Parts Have Arrived

parts have arrived:

let us indulge simulation theory further for a minute. suppose the world of Earth is a simulation. assume that most people are not real. assume there are limits to the simulation. that there are things no one has really done before even though it seems millions of people have. that there is a poverty to the simulation. the world seems full, lots of things happening, with many people. whereas there are only a few people in actuality, less than 40% real.

in the simulation the simulated people, or the simulants, are reflections of real people. a person may not be real but certainly someone is like that. one real person equates to thousands if not millions of simulants that are similar. indeed, assume most simulants are blends of several real people.

in an iterative sense, the first person to really do something makes it easy for someone else to do it. like using shared files you download so to speak. images, sounds, geography and cast of simulants you encounter.

but what if you want to do something or go somewhere that no one else has ever really done before or been to? this can only seem like a risk. am i really covered by the simulation? is its engine capable of rendering the experience? or do i need to be, as such, a god creating new reality in doing what no one has done before?

ponder how available an experience is. do i have the files? do i have the parts i need? and hopefully one day, by Shiva, parts have arrived! and let's go on an adventure.

CLEARCHARGE

Dealing with the Simulation

dealing with the simulation:

that night i was admitted to a mental hospital in November, 1992, i had the most frightening thought before i was sectioned and hauled off in a van: i was the only real person there, the other people in the room, all not real. solipsism was to me extremely disturbing. the idea had never occurred to me before that night. i didn't want to believe in it.

i am not solipsistic but i find it hard to believe as i once did that everyone is a real person. so it becomes a guessing game. what percentage of people are real? when i meet someone am i dealing with a real person? do real people have a presence?

if you think about it, how likely is it that all lifeforms that possess consciousness are capable of being human? surely not 100%. could there really be billions of people that could be configured as human? yet it appears there are.

what is unquestionable is that this reality possesses high intelligence. intelligence that could run a simulation?

and why are we here? i don't remember asking to be born on Earth. what is the purpose of the simulation? simply to meet other people?

i used to think of people that aren't real as "illusions". now in popular culture they are called NPC's.

if you seriously entertain the idea that the world of Earth is a simulation, populated by fewer than 100% real people, the concept of risk changes. you might like to visit somewhere abroad. it looks so good in the brochure. what if complete countries have 0% real people? with no one real to do anything there, aren't you straining the compute needed for you to visit this place? consider that real people generate programs for doing things, processes that can be shared with other people. if driving a car works for me, it can work for someone else. it is a risk to do something that no one real has done before then surely? what if you get in the plane to go off to that place in the brochure with a 0% real population and the simulation just freezes or worse because the place simply does not exist yet? more commonly, what is it like to go from somewhere where say 50% of people are real to somewhere where only 1% are? i think i have got what that feels like going somewhere where nobody seems real.

to put it bluntly, assuming as i once did as a child that the world is 100% populated by billions of real people now seems naive.

CLEARCHARGE

How to Interpret the World as Simulation

how to interpret the world as simulation:

a priori, we know that physical motion is not real. we do not really move. what we see is our surroundings move relative to us. we do not actually move relative to our surroundings. we each are a fixed point of consciousness inside each our own vision orb, so to speak.

the universe is not real.

it is naïve to think that what it seems is actuality. how would moving vision orbs not collide with each other and not suffer the injury of entangling vision? how could they occupy the same space, for that matter?

as for the problem of other minds...

a priori, what is far away is not me, as far as my point of consciousness is concerned. whether each person's consciousness is made of same matter is another question. are there different forms of consciousness?

a priori, propagation of states of matter exists. a priori, computation exists. a priori, magnification exists.

we are billions of points of consciousness, forever fixed in real space. this natural computer of reality sorts out all the images of what we see in the world and sends them to us through the viaducts of real space in miniature form and through the workings of our own minds, these are expanded and rendered in our own vision orbs.

"i'm not really standing 3 feet away from you. i'm 3 trillion light years away! what you see is a hologram 3 feet in front of you."

CLEARCHARGE

Illusion in the Simulation

illusion in the simulation:

posit we do meet real people in this simulation of earth. posit also that we meet mere simulants of people too. who are these simulants, these illusions of people? they are illusions, because they are not the real people themselves but shallow versions of them. are they true copies of real people? most probably not. and are many simulants just a mix of several people, randomly put together?

if they are derivative copies of real people, how similar are they to the real people they are clones of? perhaps we never meet a lot of real people but we meet a lot of their copies in this simulation. perhaps the name is the same, they look similar and behave in a like manner but they are imperfect copies of the person with a different biography. nevertheless, for some moments, it is just like meeting the real person.

with the young earth theory an assumption, this simulation was put together in a hurry. therefore, it often seems like some random mix of personality and conversation that we encounter.

CLEARCHARGE

Incredible Simulation

incredible simulation:

the concept of the Earth as a simulation comes as a shock to the materialist. what is a tree, anyway, really? what is food? that i taste something, that i can be sure of, but what else? is that all there is to life? my senses suggest things that are not real, or rather not what they seem.

the feat of teleportation immediately breaks the belief that physical motion is real. seeing things instantly change in front of you, like a train timetable, breaks the belief in a stable material world.

however another surprising aspect of simulation is that some other people whom you see and interact with might not be real, in that they are not conscious, but programmed beings. how did this come to be, if it were true? now the non-solipsistic view, there are many real people, but the simulants, the simulated virtual people, also exist in the population. if virtual people greatly outnumber real people, the danger is to slip to near solipsism. the virtual people, of course, look like and behave like real people. the answer is in this. they are derived from, based upon real people. you might never have met a certain real person but you've met a simulant just like them. posit that the Earth computer contains memories of real people, what they look like, what they have done, what they have said, and just plays a like version in the case of a simulant.

the inevitable question, how do you tell the difference? if you were able to manipulate to a greater degree how another person behaves, clearly they are not real. are virtual people made up of a rather ordinary, general palette, so to speak, so that a real person seems so much more of an individual, has its own unique personal light or quality that comes through that is perceptible? are real people more shocking, in the sense that virtual people are little more standardized, more regular, more predictable? do real people change the atmosphere or mood? do real people seem more emotional? do simulants sometimes not make sense in that they are poorly programmed? are real people more responsive then?

we all know calculation and programming are real by now. some of it is natural. some of it is man-made, artificial. the computer exists. in stealth, things develop unseen, the potential for things to manifest rises. the components of the Earth existed long before it began. growth happens. mutation is real. things spread. and there is that element of chaos in creation.

about the numbers and the ratio of real to virtual people, what can we say? what is the line of least resistance in thought? the overall numbers purported are large, the population certainly seem large, so the real population of the Earth is probably large, definitely large enough so that it might seem at one time that everyone were real. how many general types of people are there? a lot, hundreds at least, maybe thousands. you make guesses about the ratio. how could so many books and films and TV exist if there were not so many people? is it even possible for books to be created without a real author? if you assume that unconscious artificial intelligence is great then the ratio of virtual people to real people could be huge. it is easy to believe that artificial intelligence is growing certainly but is it that great already? the ratio could be 400:1 and the Earth might still seem normal. if you entertain the possibility of a million to one, then the world seems a very strange place indeed. really, only about 65 real people in the UK? it seems highly unlikely all things considered. if only every other person were virtual, it would seem almost negligible. of course not everybody is at the Earth, and certainly not at any one time. what if the population of the Earth were 40 million, plenty of people to seem a busy place, but not enough for everything to seem quite right?

if the Earth is a simulation, then are seemingly ordinary, mundane things even possible or advisable? are there parts of the world that seem to exist but don't, if you like? are there things that no one has really done? you would be the first to undertake exploration, generate new experiences. am i foolish to think if i turn up to the railway station, the train will arrive? are certain countries even real, does anybody really live there? do you have the requisite program files from someone else who has done things, seen places? and to continue on a slightly paranoid basis, do you want to avoid real people, or do you want to avoid simulants?

in actuality, real space is a fixed network of people, an unmoving chain of personal bubble spaces. it is huge. and we only know of other people from what comes down the chain. are there fixed cables in place across the chain, is it a proper system, do parts float rather freely and more slowly sometimes down the chain of space? is part of the Earth computer where we ourselves are running slightly independently or are we completely dependent on a constant feed from elsewhere? is it a decentralized system? can we, if we strain our senses, detect when something is possible? does the opportunity come to mind? by shiva, parts have arrived!

CLEARCHARGE

The Mix of Design and Random Mutant Manifestation

the mix of design and random mutant manifestation:

people are creative. there are a lot of things in the world of Earth that were by design obviously, all the things that humans have made, and built, but was the creation of Earth itself by design? or was it an accident of fate?

if life on Earth is a simulation, in the sense that some people are not real, and are actually simulants, that is, what we see as a human might not be truly representative of a conscious other being, how were they created? were they gestated in the great unconscious, built from the memories and subconscious imagination of all involved? fragments of conversations, actions, a dose of personal spirit, randomly mutated and mixed together, become manifest in the world of Earth?

perhaps some things that you might suppose were created, were not, and existed always from time zero, like human itself, trees, houses, etc. if we suppose that material objects are actually only mental constructs in actuality, and by the fact that physical motion is not real, the whole mechanical motion in a material universe, this model, it could only be a virtual construct, does that not lead to the possibility that things could be altered very quickly? how fast does the mind change? perhaps so fast that it is, in a sense, out of control, not unlike a dream.

and if the simulation were completely by design, wouldn't it be a better simulation?

CLEARCHARGE

If Earth is a Simulation

if earth is a simulation:

first an argument about the word "simulation", a simulation, as opposed to what? a material, physical world where mechanical motion is real, that matter, the stuff of reality, really changes its spatial position, isn't that what they mean? well that is not real, so it is a simulation, because nothing really "moves", correct?

that is one aspect of the concept, one easily dealt with, the other is far weirder, that some people are simulated humans, they are not really 100% representatives of specific other, real people! i mean, to say it's a simulation because physical motion is not real is one thing, but maybe forms you see of other humans could represent real other people somewhere else? maybe not, and this possibility is one in which reality could be something of a strange, chaotic mystery to all.

assume the calendar is not really that far advanced, reality is actually only a few hundred years old. the problem we have is that there was a lot to begin with, humans, plants, trees, houses, all existed at the beginning, say, and because sudden changes can happen, and the unconscious is so large, it is always in motion and chaotic, it created Earth suddenly, as it is.

that dreams are chaotic is undisputed, a product of the unconscious, and are the portal to life on Earth, and i suppose the exit. that Earth is not quite what it seems, is not entirely normal really, the suspicion happens because of the existence of dreams principally.

on the question of simulated humans, if we assume that some of the people we meet are that, it does not mean that they are unlike any real people, the probability is that they are like someone real or several real people, because they must be based on someone! their speech, their actions, are derived from real people's. they may be a composite of several people plus some random factor, who knows? if we assume that the proportion of simulated humans to real humans is high, how high? 10000:1? that would mean there are only a few thousand real people around in any country! and in any case, the truth of reality becomes a confusing in between of belief in "normality" and a near solipsistic case. it would be naive to assume the extremes of one or another, actually, it's all real, simulated humans and real humans!

the interesting question becomes, how can you tell the difference between a real human and a simulated human? are real humans more coherent, more responsive? are simulated humans poorly programmed, if you like? do real humans have more of an aura, a presence? do they look different? do they have a unique glow? who knows?

and as for the ratio of real to simulated humans, how many real humans, the baseline from which these simulated humans are derived, does it require to produce the variety of people we see today? tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? it would be tending toward solipsism if you came up with a low number, surely? that would mean the collective unconscious of all real people was huge to produce the variety of people and the amount of media found on Earth! i do not doubt that the unconscious is large and capable but does it really dwarf the conscious minds of all of us? it seems unlikely that the number is low.

CLEARCHARGE

Reality and Earth and Dreams and Hallucinations and the Perplexing Question of What Is Real?

reality and earth and dreams and hallucinations and the perplexing question of what is real:

"i mean, what is the commonly accepted view, or opinion, about what is real on earth, or at least what everyone has to assume? i'll tell you, that there are at least billions of real people for a start, right? and for someone who is not, you know, a schizophrenic, everyone you see is real and you have to deal with them as though they're real, and also that there's some kind of science that connects everyone together but i'm not going to go into that, because i don't know a whole lot about science or how it really works or would work. and then it's like, that is the only completely real thing, everything else, dreams, hallucinations, you know, seeing or hearing things other people don't seem to, and other worlds, that's all deprecated or even dismissed as not real at all. it's like you have to believe waking life on earth is the only real thing in reality and only people you can see and meet and talk to that way are real, everything else, imaginary, or a product of the unconscious mind."

"so you're saying they could be real? i may really meet other people in my dreams?"

"listen, i can't say what is definitely real or definitely not real. i can't prove anything. what i mean is, i have doubts about the thing everyone on earth has to go by. what i'm saying is, in a sense, it's all real, it's all found in reality, you know? it's all sensory experience. the question is, are the other people you meet in waking life or in dreams or talk to in so called hallucinations, are they real or not? i mean, let's look at the possibility that even in waking life on earth some people are not real. i mean, people like to think in absolute terms, either everyone is real or it's all a simulation but it's actually more probable that, unless solipsism is true and you are the only real person in this reality, that some people are real and only some are simulated."

"i just hope it's not solipsism that's true."

"right. who wants that? but as a schizophrenic, you have to consider, you're forced to think really, at some point, that the whole thing, earth, everyone you know, is just a huge hallucination, and even if it's not, it's probable, as a schizophrenic, that some people you walk past or even know, are just not real. they're hallucinations."

"wait. but couldn't everyone on earth be schizophrenic, at least slightly? i mean, that's how we all got here? you know, it could be suppressed for most people most of the time, but my theory is the earth thing is based on, it's derived from some form of schizophrenia that everyone has, like everyone dreams, though maybe schizophrenia isn't quite the right word."

"it could be. a lot of people hear things, more than are diagnosed schizophrenic. and people have imaginations, right? it's not much of a leap to think that this feeds into what they see and hear. and who said science existed at the start of time? i'm sure it was a little different to start with."

"yeah, maybe it was all a woozy schizophrenic mess to begin with. anyway, so it's like you have to figure out all the combinations of possibilities. so like maybe i mostly live in a simulation but i know a few real people on earth and when i dream, i'm completely meeting real people sometimes, and perhaps some of the voices i hear, the so called hallucinations, i'm talking to real people."

"right. the problem is, if you assume it's neither 100% or 0% anything, you're left with a huge scale of possibilities. it could be anything in between. but i mean, it does come down to the question, how many real people are there, anyway? if it turns out there are only like 30 real people in the whole of reality, well, i mean, isn't the unconscious that's feeding the hallucination of earth huge? to power the whole illusion. if it's really in the billions, well, that means earth, as given, as it's put up to be, is something like the truth. but if it's only in the thousands or even tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands, it becomes harder to think about."

"right. like who are the real people on earth?"

"yeah. and what is everyone else doing?"

"do you think they're the guardian angels? wondering about poor old us who went to earth and left and when are we going to come back?"

"you know, you have to consider that everything that's out there, in books, in culture, in myths and legends, is somehow real in some sense, though maybe there's a distortion of the truth."

"not everything is real surely?"

"well, the case may be that some things are only real in thought, truly imaginary."

"you mean, like some things in history never happened? they made it up?"

"i don't know if someone consciously made it up or history just appeared, you know. there is a theory the earth, as it is, is only like less than 200 years old. at the very start it came with a history that just wasn't real. reality could only be a few hundred years old. the real year on the calendar may be something like Year 442."

"that would be A.D. 1572 for Year 1?"

"right. except earth didn't start until about 1850 and then it was mostly illusion, a simulation."

"so gradually more and more real people went to earth. i guess you just have to think of everything, every possibility. but if it were true, why would people want to think everything is billions of years old?"

"i think people underestimate how fast things change and really how much existed already or was possible at the start of time."

CLEARCHARGE