Copyright Pending: Do NOT copy or re-distribute any part of this document, or I will hunt you down and beat you up.
Perpetual Life: The Eye of the Octopus
What Reality Really Could Be
With Politically Corrected Language and Humor
If you can’t read this on your computer browser screen, crank up the zoom to 150%.
The above page was left intentionally blank, just to flick with you.
And while we’re at it, if you don’t care for my terminology, eat crap, flick off and die.
I’m not trying to sell you anything… If I were, I would have used the copyright of this book to charge everyone just to read it.
I don’t want your stinking money.
Read this for your own damn good, and for the good of humanity.
This book is to always remain free to be read by everyone for free.
Read on to learn how and WHY God may have created our reality…
A few years ago I saw 2 science shows on public TV, back-to-back. The first was all about the science of time, and the next about the new science of Network Theory. These shows were so fascinating, they sparked a burning need within me to formally document my own fanatical theories about what reality really could be. OK, Ready? Here we go!
As a child, when I first learned there’s more than 1 religion in the world, it became instantly obvious that somebody has got to be wrong. I mean, seriously, how could there be more than one God, each claiming that he’s in complete control of everything?
Each religion denies all of the others, claiming God inspires theirs, but bad men and dark forces inspire the others. Why can’t everyone agree on even one single miracle ever occurring? What happened to all of the world’s lost religions?
More importantly, how could MY religion be right and all the others wrong? It was blaringly obvious to me that no religion is valid; it’s all just a means to power.
Of course, questions arise that need to be explained. How can the Universe exist without God creating it? What is Infinity? What happens when we die (that’s a really good one)? Why are we here? I’ve always had a deep need to have these questions answered. And so, my entire life has been an objective quest for the truth.
Before you dismiss me as just another Atheist, let me state right now that I believe in one God, the creator of our Universe. But I also do not believe in any organized religion. My parents sent me to 6 years of religious studies, but they also let me decide what I wanted to believe in. They, like everyone on Earth should, followed our religion only as a set of guidelines for traditional values to live by, not to be taken to the letter of the written word to die by, and to murder for.
I consider myself to be a Scientist and an Engineer. My quest for the truth follows a scientific approach. This book explains how I think our Universe works and how God could realistically have created it, and then goes on to suggest why. It answers all of the questions that science and religions fail to explain. The last place I look for these answers is religion.
But the reason I wrote this book is not to make you believe everything I’m gonna’ be ranting on and on about, but rather to try presenting it all as a realistic possibility; a simple, logical and credible way of explaining what our Universe is, and who we really are living within it.
I hope the realization of this realistic possibility becomes apparent to everyone reading this.
And I hope this realization then gives us all a darn good reason to warm-up to the notion that we’re all equal citizens of our world. I everyone to finally proclaim: “It is finally time to put a damper on the polarization between us caused by religious zealots and ignorant bigots.”
My goal is to reduce belief in religions to the same level as fairy tales, because only then can we really all start to get along. A bonus would be if everyone realizes that no one person or group is superior or more deserving than any other.
If we could somehow really consider what it’s like to walk in the other man’s shoes, we would, at last, start treating each other with the dignity and respect we have always deserved.
It’s the truth.
This book is dedicated to Randy “Fly” Russell, my hero.
THIS IS IMPORTANT!
I have assigned color codes to each section in each chapter to make it easy to read, depending on your background.
Green Anyone who can read (if you can’t read, we have a paradox on our hands)
Yellow High school math and science
Purple College / industrial level math and science
Red Geek computer type
Italics Stupid stuff
Turquoise Quick links to Science-ONLY topics
Even though I think most of it is simple logic and common sense, most people reading prototype scripts tell me they don’t understand this book. But I’m a geek, with a computer in every room in my house, and my head so far up my ass I can see daylight from the inside out; I sometimes have a hard time communicating with people who don’t understand basic math, science, logic, reasoning and common sense.
However, I do know for a fact that I am no better than anyone else, regardless of race, creed, religion, or education, and I really want everyone to understand the very simple purposes of this book. For this reason, I’ve added the color codes.
Just skip the stuff you don’t understand… the really important stuff is non-scientific, and as plain as day.
Most of the footnotes are important, so try not to skip over them.
This book basically has 2 parts; my wacky ideas about the science of our reality, and my delusional ideas about why God may have created it.
Although the Table of Contents (above) provides descriptive chapter names which can steer you in the right directions, if you want to only browse through the scientific explanations in this book, FOLLOW THE TURQUOISE LINKS:
at the chapter:
“What is Infinity???”
read all the way through the chapter:
“Time to step back”
”Scientific Reinforcement” (A small section in the “Conclusions” chapter)
“Appendixes and other colostomy bags - Additional ramblings and a bit of stupidity” (All sections except “The Platter”)
Although NOT really Scientific, do yourself and everyone else a favor and read:
“Is Life Fair” … there is hope for humanity and its all good!!!
“Marty’s thoughts on the Godless Universe” … giving meaning to everything we are.
If you want to just browse through this book, here are some of the “crucial, don’t miss” chapters, shown in the order they appear:
Don’t miss the chapter “Is life Fair”, below. There is hope for humanity, and ITS ALL GOOD!!!
1. Marty apologizes for the foul language and humor used throughout this book; that’s all it is, just humor. I have nothing against chicken-lovers or anyone else for that matter!
5. Sorry about any errors or mistakes…if something bad happens, it could be because of one of ‘em.
6. Don’t blame me, I’m just the messenger.
7. It’s free, so if you don’t like it, don’t read it.
8. If you read it and still don’t like it, too bad, don’t charge me for your wasted time.
9. If you go to bed with an itchy butt, you will wake up with a smelly hand.
10. Spread the word.
Skip all of the technical explanations if you like, I simply want to convince all Mankind to obey the Golden Rule. Here is a logical summary of my approach:
Maybe then we might actually start following the Golden Rule. Ya think? DUH!
If you read on, I will scientifically prove this is possible, answer all of your questions about science in the process, and give us all hope, … because there actually is hope for the collective human race.
It’s all just simple common sense and modern technology.
For the scientific explanation, we first need to settle an old argument with Randy “Fly” Russell, the smartest and coolest guy I ever met:
I’m sorry, Fly, this IS a digital Universe…
It HAS to be, or we could never move…
Scientists today wrestle with many concepts trying to explain the concept of Infinity and the behavior of matter in an infinite Universe. They struggle to arrive at theories that require them to invent all kinds of particles, sub-particles, forces and energies trying to explain the behavior of matter in our Universe.
But they still have many questions, like:
How many new sub-atomic particles and forms of energy will we need to invent to describe our next model of the Universe in order to explain its behavior?
To answer these questions, we need a starting point.
Lets start to answer how big Infinity is by first figuring out what the Universe is.
Lets start to explain what the Universe is by figuring out what it consists of. What is matter? What are we really feeling in our hands when we grip a chunk of clay?
Lets use a logical approach to define what physical matter really is. Lets start small by asking the following 2 simple questions:
We all know and love them; they need no introduction. Leucippus and his much more famous student Democritus pioneered the theory of atomism way back around 400 BC; they figured that matter could only be sub-divided down to a finite “Atomic size”. I understand that their logic went something like this…
I’m not sure if it was because they couldn’t find a small enough cleaver, or if it simply occurred to them that it would take an infinite amount of time to chop if their theory were not true.
They must have figured out that in order for matter to interact with other matter, it must do so on a particle-by-particle basis. How could it behave otherwise? As such, they realized that matter must be composed of basic building blocks mingling with each other.
Was this the moment when mankind started to assume that the Universe functions on its own, rather than the Gods miraculously manipulating an infinite flow of continuous ethereal matter? Yup!
They called the final chop an “Atom”, something that represents the smallest single unit or particle that can be accounted for. Maybe they were thinking about simple definitions like Length, Area and Volume. Here’s my “cut” at it…. Please give the yellow a try…
Lets only consider Length. This is very SIMPLE math; don’t be afraid of it:
As we use smaller dice, we need more of them, and the formula for length (L) becomes really obvious:
(number of cubes) x (size of each cube) = L
Basic algebra tells us that
If A = B x C Then B = A / C
For our row of cubes,
Since L = (number of cubes) x (size of each cube)
Then (number of cubes) = L / (size of each cube)
Thus, as the size of the cubes approach zero, the number of cubes approaches Infinity.
And so right here, you start wondering how small the cubes can possibly get. A few thousand years later, this is where Leibniz, Newton and the rest of the calculus dudes started up their smoke and mirrors routine to avoid the dreaded I - word.
They totally side-step the issue by only talking about what happens as the size approaches zero; they’re too flicking chicken poop to say if it can or can not actually be zero.
I think this is where old Leucippus and Democritus ghosts should have piped up and told Leibniz and his palSir Isaac, “Forget Infinity! If the size of the damned cube is zero, it doesn’t exist, Infinity or not, PERIOD!!!”
This is where the rubber meets the road… the difference between theoretical math and the real world. This is a line in the sand that every mathematician and physicist must cross. This alone proves that there must be a minimum size to all particles in the Universe, and makes Infinity impossible. Which it is.
I’m suggesting that there can’t be an infinite number of particles in the Universe because each particle is affected by every other one, and so no single particle can move if an infinite number of other particles are affecting it. My reasoning for this: because it would take an infinite amount of time for it to be affected by an infinite number of particles, and thus it could never move. Chop Chop!!
Hey, Leucippus and Democritus were kind of thinking like me, but in reverse. But anyway, and equally important is that implicit in this is the assumption that all matter, even different kinds of matter, can be reduced down to a single set of particles, all of which have identical composition, size, and functionality.
HOLD ON! Before you jump on the bandwagon with physicists who spew out terms like Quark and Lepton as if they’re psychologists tying to pigeonhole human behavior with terms like psychotic and bi-polar, lets try a different, logical approach.
Lets explain how all things work in our Universe at their “atomic” level, as Leucippus and Democritus defined it. In fact, let’s go beyond that, and lets simply consider all of the matter in the Universe as being made of a bunch of units (we will call them particles), as if they are logical entities that represent building blocks.
If you really feel the need to, tell yourself that protons are composed of a jillion of these basic building blocks, neutrons are composed of a zillion, electrons are made of 23, and Leptons will make you sick. Forget everything you know about chemistry and quantum mechanics, and make your life easy. When these logical particles combine, they make up all of the different elements in the U.
Our logical approach will allow us to define chemistry and physics from the inside out, rather than observing a set of behaviors and hammering them backward into an ever-changing list of postulations, theories, myths and dark fables.
If you look closely at what I’m saying, you’ll see a contradiction, that is, on one hand, I say particles can’t be infinitely small, but on the other hand, I want to consider the smallest ones as logical entities, and as such, to be considered as “points” which is a mathematical way of defining something that has no size at all. What’s up with this paradox?
Leucippus and Democritus had no instrumentation to try to actually measure things this small, but modern scientist do, and have recently concluded this about the size of the smallest particles of matter:
1. (James Beatty…) "Size" doesn't really exist in the way we think of it on a quantum level. There is *no* experimentally verified radius for the electron or any of the quarks. As best we can tell, they are point particles, occupying no physical space. Neutrons and protons have "size", i.e. seem to occupy physical space, because they are quarks held together by the strong force, and so their "size" is simply the range at which the strong force interactions between the quarks dominate. So, the smallest subatomic particle doesn't exist, as subatomic particles don't really have a size.
Confusing, right? These guys are implying that our Universe is made of particles that have no size, and therefore don’t exist. And then I say that’s impossible, and go way off on a gay-comedy rant about it!!!
As you will see below, both of these arguments are true, because within our Universe (in our reality), these logical entities each take up a finite amount of space. You just need to read on for this to make sense.
By the way, in our reality, Marty’s same argument about how small particles can be also applies to the maximum size of the Universe, the maximum number of particles within it, and to the maximum lifespan of it. In our Universe, there is no Infinity, other than in our imagination, or so, at least, that is what we imagine. It’s easy if you try, Fly.
OK, now that we’re out of chicken-loving Infinity fairyland, it’s on to the simple task of explaining how our Universe actually works. It is in fact so simple we can create a real live demo of a Universe creation whilst explaining it. My buddy Henry Thorne would be proud. After all, he’s an engineer!
If we can do it, God can too, so here we go! Here is how any architect (Man or God) can create the Universe…
There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches.
The first approach is faster to start up because there isn’t much to consider. The artist doesn’t even have to know what he wants to paint. As several of these paintings are created and the results become apparent, the task becomes recognizing what is desired, and learning how to reproduce it. This requires some time to develop as changes are made in response to the images developed thus far. Although it sounds negative, we can call this the trail-and-error approach.
In the second approach, the artist must already be skillful enough to know how to paint what he wants, before starting. Learning these skills may take longer to develop than it takes to finish the painting using trail-and-error methods. Also, the artist must somehow already know what he wants to paint. Although it sounds positive, we sometimes call this the all-knowing, pre-determined approach.
Real painting is always a blend of both approaches. Suppose these 2 painters worked side-by-side; eventually, both painters would create the same masterpiece. Using different methods, both painters would “converge” on the same results.
Developing a computer programs is very much like creating a
There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches.
The first is easy to start up because there is not much to consider. As this program is tested, its behavior becomes apparent, and the task becomes recognizing what is desired and what is not. This requires some time to develop as changes are made in response to the behavior exhibited thus far. Although it sounds negative, we sometimes call this the trail-and-error approach.
In the second, the programmer must be all knowing of everything that can occur, before starting. The skill to accomplish this may take a longer time to learn than it takes to finish the project by trail-and-error methods. Although it sounds positive, we sometimes call this the all-knowing, pre-determined approach.
Real programming is always a blend of the 2 approaches. However, the commonly preferred approach leans more toward pre-determination, requiring more up-front research time. The goal is to save development time by investing more time in research.
Additionally, with either approach, the program can be started, and the operator can then actively intervene during runtime in order to achieve the desired behavior.
If God were already all-knowing and all-powerful, all things would already be all-perfect. Maybe they already are, all is meant to be, and everything that is, is right. Personally, I don’t believe that even God is that smart nor precise, but if so, no Divine Intervention should be required, because God would already know it all.
As an added bonus, God could still hear your prayers and even answer them, although it might mess up his creation because of Chaos Theory, unless he meant to do that, in which case he is only making “Cameo Appearances” when miracles occur. Which he must have, because he already knew everything, including what he himself might do on a whim. Now THAT’S power!!!
This fits nicely into most established religions, because it places God between the issues of pre-determination and freedom of choice, making our actions accountable to “him”, thus enforcing the doctrine with the possibility of punishment both during life and after death.
No doubt, these are really strong selling points for religions, which helps to explain why they flourish as they do. I have no doubts this is bull-crap, and scaring people into believing this as a means of controlling them is a crime against humanity!
If God uses the trial-and-error method, miraculous results can easily be achieved even if he’s a bit dumber than the angry, spiteful, jealous, and revengeful lord most religions give him credit for. Development of the Universe can proceed just like programmers complete a project.
Rather than requiring God to somehow miraculously already know how everything in the Universe behaves, he can just start it up and see what happens.
Doesn’t that seem more realistic, … like some how, actually, possible?
Still, it’s a big project, even for God. For example, try designing “Eyes and Eggs”.
Throughout the evolution of animals on Earth it becomes necessary to develop anatomic structures as well as behavior patterns required by the species; for example, the development of vision systems and nesting of egg behavior of ducks ... Eyes and Eggs; millions of neurons working in concert with learned activity, something in the brain structure responding to dynamic changes in real-world situations, all compounded by the innate desire of the beast to conceive, hatch, protect, and teach its offspring.
How can something as complex as this happen to evolve, even over millions of years? It seems impossible for all of this to develop by coincidence of a set of random mutations occurring. Could evolutionary selection possibly be this efficient, or could there be some kind of “intelligence” in the design of our Universe?
You bet there is! Just like programmers have a toolkit to help coding proceed, God has a toolkit as well, making creation of the Universe as easy as ABC. Simple as Doe-Rae-Me. ABC, One, two, three, baby, you and me!
I believe that evolutionary development proceeds with seemingly impossible efficiently because implicit tendencies funnel the myriad of possibilities into a small set of familiar characteristics and appearances. These tendencies are the direct result of mathematical optimizations being applied.
The best example of this is soapy water bubble structures. Neither the soap, nor the water making up the bubble, the air that surrounds it, the gravity, or any other factors that affect it have any pre-conceptions of the beautifully symmetric shapes that occur. It is purely the mathematics of optimization being applied to the network of interacting soap and water molecules.
Examples like these are abundant in nature, each representing simple mathematical optimizations being applied to a structure;
Yet another great example of the mathematics of nature is shown in the structures of snowflakes. Neither the water, the air, the gravity nor the temperature changes involved have any pre-conceptions of how these structures will turn out. If you look closely at snowflakes, you would be hard pressed to say that these form naturally, all on their own, and yet, we know that they do. We know that God does not bother to sculpt each snowflake individually, even though they each look like works of art, just like most of God’s creations.
Once again, we must assume that the Universe functions on its own, rather than God miraculously manipulating that infinite flow of continuous ethereal matter. Yup! God only needs to select which of these tendencies are to remain or be discarded, the modifications are put in place for the next run, and God tries it again.
As each creation proceeds, the familiar behaviors that God wants are replicated. The patterns that result are the means by which evolution occurs with miraculous efficiency, and these remain in place for God to pick and choose from.
The challenge for God then becomes adding new features or eliminating unwanted ones, but the job is simplified because these tendencies provide most of the desired characteristics without God having to sweat out all of the little details. You might consider these tendencies as a set of building blocks; programmers would call them a set of library modules. I call them God’s toolkit.
Does this imply there must be recognition of what these tendencies are, and selection of what is desired? If so, God MUST exist, and MUST want things to be the way they are, at least during the latest development run.
Also, no divine intervention is required during run-time; in fact, it would introduce chaos into the run. Ironic, because religion itself is a part of the runtime activities. God’s use of this approach might also explain why there is so much pain in the world; maybe this is not the final run. Or maybe it is, but God doesn’t feel our pain. Or maybe he just doesn’t care.
I like to think this is the final run (“God doesn’t play dice”), but some pain is required to establish a pathway to whatever end result he’s interested in. That is the kind of wishful thinking that I have. I don’t think God takes the time to listen to our prayers; he has enough coding to do already, and doubtless uninterested in changing minor aberrations, even if he did look that closely at the program output.
I hope at this point that you can begin to appreciate that what I’m saying has some degree of possibility. I hope you can distinguish it from the huge pile of vague bull-crap nearly all religions spew out to explain how God can possibly operate. I hope you consider a logical explanation to be better than beliefs based upon induced fear and blind faith. That is true, even if the premise is false.
Hey, I’m not trying to sell you anything; TRUST ME, I have no reason to lie.
But if you need to be terrified into believing it like a good little Catholic, just consider this: Any program can be run a countless number of times with perfect reproducibility. So all of the wrong things you have done throughout your life could repeat ump-teen zillion times over again and again. Don’t you think maybe you should start doing the right thing?
You will now, of course, start to be good because since the beginning of time this has been pre-determined; you have now read this, and now your craping your pants just like Albert and me. Be careful from now on! I know you will.
Next, I will show you how man or God actually can implement
a Universe creation. And if we do it, we get to use God’s toolkit to make our
task easier. This is very basic computer logic – Don’t be afraid of it. If
you don’t understand the pseudo-code, skip it, but note that contrary to
what you might expect, it is a very short and simple program. And it works!
Its location, relative to the center of the Universe, specified by its X, Y, and Z coordinates . These are finite numbers, so the Universe can be visualized as a 3-dimentional grid, or a “matrix”.
Its vector, described as a direction and a speed, relative to another object. Again, these are both finite numbers, so there are a discrete set of directions and speeds an object can travel in. Objects with negative speed are traveling in the direction of the other object. Objects with a positive speed are traveling away from the other object. Objects with speed = 0 have an undefined (or null) other object.
We are now ready to start the Universe. The following pseudo-code shows how simple it is…
‘ (This is a comment line)
‘ (A continuing comment line) …
Constant UniverseObjectCount = 10 ka-jillion
‘ The count of objects (particles) in the Universe
Type Definition: LocationType
‘ A data structure used to describe an object’s location
Xloc as positive integer
Yloc as positive integer
Zloc as positive integer
End Type Definition
Type Definition VectorType
‘ A data structure used to describe an object’s speed and direction.
’ Note that the direction is not defined in terms of grid location;
’ the DirectionObject is the index of another object in the U.,
’ and set to NULL if speed = 0. Note also that
‘ speed is limited to the speed of light.
‘ This is how relativity is implemented in the Universe.
Speed as integer
DirectionObject as positive integer or NULL
End Type Definition
Type Definition UniverseObjectType
‘ A data structure used to describe an object’s
‘ PrimeDentity (described in Note_1 below)
’ and it’s state; its location and its vector
PrimeDentity as Integer
Location as LocationType
Vector as VectorType
End Type Definition
‘ (Don’t worry about this one, real programmers know what it is.)
‘ (I’m just being a jerk show-off leaving it in here…)
Dim UniverseObjects (UniverseObjectCount, 2) as UniverseObjectType
‘ Sets of Arrays that define the states of all objects in the Universe.
‘ This is where our Universe actually exists.
‘ Runtime variable definitions now follow…
Dim CurrentSet as Integer
Dim CurrentObject as Integer
Dim Done as Boolean
‘ Begin the Universe here
CurrentSet = 1
Do Until Done:
For CurrentObject = 1 to UniverseObjectCount
UniverseObjects (CurrentObject, NextSet(CurrentSet)) = _
DetermineNext (CurrentObject, CurrentSet, Done)
‘ Determine next state of this particle,
‘ and store it in the alternate set
CurrentSet = NextSet(CurrentSet)
‘ We move… this is a “grain of time”, or
‘ a “tick of the clock” observed in the virtual U.
‘ Hard to believe it, but these 7 lines of core code run our Universe
‘ Function to determine the next set according to the present set
Function NextSet (CurrentSet as Integer) as Integer
If (CurrentSet = 1) then
NextSet = 2
NextSet = 1
‘ Function to determine the next state of a particle
Function DetermineNext (CurrentObject, CurrentSet, Done) as UniverseObjectType
‘ See Note_1, below
Only 7 lines of “core” code actually run our Universe. We just need the DetermineNext function to complete the greatest program ever written. It’s a good thing God isn’t being paid by the number of code lines written, or he would be sleeping on the floor!
I believe that a very simple set of calculations will yield very complex interactive behaviors collectively manifested as the laws of chemistry, physics, and relativity.
I believe these behaviors exhibit themselves when several objects are within close proximity. The magic here is that the behavior of masses of objects result from intrinsic relations (tendencies), naturally defined by mathematics.
In review, a circle is a 2-dimentional shape in which all members of a set of particles are the same distance from its center. The relation between the diameter and circumference of a circle involves the number pi; lets call this a naturally occurring mathematical relationship. In 3-dimentions this occurs as a sphere.
These are shapes that naturally occur in everything we see. It is these same naturally occurring mathematical relationships that cause bubbles to be round, and for all the planets to round off and spin in perfect concert with all the other objects in any solar system. It all manifests naturally from the network of relationships that implicitly results from these separate objects.
And so, God’s task in creating the Universe is not as complex as it seems because he doesn’t have to control every little particle of matter; most of the macro structures will automatically form intrinsically.
And so, the same way a painter can start to paint with no experience, and the same way a programmer can start a program without thinking it through, God can start to create the Universe without much forethought, and with limited skill.
Besides explaining how our Universe actually works, explaining Infinity, reality, and time, showing how God could realistically have created the Universe (making everyone melt with satisfaction and joy, allowing everyone to understand God’s plan and give us all a reason to consider religion on the same level as fairy tales, thus saving mankind from eons of insane torture and oppression), there is proof that we will all live again, and also practical benefits we can now harvest; this is the basis of my declaration that there is hope for mankind.
We can also come up with a new way to re-define all of the laws of chemistry, physics, and relativity simply by figuring out this very simple formula, and extrapolating generalizations that precisely explain the behavior of matter. As previously stated, we can solve these riddles by working from the inside out, rather than taking the long way home through observation and theorization.
Purdy schweet, huh?
If, as I suspect, the solution is simple, then I believe it is not only possible to determine the exact parameters and algorithms used to create and run our own Universe, we can then go forward and use them in our own computers to duplicate our own Universe, and therefore be able to review anything that has happened in history and also predict the future.
That’s just one of the practical benefits we can now start to harvest. Talk about modern technology!
It seems just too simple, but this is how the Universe actually could be replicated. The only things to consider next are the specific parameters and rules:
1. How many objects are in these sets?
2. What are the numerical resolution limits for the characteristics?
3. What are the rules to calculate the next position of a particle?
I thought you would never ask! It seems as though we can only guess about these questions, and wonder about what it would take to create the Universe.
Now, ‘ol Marty might be nuts, but I believe we have the technology to figure it all out, right now!
I believe that once work starts on this project, it will soon become apparent that determining the solution is not only possible, it’s simple… it is the one that fits what really is. If we can just make it to that first galaxy they talked about on the TV show about time; the one that only now do we see, but really occurred only a few billion years after the big bang, the rest of the Universe will follow in suite.
As you will see, it is simple child’s play, but first we need a few quick terminology definitions…
I’m calling it a particle if it’s in the current set, an object if its in (one of) the alternative set(s). Why? The current set is reality, alternative sets are used only for intermediate calculations and thus something we can never see, touch, feel, or contact. Don’t waist your time worrying about it because to us, reality is all that matters. Unless your trying to somehow short-circuit the Universe, just try to sit back, enjoy the ride, and try not to get any on the curtains.
Any smaller number other than the number 1 cannot equally divide a prime number. Here are the first 12 prime numbers:
1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31
Note that all prime numbers are unique from one another.
Given a list (an array in computer terms) of objects, each object is uniquely identified by its Array Index. For example:
The index of the second object in this list is 2, allowing us to use #2 to uniquely identify it, even if the object’s value (“Drugs”) is not unique, as shown in #12.
For reasons described below, we will need to make use of prime numbers in some of our calculations. Like the array index, each prime number is also unique. Marty calls the distinct prime number associated with each distinct array index the PrimeDentity:
Just one more terminology definition and we will be off, but first, we need to define what Force and Energy really are.
Our Universe seems to exhibit a myriad of forces and energies. Physicists really struggle to reverse-engineer these observations into a continuously changing set of theories trying to explain what they see. They try to describe and classify them, as if they’re some kind of strange category or some weird alternate state of particles, and as such, make up part of the Universe in and of themselves. E = mc2 is a great example of this confusion.
Marty says this is all hogwash! Neither FORCE nor Energy is CONTAINED WITHIN OUR UNIVERSE AT ALL!
First of all, Energy is actually a measurement of the magnitude of the potential to move matter from one place to the next.
What we observe to be “Force” is simply the manifestation of changes in the positions and vectors of particles as the Universe ticks off grains of time. Period! In other words, Force only comes from the computer that’s running the show, its not part of the show itself.
I still use the term “Force” because that’s how we describe and quantify what we see when observing changes in the position of matter. But just to be clear about it, Force does not come from matter, nor is it stored in anywhere or any way in our Universe.
Force is really the computer algorithm used by the big box the runs the U. Isn’t that a lot less confusing? To me, this is a bone-chilling revelation.
I will now describe how each of these “Forces” behaves in order to calculate the next position of a particle. Like I said, its all child’s play.
I bet you thought I would leave this part un-explained, huh? You still don’t know whom you’re dealing with do you? Marty will let you see the truth. Get a few rolls of toilet paper ready; this is a thrilling chapter…
Meat and gravy, where the rubber meets the road, I am NOT full of crap! Here is a simple algorithm that determines the movement of all particles in a Universe.
In review, each particle in the current set is considered one at a time to calculate its next state (position and vector), as this chapter reveals. The calculated next states are stored in the alternate set’s associated objects.
All particles in the Universe are then instantly “moved” into their next position discretely as the Universe ticks away another grain of time, simply by changing the alternate set into the current set. Tick Tick Tick!
Enough small talk; let’s dive right in.
At any point in time, all of the particles that make up a Universe are in a particular set of states (locations and vectors). The next state of each particle is calculated by applying a simple set of rules enacting only according to the present states of all the particles in that Universe.
Only three factors cause a particle to move into its next state, and each has an associated “force” enacted by a different algorithm:
Lets knock off nuclear forces right now. Isn’t this getting frightening? Good (my hands are a-washing…heh heh heh)!!!
When more than one object occupy the exact same X, Y, Z grid location, a set of “Nuclear force Rules” is applied as a first priority in calculating the next positions for all of these co-occupying particles.
The objective is to move each particle away from the position it shares with any other particle(s), into different positions; if we don’t get them into different positions, there will certainly be a repeating co-occupation in the next tick of time, and this will repeat indefinitely, causing the program to infinitely loop, thus suspending all subsequent movement of all of the particles in the entire Universe. Which is a bad thing.
In order to prevent an infinite loop (BTW, this is the only Infinity ever possible in any real Universe, you chicken-loving son-of-a-gun), we’ll use the PrimeDentity specified for the array index number of the particle being considered to grant uniqueness to the calculation of its next position, as shown below in the pseudo-code for DetermineNext.
Did you think I was bull-craping about having this actually done, or worse, think you could get away from having to read more pseudo-code? Just stare at the screen and act like your reading it in awe; it will all be over soon because the code is FLICKING SIMPLE!!!!!
Using the array index also has a hidden advantage. Suppose the initial state before the big bang was that all particles in the U. were in the same position (which I believe to be true for simplicity, which everything I’m suggesting is); Particle #1 is used to provide a point of reference for direction and relative speed for all other particles sharing the position.
Without the uniqueness provided by array indexes, we would otherwise need an external “anchor” particle to stand out and provide a point of reference, sacrificing itself for the good of the reluctant masses, all the while looking like a dingleberry hanging from an otherwise perfect ultra-concentration of particles.
For simplicity reasons described below, with nuclear forces, we will only consider the current position and the count of other particles occupying the location; we won’t consider the vectors of the co-occupying particles. At least in our first run. Oops, I just farted a lightning bolt!
Function DetermineNext (CurrentObject as integer, _
CurrentSet as integer,
Done as Boolean) _
‘ Called from main(), this function determines if
‘ the end of the run has been reached, or if not,
‘ determines the next state (PrimeDentity, location
‘ and vector) of a particle and stores it in the
‘ associated object in the alternate set.
Dim FirstRelatedIndex as integer
If (IsDone) then
‘ Call to IsDone determined the run is finished,
‘ ending time and existence, as we know it.
Done = True
If (IsPositionShared (CurrentObject, _
‘ so use nuclear force rules to move it
DetermineNext = NuclearMove (CurrentObject, _
‘ Move the particle using nuclear force rules
If (IsPositionClose (CurrentObject, _
‘ Call to IsPositionClose returns true,
‘ so use quantum mechanics rules to move it
DetermineNext = QuantumLeep (CurrentObject, _
‘ Move the particle using quantum mechanics rules
‘ Must be part of a cluster, so use classical physics
DetermineNext = NewtonMotion (CurrentObject, _
‘ Move the particle using Newtonian physics
End Function DetermineNext
Function IsPositionShared (CurrentObject as integer, _
CurrentSet as integer, _
FirstSharedIndex as integer) _
‘ Determines if a particle shares its position with others:
‘ If not, returns False.
‘ If so, determines the first particle
‘ sharing its position and returns it as
‘ FirstSharedIndex, and returns IsPositionShared as True.
Dim index1 as integer
For index1 = 1 to UniverseObjectCount
‘ Loop through all particles in the U
If (UniverseObjects (CurrentObject, _
CurrentSet).Location = _
UniverseObjects (index1, _
‘ We found the first particle sharing
‘ the same location
FirstSharedIndex = index1
‘ Save it
If (CurrentObject NOT= index1) then
‘If this is not the same particle
IsPositionShared = True
IsPositionShared = False
‘ No shared particles found
End Function IsPositionShared
‘ Can you believe how easy this is?
‘ Just one more simple function,
‘ and we’re done with nuclear forces!
Function NuclearMove (CurrentObject as integer, _
CurrentSet as integer, _
FirstSharedIndex as integer) _
‘ Function to move a particle by nuclear force
NuclearMove.Location.Xloc = _
UniverseObjects (CurrentObject, _
UniverseObjects (CurrentObject, _
‘Set next location
If (CurrentObject NOT= FirstSharedIndex) Then
NuclearMove.Vector.Speed = _
UniverseObjects (CurrentObject, _
CurrentSet).Vector.Speed + _
UniverseObjects (CurrentObject, _
I told you it would be easy!!!
If you aren’t the programmer type, give this code to someone who is, and watch the expression on their face when they look up and say, “This really could work”. Priceless.
By now, I hope you agree: this is all eloquently simple. Not on the surface, no. But if you just let it sink in, it’s really quite simple…
We’re swimming in a sea of changing numerical sequences.
From that standpoint, it just makes everything easy.
We can first try simple formulas to get matter to naturally form into a single Hydrogen atom. That shouldn’t require a very large object set. We only need to focus on the proximity rules (quantum mechanics) to figure this one out, and that part should be easy!
It will occur naturally because of intrinsic relationships developed between the cooperating network of particles within the proximity, the same way soap bubbles form complex structures all on their own.
Next will be to increase the set size, naturally forming multiple hydrogen atoms, and establish some rules for their co-existence. These rules will simply be the laws of classical physics.
And then, all on its own, magic will occur. Increasing the set size in subsequent runs will suddenly reveal extremely complex networking that will naturally evolve to create all of the elements in the Universe. Matter will start to form our constellations and galaxies… POOF!! You can rest on Sunday if you need a break, but it really wasn’t all that hard, was it?
Parameters include the count of all particles, the maximum distance allowed from the center of the U., etc… The actual parameters used for our U. might be a bit difficult to determine, but I don’t think it’s impossible. For example, since one of the key parameters in the formula is the maximum relative speed of a particle, maybe that can be used to help us discover the other parameters, since the speed of light is a know constant.
With the new science of Network Theory explained by 6 degrees of separation studies (6DSS), we are suddenly armed with the enormous potential to solve problems from a mathematical approach.
For example, by using Network Theory, we can now begin to determine the precise DNA sequences throughout the evolution of every species on Earth, and then go on to create intricate relations between these DNA maps and the pathology of diseases affecting these critters. The entire field of medicine suddenly becomes a MATH PROBLEM, the laboratory suddenly becomes a computer room, and all the lab cats and rats are free at last, free at last, free at last.
I’m hoping Network Theory will help give us the final clues we need to pull together the final solution to crack the formula used to create the U. we live in.
As mentioned above, while the finite sizes of the X, Y, and Z coordinates for an object limit the size of the Universe, we don’t need to keep track of what may or may not be in each individual grid position; we only keep track of these positions for the objects we have in our set. Maybe there are only a few particles darting all over the virtual Universe, and perhaps more than 2 sets are used.
In addition, the complexity of an object set can be defined by the proliferation of relationships with other objects, rather than by the “size of the Universe”, or the number of objects within it.
And so, the Universe can be disseminated all the way from the big bang and on by creating a PROLIFERATION of events; the number of state definitions created by such would rival the count of particles in the U. multiplied by the number of state changes it took to create the Universe since the big bang.
In these cases, we could do a lot “more” with “less”. Right, Jim?
I recently invented a flying disc for the sport that contains fluids to help it fly farther and straighter. In doing so, I realized that the design worked similar to an amphibian circulatory system. This opened my eyes to the power of intrinsic functionality and the convergence, throughout evolution, of commonly desired physiological characteristics.
Outflow fluid Snap:
(inside fluid) ->| (snap valve) -> \ (one way valve) -> (outside fluid)
Inflow fluid Snap:
(outside fluid) ->| (snap valve) -> \ (one way valve) -> (inside fluid)
And speaking of open eyes, did you know that the eyes of Mammals did NOT follow the same evolutionary path as the eyes of Octopi?? “Riveting”!!
Yes its true… as complex as the structure of an eye is, Octopus eyes and Human eyes were formed not by common genetics, but by the need of the beast to see its surrounding world. We physiologists refer to this as CONVERGENT EVOLUTION, and it helps prove what I’m suggesting about the Universe forming on its own.
Scientists now believe that the existence of convergent evolution here on Earth proves the existence of life on other planets. So maybe that really was an alien flicking you in the ass last night.
I know in my heart that if someone actually started another run of the Universe, seeming to be virtual or not, we would all live our lives again within it. We would be unable to determine if our lives are real or virtual, and I say what’s the difference, Boss?
How do I know this in my heart? Let’s borrow a few lines from the movie Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure:
“But it did happen. Hey it was me who stole
my dad’s keys.”
They get into a bind, and need to have a set of keys appear during their hilarious time travels. To do so, they surmise that after they get out of the jam they’re in, they will use their time machine to plant the keys there, after the fact.
OK, Marty is crazy. I actually believe that since I’m here, someone must have created the Universe that made me. And thus, I don’t even worry about it. It HAS to happen again and again. If I don’t do it myself (woops, the delusion cat just jumped out of the bag I’ve been smoking from), someone else will. It’s a sure thing. To me, this rationalization is just as worthwhile as anything anyone has ever suggested to me to explain how I got here.
To do something right, sometimes you got to do it yourself. Maybe this book will inspire the creation of a dozen Universes. God bless ‘em all, whomever that DUDE is. After all, any stupid shmuck can play God once the simple formula is discovered.
There is a cold hard truth in the revelation that God might be someone like one of us, just another poor slob, just like you and me; even though I say that I don’t believe in fairy tales and prayers, this confirms that God probably ain’t watchin’, and definitely ain’t listenin’ to individuals, which is kind of a bummer because it removes all hope of a divine miracle to hit my daily lottery numbers.
And while we’re at it, we can hope that he might try to save humanity.
But why wait for him? If the Pope and the Ayatollah read this, and if they see the truths I reveal, maybe they can at least agree with me IN PRINCIPLE; We will HAVE to start saving humanity on our own. What a concept!
We can’t wait for God, or the Messiah, Mohamed or even Spiderman to save us from our own greed and incapacity for compassion. Even if he is listening to our prayers, God isn’t smart enough to know what to do to correct these little details anyway, other than to try changing some parameters, re-booting the box, and sparking up a big fatty while he watches another eternity come and go.
Crap, if he’s like me, he’ll have forgotten why he re-booted the damn box in the first place, let alone try to re-write the code on the fly for the entire Universe, just so you can hit your daily lottery numbers.
Don’t wait for God to pop up and tell you to respect one another. We will have to do it by ourselves. Isn’t that far more rewarding? Isn’t that way better?
For the first 35 years of my ignorant life, I wanted to believe that something special was going to happen, like I’d get picked up by Aliens, or somehow I’d get sent back in history and become a great teacher; something, anything, was going to happen. On my 35th birthday, I bought 35 lottery tickets and sat down to see if any were winners. Not!
But since then, I have come to realize that truth is even stranger than fiction; it’s WAY, WAY BETTER! And better yet, knowing this now gives me a rock solid grip on what life really is, and exactly what to expect.
The best part is that I no longer have any fear of what I can’t control or have yet to understand. There ain’t no boogey man underneath my bed, there never has been. I’m not afraid of the darkness of the future of my soul any more.
And now I know that this is yet another way that religions hold everyone captive in the moments of expectation and fear of the unknown. I laugh at them! Ha, Ha, Ha! As master Poe once told Grasshopper, “Fear is the only darkness.”
This is an actual way the Universe can be created, and it explains a lot about the unknown, so even if you don’t fully believe it, a lot can be learned from it.
If you say that God operates in other manners, then I would ask
But as useful as getting into a pissing match over religion may seem, this is not a debate over religions or about atheism, either. On the contrary, I believe there is a God, and he has created a very precise plan that requires all of the beliefs and religions that have come and gone throughout the history of world; its just part of the scenery along with flowers, birds, bad breath, and acne.
And although it is the absolute imperative of all established religions to blur the distinction between faith in God and faith in the religion, modern inventions like the microscope and the telescope have revealed the scientific truth of our natural reality. So we, as a species, have naturally developed understandings as well as tools to further enhance our development, resulting in common beliefs that conflict with established religious doctrine.
This is called “Science and Reasoning”, a natural part of the development of mankind.
If not for this fact, I don’t think you would have read this far. But, since you have, you obviously believe in science enough to at least tolerate this discussion, even if you don’t believe it. This is healthy, so lets continue.
Once tolerated and somewhat understood, your next response is that God can’t be that smart. After all, if anyone understands Chaos Theory, they know its impossible to predict how a G-Zillion particles will interact with each other and randomly create Leonardo, and have Da Vinci’s brain create the Mona Lisa.
I know, it sounds impossible. But if you just reason it through, you will see that it is possible.
By starting with the “simple approach” (also known as the “trial and error approach”), the architect can run a test, see the results, make small changes and then run another test with ABSOLUTELY PERFECT REPRODUCIBILITY. This is possible because we are dealing with a pre-determined sequence of discrete calculations. There is no Chaos here, even though it seems that way by observing the behavior of matter.
What makes it all possible is the limiting of every number to a finite size, or in other words, this MUST BE A DIGITAL UNIVERSE. Come on Fly, you have to at least start to think that I may be right about this, but if not, let me re-phrase what I agreed upon with Leucippus and Democritus to present more proof:
If the Universe was really analog, or if there could be an infinite amount of space between particles, or if particles could be infinitely small, it would take an infinite amount of time to perform some of the calculations that determine the next position of any of these particles to infinitesimal precision and thus, we could never move. Re-stating this in yet another way, the Universe is composed of a number of particles, each of which is effected by all of the other particles in the Universe; as such, because it would take and infinite amount of time to make the infinite number of calculations required to be able to consider the effects of all of these other particles upon even one single particle, we could never move. However, since we appear to be moving, I believe that these calculations are being made to finite resolutions and only to a finite number of particles, and that is enough proof for me.
If you want to skip ahead to the next Green section, go right ahead. This chapter elaborates on the science of our reality.
I will now explain how the Universe operates, from the big bang onward. Lets start at the beginning. This will be simple, AND, we won’t have to watch out for snakes and apples.
Scientists have recently tried to figure out what happened during the big bang. I don’t know much about these sciences, but I have heard some suggest that within the first few milliseconds of the big bang, some major changes occurred to an incredibly huge amount of matter, most of which are not possible under any of our understandings of the laws of physics and relativity.
However, in Marty’s simple model of the U., these changes are not only possible, they are predicted by the algorithm for nuclear movement, simply by initializing the location of every particle so they all logically occupy the same position in the first moment of time.
During the very first grain of time, the very first movement
in the Universe was the biggest single event ever, as far as maximum movement
of objects in the history of the Universe.
This is based upon my simple model of the Universe, which uses co-occupation (nuclear force) rules as a first priority in calculating the next positions of all particles, as described in Note_1. If, as I suspect, the initial state of the Universe was that all particles occupied the exact same position at the same time, this represented the maximum concentration of particles possible.
Any subsequent movements almost certainly have to occur with particles separated from one another, resulting in less overall movement.
Here is the catch…
I said “almost certainly” because it is possible for all of the particles to wind up in the same position sometime in the finite future! This will end time as we know it, and trigger the next big bang. As WILD as that seems, again, lets think it through…
Marty’s theory on perpetual gambling:
My cousin Larry and me often wonder what it would be like to hang around the casino and just play craps forever. One day we’d be up 10 va-va-villion on the house, the next day we’d owe “Vito Gallastoletti” even more in markers and fingers. Depending on our bankroll and the house edge, over a long time statistics will rule the day. Lets face it, Vegas was not built by winners.
Now lets go on a chicken hunt in fairyland and imagine that we have a HUGE bankroll, I mean, like, the entire Universe is gold and we own it. And not only that, let’s say that there is no house edge, so theoretically, we could play forever. BUT, let also imagine that NO MATTER WHAT, THE HOUSE CAN NEVER BUST.
It might take what seems like an eternity for the house to finally win all of our money. However, it is a mathematical certainty that eventually, it MUST occur. In fairyland, Infinity always wins over finite.
My theory on gambling, about the house always eventually wining if it has an infinite bank, can that explain how and why all of the particles in the Universe can eventually wind up in the same place at the same time? Because it is a possible next state, and there is a lot of time to encounter it? Oh, and don’t forget, taking place by God’s design, not by chance, it results from a precisely pre-determined sequence of state changes.
In any case, this allows for multiple big bangs to occur, and addresses another bunch of scientific questions, like how long has time really existed?
Using my simple model of the Universe, I’ve deduced some simple solutions to re-cycle the Universe by getting it back to its initial state, whilst answering the questions of infinite space at the same time! In deciding the next position of moving particles using finite numbers, lets consider those particles for which the next position will be located out of the Universe’s finite range; the particles way out near the edge of the Universe…
We can, for example, simply move them back to position zero and then accumulate them until they are all there. This way, the Universe starts in an initial state, runs until its done by virtue of all particles being back in the initial state, and this could be the state that triggers another big bang, thus re-starting the U. ump-teen times over again.
Or, we could just let these re-positioned particles continue to move from position zero as they arrive there, making the Universe flow like a big fountain, where water that gets to the edge goes back to the center. This way, the U. continues to flow until one fine day when all of the particles in it happen to all hit position zero at the same time, and we repeat our banging that way.
Hey, another question is answered; how can the size of the Universe be infinite? What’s on the other side of that flicking wall? Answer: It doesn’t matter because only the finite size of the fountain within it is ever occupied.
In other words, don’t sweat it, because that’s a question only for chicken-hungry calculus wimps who don’t have the flicking balls to admit that Infinity is impossible, suggesting we live in a make-believe never-land. God damned pussies…
Maybe the goal of one of God’s creations is to make the Universe flow using the simplest equations that last the longest with the least amount of objects and distances traveling at the slowest speeds before returning to the initial state; a simple programming assignment to be completed in the first week of God School 101.
A more difficult programming assignment for God would be one in which more than one formula is used. A set of formulas must be mathematically structured so that multiple cycles of time grains can tick off using one formula, and the same sequential result can be calculated in fewer cycles by using another.
Like frame speeds used in video capture, within a given frame speed the same events occur and are viewed as in other renditions using slower frame speeds. But these frames are not being viewed they are being created by God’s choice of the formulas used in his versions of the DetermineNext function.
This requires a mathematically compatible set of formulas used to obtain identical results in which events occur in multiple sequential timeframes according to one formula, and the same states result by another formula using a smaller number of timeframes.
For example, a first formula states:
Particle #1 position = (current) + 3
Run this first formula over 6 timeframes, and Particle #1 position is at (current) + 18.
Meanwhile, another fast formula #2 says:
Particle #1 position = (current) + 6
Run this fast formula over 3 timeframes, and Particle #1 position is at (current) + 18, just like before.
Meanwhile, another fastest formula #3 says:
Particle #1 position = (current) + 9
Run this fastest formula over 2 timeframes, and Particle #1 position is at (current) + 18, just like before.
Formula 2 runs along formula 1, but twice as fast with the same results. Formula 3 runs along formula 1, but thee times as fast with the same results. This is a simple, “mortal” example of a solution to God’s bonus question.
The result would be that this student can produce a series of snapshots of “time” rushing by, making reality equal in the speed-up “frame speeds” as in the most granular frame speed; all objects in the Universe wind up in the exact same set of states, and once in that state, it goes forward from there in whatever granularity is desired by virtue of which calculations are being applied.
An even more challenging problem is to devise a formula that can somehow be run in reverse, so the Universe can be played forward or backward.
If the formula ran perfectly symmetrically, where every sequence executed at the start is repeated in reverse order, that might help; the Universe would run like a bell curve, expanding until it gets to a certain size, and then contracting back again. The only problem here is it gives me a headache trying to figure out if we’re actually going forward or backward!
But a better way to do it is to maintain the array indexes and the original PrimeDentity, in addition to the last known PrimeDentity, and use all 3 when making the forward calculations. This adds an extra level of order to the calculations, providing a “backward linkage” which could be used to unwind a given Universe’s state backwards to figure out what the previous state had to be, in order to make it. Running this program across a series of states would then be the same as playing the Universe in reverse.
You might call this the “Anti-Universe” program, and think it must have dark and unholy connotations, but don’t get confused; its still just another way to crunch the numbers and calculate the exact same sequence of state changes. Below, we will actually beat a horse to death discussing this simple concept.
Who’s more bored, God, applying a countless number of equations and combinations to test and review, me having the time to dream this crap up, or you actually reading it? WAIT!!!! Don’t you dare stop reading; I promise this will be your last insult, but after all, this is purple, so have some balls and get a thicker skin. You’ll need it if you try explaining this crap to anyone else!
Getting down to a bottom line on God, are you:
PLEASE, SEE THIS AND AGREE
AND THEN SIT BACK AND STOP STRUGGLING OVER STUPIDITY
TRY GETTING OVER THE POLARIZATION AND HATRED YOUR NATION HAS SURELY TAUGHT YOU
TRY GETTING ALONG WITH EACH OTHER
IT IS A BIG STEP FOR MANKIND TO TAKE, BUT WE’RE READY TO TAKE IT RIGHT NOW
PLEASE REALIZE WHAT I SAY AND VALUE IT
THE TIME IS NOW!
At this point, if you say your bible is proof enough for you, we can both safely assume that you have been blinded by religion. Although you are smart enough to read this, you may become personally threatened by its contents. And then, instead of trying to embrace it or at least trying to learn something from it, you might devote your time preparing passages of scripture, which clearly dispute these ideas.
Since arguing with a zealot is as useful as bicycles for fish, I suggest that you at least try reading the following paragraph…
Throughout the history of our planet, religion has been required to empower our leaders who have used it as a tool to enable and sustain social bonding, allowing the formation of groups and cultures. These groups then developed the concepts of ownership and sovereignty. Mankind then needed to create weapons and study war to seize and protect what became “rightfully theirs”, accelerating our introduction into the world of science and objective thinking.
Well, that’s what really happened.
Wait! Are you still clinging to it, perhaps thinking of some meaningless passages they shoved down your throat to regurgitate back unto me? If so, then I suggest that you read the following repetitious paragraph one more time, and then stop reading…
addition , eEveryone
has to agree that if God created the world the way he intended, all of the
world’s peoples and religions are all integral parts of his plan.
Are you still with us? Don’t worry; God forgives you for seeking the path to truth in any religion.
If you happen to run into me, let me warn you right now: DO NOT QUOTE SCRIPTURE TO ME, OR I WILL KICK YOUR FLICKING ASS!
If your nation, religion, culture or otherwise gang affiliation has death penalties established for losing faith, or for cartoonists and others who criticize it, or if it vows to dispatch all non-believers and eventually take over the world, shouldn’t that show you how weak it really is? So weak, it can’t stand upon its own merit? So weak it requires blindly threatening its own followers in order to enforce and propagate it? So weak, the presence of non-believers threatens its existence?
I’m talking to you gang-bangers, willing to murder and die for your stupid, worthless colors. I’m talking to you hard-liners in the world who blindly follow your religion because you’re too afraid to place reason in front of it. I’m talking to anyone convinced to perform a suicide bombing by extremists calling themselves religious authorities. I’m talking to anyone taught to kill others for bullcrap reasons, justifying it in any case because of the pretence that your victims don’t worship the same as you, don’t think like you, or they just aren’t like you.
Wake up… question what you are… ask what you want to ask. See what your own eyes see, and yes, feel what your “enemies” feel. For example, some of the hard-core Muslims in the world want to force everyone into their world… the real hard-liners are openly at war with everyone who is not Muslim. OK, lets suppose they win this war. Lets say they enslave, butcher, convert, or otherwise dispose of all of their enemies, leaving only Muslims. OK, then what? Will some sects be better than others? Will the wars between these sects suddenly cease? FUCK NO, they won’t. So where would it end? Where WILL it end?
Catholics, are you any better? Is any religion really any better? Even the Nazi parties began isolating “pure blood” from those without Blond Hair and Blue eyes. Can’t anyone see the futility this leads to?
Can’t anyone see that extremists are the ones keeping mankind at war with each other?
Doesn’t anyone want to just admit that blind faith is the one and only stupid reason our entire civilization remains a free-for-all for murderers, or are you all a happy bunch of stubborn flicking retards? Are you happy to remain stubborn and retarded, just as long as you don’t rock the old boat? Yup, it’s the same as it ever was, the same as it ever was! The “good book” my ASS!
If you want to murder me for making these statements, flick you and the hog or camel you rode in on. You can’t stop mankind from evolving past your gangland bullcrap.
Instead, why don’t you invite the idiot who ordered you to kill me over to your place and have a nice big suicide ritual celebration with the rest of your clan; eat a bunch of pita, flick a bunch of lambs, beat up all of your women, and then pull the ol’ pin and dance your way back to Mohamed and the 72 virgins he promised you.
If you want to skip ahead to the next Green section, go right ahead. This chapter discusses the theoretic implications of simulating our U, and is really quite long, dry and technical, so you might want to skip over it, especially if you’re nerd-challenged.
In review, I think we can simulate our own Universe in a simple computer program.
But, there is a problem here; even if my theory is true, if we could get a simulation of our own Universe going, it would be impossible to build a computer fast enough to simulate our Universe from the last big bang until now, as proven below.
Yet again, I have a possible solution to this, but first of all, we need to ponder upon what we need to simulate, and the first question I would ask is, do we need to consider previous big bangs as well as our own?
Marty’s theory on the effect of previous runs of the Universe upon a subsequent run:
Since the Universe starts out in a distinct state, previous runs have no bearing or effect upon it. This is because all of the particles in the U. move only according to the rules enacting upon the present states of all particles in the Universe, so once the U. is in the exact same state, it starts again and runs exactly like it did before.
So, since previous runs of the Universe cannot affect our run of the Universe, we don’t need to consider them at all.
And so now we only need to deal with a relatively small and finite set of state changes: only all of the particle motion in our Universe since the last big bang. Good thing, because we don’t have any idea how many times God lit this firecracker and absolutely no way to figure it out.
OK, so next, we just need a really big and fast computer, right? Wrong!
If we had all of the equations and algorithms, knew all of the parameters, and started a computer simulation run of our own Universe, is it impossible for the run to “Catch up” with our own Universe.
The problems include the fact that any simulator built in our Universe cannot possibly run faster than the outer Universe, because the outer Universe moves all of the particles that compose the matter of which the components our computers are made of.
I don’t think computer size is a prohibiting issue because the complexity of our U. can be defined by the proliferation of relationships with other objects, rather than by the “size of the Universe” or the number of objects within it. But speed is a prohibiting issue.
If the Universe plays itself out as a set of sequential computations that change the states of objects in discrete ticks of time, how can multiple processors help speed up the calculations? Could this make the sequence of calculations proceed faster? I think it can help…
In review, the processing that occurs in the big loop in main() looks like this:
For CurrentObject = 1 to UniverseObjectCount
UniverseObjects (CurrentObject, NextSet(CurrentSet)) = _
DetermineNext (CurrentObject, CurrentSet)
‘ Determine next state of this particle,
‘ and store it in the alternate set
Now lets suppose we try using multiple computers all working concurrently on a run of the U. Suppose we use 1000 computers, each acting on its own share of the Universe’s objects.
Each of these 1000 computers can resolve the statement in this code loop concurrently! Because I’m using multiple-buffering techniques to calculate the next position of every particle in the Universe without being disturbed by intermediate movements whilst these calculations are being made, each calculation is independent of the others.
Lets alter the above code to take advantage of multiple computers; first let’s introduce a few new constants and variables, and then change only one line in the code so each computer acts only upon its share of objects:
‘ The following lines go with the program’s declarations section
Const NumberOfComputers = 1000 ‘ Number of concurrent computers
Const CurrentComputer = 23 ‘ Current computer in use  (1 to
Dim FirstParticle as Integer ‘ First particle for this box
‘ to consider
Dim LastParticle as Integer ‘ Last particle for this box
‘ to consider
‘ The following lines go just after main()
FirstParticle = ((CurrentComputer – 1) * UniverseObjectCount)) + 1
‘ This equals 23,001 for box number 23
LastParticle = FirstParticle + NumberOfComputers – 1
‘ This equals 24,000 for box number 23
‘ The following one-line change occurs to the “For” looping statement
For CurrentObject = FirstParticle to LastParticle
Lets re-state our previous question:
If the Universe plays itself out as a set of sequential computations that change the states of objects in discrete ticks of time, can multiple processors help speed up the calculations?
The answer is yes, it helps speed up the execution time it takes to complete a single loop through all of the Universe’s objects to calculate their next state, HOWEVER, it does NOT help make the sequential processing that occur between each of these loops go any faster! The reason is because these steps are NOT independent of each other; we need to know what the present state is before we can go forward to calculate the next.
To make this unreasonably long story short, lets paraphrase this by just stating that we still need to execute the ticks of the Universe’s time sequentially, and thus Marty’s catch-up theory remains true.
FYI, we computer geeks have a similar theory that applies to simulators trying to run a simulation of the computer that is running its own program. Can it ever catch up? No!
Getting back to the point of this long, dry chapter, the good news is that we only need to consider the time between the last big bang and the present to reveal the past and allow us to see into the future. Lets call this the “You can tell where you are going from where you have been” approach. But the bad news is, its impossible.
But wait! I’m Marty, and I’ve figured out another way to at least simulate the recent past, present, and future states of the U. Hey, unless you want to watch a bunch of dinosaurs eating and flicking each other, the time range from the recent past to the future is the only thing we want to see, anyway, right?
Lets call this the “you can tell where you have been by knowing where you are going” approach, or Marty’s “back-door-man” approach. Using this approach, we only need to consider the time between the present and the end of the Universe, if and when the next big bang is due to occur relatively soon.
The assumption here is that God attended God School 101 (see above) and figured out both of the extra credit questions.
I believe it might be faster to try to simulate the Universe in reverse from the end of the Universe back to the present, rather than try to simulate it forward from the big bang back to the future. If we’re now approaching the end of the Universe, and if these sequences can somehow be calculated in reverse, there would be much less calculations to perform as trying it from the start.
And if there is an accelerated sequence running in parallel, we might take advantage of that too. There might be one; God might have left us one to help us discover the secrets of the U. he created for us. Don’t put it past him, look how much we already know without any of his direct help so far.
So, although Marty’s catch-up theory prohibits us from building a fast enough computer to catch up from the last big bang until the present, there is hope, especially if we’re close to all hope being lost.
Fair enough, but we still need to determine the final missing pieces: the end state of all particles in the U., and the values of those stinking unknown parameters. We are getting there…
We still need to know the ending state of the U., and we need to determine the missing parameters.
Lets put the Horse in front of the Cart. If we know the parameters, or at lease just the UniverseObjectCount parameter, we can assume the ending state of the U. is simply that of a UniverseObjectCount of particles are all located at position 0, and all vectors set to DirectionObject = NULL and Speed = 0.
I’m making a few assumptions here:
So, one last GOD DAMMED time, how can we determine those MOTHER-FLICKING parameters? Lets ask the chicken-lovers.
In Calculus, chicken-loving students learn about Limits,
for example, in the simple equation
y = 1 / x
everyone knows you can’t divide by zero, and so x can’t = 0. It seems “intuitively obvious” that if x were 0, y would have to be Infinity. But since the number Infinity was not understood (until Marty), they sidestepped the issue with double-talk by only considering what happens as x approaches 0; When x is .001, y is 1000. When x is .00001, y is 100000. When x is .0000001, y is 10000000. Blah, ba, blah.
The point of these sissy chicken-lovers is that the end result can be determined without having to play it all the way through. They might surmise that we can determine those bloody parameters, like the maximum value of a particle’s location relative to the center of the U., by solving them as a set of related limits equations.
If we can figure out the actual maximum resolution possible
for parameters like this, maybe we can extrapolate it to a maximum “word size”
like integer, double, etc…. That would at least show us the outer limits of,
for example, the number of objects in the U.
Let’s ask what the parameter in question is used for, and then consider what it takes to approach a resolution for it. If it’s used for the shortest distance between 2 objects, it has a FINITE ANSWER. If it is for the maximum distance between 2 objects, this also has a FINITE ANSWER… (Considering my theory that the formula simply resets to zero any location past the end of the U.).
Even if your not a chicken-lover, you must admit that as queer as it seems, these calculus-queen’s limit calculations show us a way to make it possible to fit everything together,
even if all they really want from life is a better fitting chicken kabob.
So now, we finally have a way to pull together all of the missing pieces. If this is valid, then given enough time, we actually could simulate a short sequence of our own U. Marty’s catch-up theory really states that it just can’t be nearly as fast. So, lets say that we could, with 1 year of sequential processing using the fastest computers known, simulate the first 23 x 10**23 ticks of our own Universe, I’m guessing that equals about our first 23 seconds of time. So what? Big fucking deal!!
I know, I know, it seems like I’ve stretched this whole scientific explanation thing into a colossal Mongolian cluster-flick. But, from my jaded point of view, everything here possibly could work, and that is the key point of this parched chapter, and the basis upon which this book’s subsequent chapters are built.
This proves the possible scientific basis, and indoctrinates my postulation that we really could be living out an endless set of perpetual lives. Finally, if enough people believe the experiment has a valid basis, there is, at last, hope for humanity, and a good reason to start treating each other according to the Golden Rule. That’s what! OK, I’m Done. “Mission accomplished”.
Man, this last “Geeks only” chapter really SUCKED! Take a break, have a glass of Pepsi with crushed ice, burn a joint and relax. The good thing is, this concludes my possible scientific explanation of how our Universe works. Now, lets focus on what we are as human beings living within this virtual U. scenario. OK, you can have a pastry too.
The technical explanations given this far are enough to make you understand my point about treating others fairly. However, I’m just as obsessive and compulsive as the next nut case, and so let me elaborate on what the human mind really is.
The human mind is a data processor; it gets its input in the form of electronic signals from the nervous system, archives and processes the information, all while it outputs feed-back signals that control the human body. Not many scientists these days will argue this fact at all. Well, other than “Christian scientists”.
Of course this is an over simplification; there are anatomic brain structures that provide pre-programmed responses. These are developed and honed evolutionally by natural selection. Examples are abundant in nature. Look at the ducks, the way they make nests, and protect their young.
A man-made example of this is exhibited in the behavior of Dalmatians. These dogs have developed a tendency to run along cars, bicycles and joggers.
They obtained this trait by man-made selection over several generations of being bred to run along and protect carriages on English country roads. The endocrine system also affects the brain, as well as a few other factors. But the point is, our brains are computers.
The human mind is not capable of detecting the difference between the external world being physical or virtual, OK, lets go ahead and compare it to the Matrix movies. This is because all of our sensory input is first translated into information in the form of electric signals (via the nervous system) before our brain perceives it. Being purely information, as such, we are unable to perceive if the world is “real” or just “data”.
And since we cannot determine this, I say, What’s the difference, Boss? There is none!
And so, we must accept the fact that it is possible. In fact, anyone who studies the principles of classical physics treats matter not as a discreet set of objects, but as behaviors these objects collectively exhibit. So there really isn’t much of a leap, if any between these two forms of reality, because really, they are the same thing when we consider them as such. Which we do.
Read this book twice… the more you think about it, the more it becomes apparent that the only way for the Universe to exist is as a set of logical states. Trust me on this one … it cannot be otherwise.
Even Neo gets hungry, is it time for chow?
Tastes the same, virtual or not!
Some of the most useful computer application programs we have are called “computer simulators”. For example, IBM made a ton of money in the 60s and 70s with its “mainframes”, which are really big, fast and expensive computers. To keep IBM’s mainframe market competitive as the cost of hardware began plummeting in the 80s and 90s, they came up with the “Virtual Machine” (VM).
It sounds like hardware, but the VM is really a set of computer programs each of which behaves exactly like a different kind of computer. A single mainframe can run multiple VMs all at the same time.
So then, as cheaper mid-range computers like the AS-400 were introduced, IBM kept its mainframe market share by providing a VM program that acts exactly like an AS-400. If you already had a $1,000,000 mainframe, and were given the choice of buying 10 new AS-400s for, say, $50,000 each, it made more sense to buy the “VM simulator for AS-400 software, costing $10,000” and use it on your old mainframe to simulate the 10 AS-400s, than to buy the actual AS-400s and scrap your old mainframe.
A program designed to run on the AS-400 has NO WAY OF KNOWING if it’s running on an actual AS-400, or on a Virtual Machine running on a mainframe simulating an AS-400, or running on any other kind of computer simulator, for that matter. From the point of view of the running program, the exact same sequence of state changes is executed.
And so, the exact same results occur, and the program doesn’t care. Why should it care, after all, its just a program. The only thing that matters is that the calculations are performed correctly, and the output and results are in the correctly expected sequences.
Note: The next 3 sections are YELLOW only if you can’t do basic arithmetic. Of course, I’m assuming in this statement that at least you can count to 3.
If you need to add some numbers together, you can get the job done in any of a number of ways, the most obvious is to sit down and use a pencil and paper. Or, you can speed things up, and even automate the process by using a tool like an adding machine.
When using a tool to perform some calculations, it doesn’t matter if you’re using an abacus or a slide rule. It doesn’t matter if it’s an adding machine that uses gears, sand, or fluids with valves. You could use an old SR 10 pocket calculator, or you can use a computer; any kind of computer. The same set of calculations can also be made visualizing the answer, by looking at a set of charts, by asking someone to give you the answers, etc., etc., etc.
Whatever tools you might be using, whatever way it gets done, the correct results will always be the same. The only difference might be the speed at which the job gets done, but in the end the results of the calculations are identical. Nobody can argue about this, it’s as simple as it sounds.
Lets take this a step further; King Bennett needs to perform 18 calculations, and he demands that the results must be correct. To be absolutely certain, his highness orders 9,000 of his closest disciples to somehow perform all of these calculations and report the results back to him in a list. Here is The King’s list of calculations to be performed:
Each of the 9,000 disciples use whatever methods they have available to them to complete the task and report their list of results, for example:
Again, the methods the disciples use to determine these calculations have no effect upon the correct results. The correct lists from all of the disciples are identical because all of the calculations were made by virtually identical methods. Anyone with incorrect results is battered to death with flying discs by the king himself.
We can compare The King’s sequence of calculations to another sequence; the moves players of a chess game make. Today’s chess players use “Standard Algebraic Chess Notation” to record the sequence of moves made in a game:
Here is an example of a report listing of a full game’s sequences of moves:
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Bd7 4. Bxd7+ Qxd7 5. c4 Nc6 6. Nc3 Nf6 7. O-O g6 8. d4 cxd4 9. Nxd4 Bg7 10. Nde2 Qe6 11. Nd5 Qxe4 12. Nc7+ Kd7 13. Nxa8 Qxc4 14. Nb6+ axb6 15. Nc3 Ra8 16. a4 Ne4 17. Nxe4 Qxe4 18. Qb3 f5 19. Bg5 Qb4 20. Qf7 Be5 21. h3 Rxa4 22. Rxa4 Qxa4 23. Qxh7 Bxb2 24. Qxg6 Qe4 25. Qf7 Bd4 26. Qb3 f4 27. Qf7 Be5 28. h4 b5 29. h5 Qc4 30. Qf5+ Qe6 31. Qxe6+ Kxe6 32. g3 fxg3 33. fxg3 b4 34. Bf4 Bd4+ 35. Kh1 b3 36. g4 Kd5 37. g5 e6 38. h6 Ne7 39. Rd1 e5 40. Be3 Kc4 41. Bxd4 exd4 42. Kg2 b2 43. Kf3 Kc3 44. h7 Ng6 45. Ke4 Kc2 46. Rh1 d3 47. Kf5 b1=Q 48. Rxb1 Kxb1 49. Kxg6 d2 50. h8=Q d1=Q 51. Qh7 b5 52. Kf6+ Kb2 53. Qh2+ Ka1 54. Qf4 b4 55. Qxb4 Qf3+ 56. Kg7 d5 57. Qd4+ Kb1 58. g6 Qe4 59. Qg1+ Kb2 60. Qf2+ Kc1 61. Kf6 d4 62. g7# 1-0
Yes. To the pieces inside of the chess game (Bishops, Pawns, Etc.), it does NOT matter how the game’s players physically or logically decide on what moves are made. It does NOT matter who the players are, how many there are, or how experienced they are. It doesn’t even matter if the players themselves are actually computers!
Additionally, to the pieces inside of the games, it does NOT matter how long it takes the players to make the moves, because the only time frame they can relate to occurs from move to move. Why? Because time is based upon motion, and the only motion they ever see is the sequence of moves.
And so, just like programs running on computer simulators, and just like any ordered list of calculations, the exact same sequence of state changes gets executed within its own reality. The processing is real, even if the processor itself is simulated, the moves are real, even if the game is simulated, virtual, or “real”.
Again, it all seems real to those chess pieces; it’s real inside of their reality, and in that reality, the only measurement of time they perceive occurs relative to the sequence of steps, not to the time it takes to make these steps by the players making them.
OK, I think the horse is dead. By now I certainly hope you can see where I’m going with this, right?
If not, maybe you should shift your focus back on how God has the time to individually sculpt every snowflake that falls on every planet in the Universe. Or think about how anything that you don’t understand must be proof of God’s infinite wisdom. Maybe try smoking some cigarettes, throw in a big chunk of meth, and enjoy it with the rest of your trailer park country-hick retards. Or better yet, just keep reading the bible and pay your minister to keep telling you more lies and suck and flick your sons right in the confessional.
Its all God’s will, so it must be all good, all right, all of the time, and every night. Let God do all the thinking for you, after all, its all God’s will anyway, and don’t even bother to help you’re fellow man, God will find a way!
What are our bodies and brains? What are our MINDS? What about our conscious perceptions? What about our soul, and what really happens when we die?
Like the Universe itself, these answers are also quite simple.
We exist in an “Inner Universe”. It is the reality we are made of, and all we ever see. There is also another universe I’m calling the “Outer Universe”.
Our inner Universe consists of matter, which our brains also consist of. From our point of view, this matter consists of a set of moving and interacting particles. This perceived motion is actually a sequence of state changes generated somehow, somewhere in the outer Universe, but appearing to us as virtual reality.
Looking at it like a game of chess; the players (in the outer U.) take the time they need to decide the next move, and then make it all at once, even if it involves more than one piece. The chess pieces within the game (the inner U.) only see of the movement of pieces occurring as a sequence of events, and this sequence is the only thing they can base their time frame upon.
In the outer U., while the calculations are being made to move our inner U. into the next step in the sequence (the next grain of time), time is not perceivable to us; we are frozen in a state of indefinite suspension because nothing moves in our Universe; Our sense of time passing is based only upon the relative motion of particles in our Universe occurring, as our brains acting as simulators are programmed to respond to our sensory input of such.
What we feel as we perceive time pass is our brain’s perception of these changes. Our processors need no internal clock; all matter in the Universe, including all parts of our bodies and everything around it all moves at once through the grains of time.