical bodies needing food in relation to communicating language through the CTMU?

1. How is starvation used in India to communicate compared to what would have happened if Chris Langan used starvation to show his understanding of CTMU?

2. If Chris Langan couldn't use starvation, similar to Gandhi's, to communicate, what were the CTMU cultures already settings that prevented this?

3. If I'm failing at this, can you show me examples of how you would write this?

4. Please show me the details of CTMU language in comparing Gandhi and Chris Langan and their physical bodies, which they were able to use or couldn't use, in order to obtain their goals in communication.

 

[River Sea]

That is only on a superficial level of reality. Survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual or Quantum level. QM implies that there is a deeper level of reality. It is the height of hubris to assume you have anything more than that.

@Ostronomos when I learn vocabulary I type the words in different situations to see how to use the words. It helps me remember the words

@Ostronomos you were saying, "QM implies that there is a deeper level of reality. Survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual."

Quantum comes from Latin, meaning "an amount" or "how much?

What is a quantum?
A quantum (plural: quanta) is the smallest discrete unit of a phenomenon. For example, a quantum of light is a photon, and a quantum of electricity is an electron. Quantum comes from Latin, meaning "an amount" or "how much?" If something is quantifiable, then it can be measured.

What is quantum in physics and computing?

Learn about quantum, the smallest discrete unit of a phenomenon. Explore the meaning of quantum in physics and how it applies to computing and cryptography.

www.techtarget.com

@Ostronomos you were saying, "Survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual."

Chris Langan was saying, "in that picture human beings are a bit like the cells of its body"

I think earth is a cell as well. We go through the outer membrane of this cell when leaving the earth atmosphere, as we travel through this shechina white light tunnel to the light, yet how do we measure that? How does one measure spirituality? This is only my comprehension, please don't take this as facts.

What happened to an amount or how much?

What would happen to use "an amount" to feed us spiritually in the midst of the physical world? Allowing learning how to allow the light to flow from with in the physical body and radiate outward, as use the word Quantum which means "an amount" it's then using spirituality to go from with in the physical body and radiate outward, then did this quantum arrived through the shechina and in the body and flow outward? Can the word Quantum be used this way due to the word "an amount" Or am I misusing this word? Because when measuring an amount one no longer needs to do that and still can use the word Quantum?

What causes math to be used and when not to use math to measure but allow flow?

Quantum comes from Latin, meaning "an amount" or "how much?" If something is quantifiable, then it can be measured.

 

[Ostronomos]

@Ostronomos when I learn vocabulary I type the words in different situations to see how to use the words. It helps me remember the words

@Ostronomos you were saying, "QM implies that there is a deeper level of reality. Survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual."

Quantum comes from Latin, meaning "an amount" or "how much?

What is a quantum?
A quantum (plural: quanta) is the smallest discrete unit of a phenomenon. For example, a quantum of light is a photon, and a quantum of electricity is an electron. Quantum comes from Latin, meaning "an amount" or "how much?" If something is quantifiable, then it can be measured.

What is quantum in physics and computing?

Learn about quantum, the smallest discrete unit of a phenomenon. Explore the meaning of quantum in physics and how it applies to computing and cryptography.

www.techtarget.com

@Ostronomos you were saying, "Survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual."

Chris Langan was saying, "in that picture human beings are a bit like the cells of its body"

I think earth is a cell as well. We go through the outer membrane of this cell when leaving the earth atmosphere, as we travel through this shechina white light tunnel to the light, yet how do we measure that? How does one measure spirituality? This is only my comprehension, please don't take this as facts.

What happened to an amount or how much?

What would happen to use "an amount" to feed us spiritually in the midst of the physical world? Allowing learning how to allow the light to flow from with in the physical body and radiate outward, as use the word Quantum which means "an amount" it's then using spirituality to go from with in the physical body and radiate outward, then did this quantum arrived through the shechina and in the body and flow outward? Can the word Quantum be used this way due to the word "an amount" Or am I misusing this word? Because when measuring an amount one no longer needs to do that and still can use the word Quantum?

What causes math to be used and when not to use math to measure but allow flow?

Quantum comes from Latin, meaning "an amount" or "how much?" If something is quantifiable, then it can be measured.

I may have been incorrect in saying that survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual level. As Quantum darwinism would imply.

We can quantify spirituality via spiritual unity with all of reality. An unbound, limitless existence that transcends the physical world.

 

[Madsaac]

Firstly, I'm no expert in this but it sounds like someone clever guy has just come up with some ideas without any proof.

He says things like "God was telling me, who he is and what he looks like" or "Ultimately what reality is, is God himself." or "Earth and ultimate reality was a vast organism, a coherent form of life". What does any of that really mean?

Yeah, that doesn't really work. What does work is that reality is a function of our brain, those little electric sparks that are happening in our brain right now, is what forms our perception of reality. Its relatively a simple concept

It seems people, just like to make things up

 

[River Sea]

I may have been incorrect in saying that survival of the fittest is not on the spiritual level. As Quantum darwinism would imply.

We can quantify spirituality via spiritual unity with all of reality. An unbound, limitless existence that transcends the physical world.

Does the language of the measurement numbers change after the quantum is in an amount of Darwinism? Example: in another area, 1 cent, 1 million. People won't use cents when explaining a million, so are there different languages for the amount of quantum Darwinism? Also are there any measurement problems when understanding an amount, so language hasn't caught up and still using language that can't completely capture a measurement of?

He says things like "God was telling me, who he is and what he looks like" or "Ultimately what reality is, is God himself." or "Earth and ultimate reality was a vast organism, a coherent form of life". What does any of that really mean?

Yeah, that doesn't really work. What does work is that reality is a function of our brain, those little electric sparks that are happening in our brain right now, is what forms our perception of reality. Its relatively a simple concept

Are the electric sparks in the brain also of the Quantum Darwinism, or what causes electric sparks actually?

Look what I found online.

Quantum and Electromagnetic Fields in Our Universe and Brain: A New Perspective to Comprehend Brain Function

Quantum and Electromagnetic Fields in Our Universe and Brain: A New Perspective to Comprehend Brain Function - PMC

The concept of wholeness or oneness refers to not only humans, but also all of creation. Similarly, consciousness may not wholly exist inside the human brain. One consciousness could permeate the whole universe as limitless energy; thus, human ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Abstract​

The concept of wholeness or oneness refers to not only humans, but also all of creation. Similarly, consciousness may not wholly exist inside the human brain. One consciousness could permeate the whole universe as limitless energy; thus, human consciousness can be regarded as limited or partial in character. According to the limited consciousness concept, humans perceive projected waves or wave-vortices as a waveless item. Therefore, human limited consciousness collapses the wave function or energy of particles; accordingly, we are only able to perceive them as particles. With this “limited concept”, the wave-vortex or wave movement comes into review, which also seems to have a limited concept, i.e., the limited projected wave concept. Notably, this wave-vortex seems to embrace photonic light, as well as electricity and anything in between them, which gives a sense of dimension to our brain. These elements of limited projected wave-vortex and limitless energy (consciousness) may coexist inside our brain as electric (directional pilot wave) and quantum (diffused oneness of waves) brainwaves, respectively, with both of them giving rise to one brain field. Abnormality in either the electrical or the quantum field or their fusion may lead to abnormal brain function.

The actual word in each letter
Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe (CTMU)
The ctmu self-simulation theory of the universe
Chris Langan was the first to use the term self-simulation in the context of reality theory

Cognitive theoretic Model Universe.

To my questions as I'm learning Chris Langan and Gandhi at the same time, while using the word paradox.

So let me see if I can use this word paradox in a sentence.

What is the paradox between Gandhi and Chris Langan's physical bodies needing food in relation to communicating language through the CTMU?

1. How is starvation used in India to communicate compared to what would have happened if Chris Langan used starvation to show his understanding of CTMU?

2. If Chris Langan couldn't use starvation, similar to Gandhi's, to communicate, what were the CTMU cultures already settings that prevented this?

3. If I'm failing at this, can you show me examples of how you would write this?

4. Please show me the details of CTMU language in comparing Gandhi and Chris Langan and their physical bodies, which they were able to use or couldn't use, in order to obtain their goals in communication.

I'm learning about Chris Langan and Gandhi at the same time.

1. There's no separation so that means Chris Langan and Gandhi are not separated.
2. When I began learning about Chris Langan and Gandhi I notice they show their sufferings

Example of suffering:
Chris Langan's dad passed away.
Then Langan's mom married three more times. Her second husband was murdered, and her third husband died of suicide. That's a lot of deaths.

Example of suffering:
What was Gandhi's childhood like?
Gandhi was afraid of ghosts and snakes. How come Gandhi was afraid of snakes?

I learned that way back in 1500 BCE, people were afraid of snakes. Later, Krishna protected the people from these poisoned snakes. But why was Gandhi afraid of snakes? Were the snakes poisoned, similar to when Krishna protected the people from the snakes, but who protected the people during the time Gandhi was afraid of snakes?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Well, if you want to define reality in very impractical terms, have at it. Grasping this so-called "deeper level" is pretty irrelevant for life and living. Over-intellectualize all you want and smear it as "hubris" - all living things are going to continue to use their senses, successfully navigate the reality around themselves, and continue to survive and flourish. Seems like a pretty firm grasp of what actually matters to me.

To add - I'm neither an atheist nor a "naysayer." I grappled with deep ontological questions before I even turned ten. And while it is in principle true that nobody knows crap about anything (granting certain epistemological assumptions), that's neither a practical nor relevant nor viable approach to life and living. There is no use to wandering about in circles constantly muttering 'I don't know' then proceeding to walk off the cliff that you doubted was actually there.

Well, the practical part of what is, is not that hard for the everyday life. It is what matters and how it matter, where the fun starts.

 

[Ostronomos]

In the moment I closed my eyes I saw blackness reaching singularity in less than a second. And then nothing had meaning. It was the death of all the pain I've been nursing. There was no memory of anything. That is what it means to "live in the moment" as is the evil being promoted by some. A second longer and I would have seen hell, pure evil. The 'excrementation' of the complete I AM theory.

God binds our subjection with objectivity. This world is virtual and the other one is the real one. To have no identity of who one is and to live in the moment without God is to live in a false reality without meaning and it is indistinctive while one is alive witnessing everything without information on it is strictly a creature of sensory apparatus and not a shred of understanding through the heart.

Call this an the awakening that comes after recovering from a sudden singularity of blackness and nothingness. The ability to regain meaning of all things (and to eliminate the indistinctiveness of each object including the indistinctiveness of my physical body in a world of strictly objects) required my absolute concentration on God. It was necessary for my sake to obtain comprehensibility. I took a number of steps to regain my identity and with it the meaning that defined each object including my physical self. God was necessary in my ability to regain comprehension of anything and to welcome a fresh and positive reality and leave behind all the negativity that, when wiped out in that moment, left me in a world of strictly objects. This was probably why the loss of identity creates fear - it opens one to the world of absolute negativity, a world without God. Imagine not knowing that your physical body belonged to you, kind of like a sudden state of permanent amnesia. Strict materialism (belief in objects) leaves one in a world of no meaning. This is why mind is necessary to extract information from matter. The physical brain and body is not the mind.

Meaning is what is necessary to distinguish mind from objects and thus the physical body from mind itself along with the other distinct objects that are distinct from the physical self-identity.

To live in each moment is to have no memory of the self and thus no distinction of mind from physical body.

After regaining the meaning of people/objects and regular objects was when I was able to see that subjectivity is required for us to recognize our physical identity and with it who we are (the "I AM") and our needs. "Bliss" is the state of being an automaton or a system of sensory apparatus' incapable of human function because subjectivity is needed in order to self-determine oneself from the object world and thus create meaning/information (without meaning objects give no distinctive information and thus both objects and their characteristic interpretation in relation to the self and the ability to distinguish between mind and body will be lost, the mind must distinguish the physical self from objects otherwise one looks at all things without recognition or priority) and to be given it by concentrating on The Provider and Creator of meaning/information.

On meaning

We create meaning and the meaning creates the "what" identification of each and every object including the physical body. The provider of the meaning of the objective universe and thus the creation of the meaning that enables us to recognize our physical body as a separate object from the mind and therefore the physical body and the mind from objects in general is God. Otherwise reality would be a world of false objects as the object world is virtual and exists in space and time as opposed to reality. The subjective reality creates the meaning that enables us to function meaningfully and to recognize the mind, and therefore the body, from the object.

I must tell you that the physical world is virtual and the informational one is real. We have always argued about whether the reality of matter is virtual versus the reality of information. I assume the information being spoken about is what gives objects irreducible complexity.
Assume that we were functioning in a world of specified complexity, a roach can have absolutely no difference in meaning to a loved one or death itself and the response to all would be the same as there would be no information to distinguish them. Kind of similar to a blankened, mindless physical brain interpreting and operating in a reality of purely neuromuscular and sensory apparatus which would lead to a physical object that perceives not a shred of information from any object and thus could not act.

The will of our mind and self-determination to exist gives meaning to matter (as opposed to strictly appearing to be objects) and therefore information can be perceived.

 

[Ostronomos]

Self-simulation is based on the idea that reality exists within reality:

 

[River Sea]

Self-simulation is based on the idea that reality exists within reality:

@Ostronomos I watch both videos

Yes I agree about simulation

Self-simulation is based on the idea that reality exists within reality:

@Ostronomos I watched both videos

This responds will be extremely sloppy

I understand we're in a simulation

I understand there's past stories

I found out (I don't understand it all of yet) get extremely into wanting to connect the past stories

Also to look at maps

I love it just love it and I get extremely fixated

But there's a challenge

basically i get blamed if i ask a question then i'm told i'm asking to be spoon fed. and that i must work and research,

so i research and then i'm blame for being holy

i researched about goats run off of mountain, and the droughts that people had to leave to find another home to farm

i posted what i learned

so now i'm blamed for derailing and i'm scared full of anxieties, it's just a matter of time, i'm sure

i was set up to fail that thread

oh meet @Bharat Jhunjhunwala I learned a lot from him.

however I was set up to fail at this other thread, so it's just a matter of time

if I ask a question I'm blame for asking to be spoon fed, i'm told to work and research

i researched I did, and i posted the past stories

i was so intrigue with seeing Iran and i kept thinking how did the people travel through iran at taftan volcano,

i really did watch the two videos that you shown.

but this is so unfair

I did the best I could at this other thread,

i put my all into it

how come i'm always in trouble for

i understand this is also a simulation

just watch how i'll get in trouble now

just watch

i hate this so so so much

oh you see this person is a zero, the budhist stuff

and @Bharat Jhunjhunwala has the forgot word, invenity is it, it's a forever number

infentity

when i go to light i don't have any number, i just drink from light

but the challenge is i get blamed if ask questions and when research then i'm told i'm holy

i wasn't trying to be holy all i was doing is showing adversary in the past stories

but i think this person wants me to do the zero stuff that empty stuff

and i don't do that, instead i drink from light

that empty stuff don't work for me, it probably works for some one else but not for me

i been angry lately, i think what my anger is from is

no matter what i do i'm in trouble

this person says you do your work and research

so i did

then i posted my research and now i'm blamed for derailing it to holy

so now i'm full of anxiety a panic attack, it's just a matter of time just watch