NationStates Jolt Archive

Morpheus: If real is what you can feel, smell, taste and see, then 'real' is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain

Ever wonder what exactly reality is? I mean do we really have to accept what we see, feel, smell, and hear? What if we don't have to accept the reality that is presented to us? Do we even have a choice? What makes our dreams less real than our awaken moments? I certainly have dreams that are so real that I could swear that it actually happened. Are there other forms of reality that we can't access or because we choose this reality, we can't see the other reality?

What do you guys think of reality, and what does it mean to you?

I don't like questions like these -- not 'cause I'm averse to depth of thought, but because there's not really much to say about it. Reality is... reality. The world around us, which our consciousnesses experience via our senses. Our senses could be fooled by some vast Matrix contraption, sure, but I've never understood how discussions stemming from that idea can turn up anything relevant. "Ooh, if we were in a perfect simulation of the world, would it be real?" Well, it doesn't really matter, since we're not in such a simulation, and even if we were, there would be no way to tell and it would in no way affect our lives.

/rant

Ever wonder what exactly reality is? I mean do we really have to accept what we see, feel, smell, and hear? What if we don't have to accept the reality that is presented to us? Do we even have a choice? What makes our dreams less real than our awaken moments? I certainly have dreams that are so real that I could swear that it actually happened. Are there other forms of reality that we can't access or because we choose this reality, we can't see the other reality?

What do you guys think of reality, and what does it mean to you?

Often. I have only my senses with which to percieve the world around me. Yet it has been demonstrated time and again that all 5 of them can be fooled. So I have nothing upon which I can truly say what is real and what is not. For all I know this is the matrix.

Once upon a time, I, Chuang-tzu, dreamt I was a butterfly, flittering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly...suddenly I awoke... Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly dreaming I am a man.

"Reality has a well known liberal bias"


The end.

"Reality has a well known liberal bias"


The end.

ROFL, that's good.

The reason I ask this is that in the Matrix's forum that I visit, we've debated whether or not the computer simulation could be considered "real". I mean yes it is a computer simulation, but what if it's really just another world, or another 'reality'?

Actually, I can make reality fade from around me at anytime. Usually this happens when I pray. I'll pray, and everything around me kinda just disappears, and all i see is me bowing before God.. Now this doesn't happen ALL the time. But it is great when it does :) Usually I come out of that and an hour or two has passed.

ROFL, that's good.

The reason I ask this is that in the Matrix's forum that I visit, we've debated whether or not the computer simulation could be considered "real". I mean yes it is a computer simulation, but what if it's really just another world, or another 'reality'?
You could only begin to consider it "real" if it had near-infinite detail and was absolutely flawless. Such a simulation is virtually (heh) impossible, and therefore irrelevant. Even then, it wouldn't actually be real, just real enough to fool us. And what we do not know, cannot know, and does not affect us is, once again, irrelevant, at least as far as humanity is concerned.

And the virtual spaces we have now? They're obviously not real -- just two-dimensional interpretations of some data in a server somewhere. Convincing, yes, but still a facsimile of reality.

Actually, I can make reality fade from around me at anytime.
And here I was thinking we were just suffering rolling blackouts. Zilam, you devil, stop making reality fade, it's a real inconvenience! :p

Ever wonder what exactly reality is? I mean do we really have to accept what we see, feel, smell, and hear? What if we don't have to accept the reality that is presented to us? Do we even have a choice? What makes our dreams less real than our awaken moments? I certainly have dreams that are so real that I could swear that it actually happened. Are there other forms of reality that we can't access or because we choose this reality, we can't see the other reality?

What do you guys think of reality, and what does it mean to you?

The answer to all your questions is that one is under the delusion of having/being an ego-self.

ROFL, that's good.

The reason I ask this is that in the Matrix's forum that I visit, we've debated whether or not the computer simulation could be considered "real". I mean yes it is a computer simulation, but what if it's really just another world, or another 'reality'?

To my mind there is no reason why a virtual reality should not be as valid as a umm traditional one. Not quite the right one but you know what I mean. If you are going to totally dismiss any virtual world as "unreal" that invalidates any friendships or bonds formed with other individuals within that reality. I think the internet is rapidly becomming more and more an acceptable means of communication and interacting with people as the "real world" and as such is gaining "reality". There's no reason why a total immersion virtual reality should not be considered "real", especially if, as in the matrix, all your bodily needs are catered for as well and you need never come out of it.

I don't like questions like these -- not 'cause I'm averse to depth of thought, but because there's not really much to say about it. Reality is... reality. The world around us, which our consciousnesses experience via our senses. Our senses could be fooled by some vast Matrix contraption, sure, but I've never understood how discussions stemming from that idea can turn up anything relevant. "Ooh, if we were in a perfect simulation of the world, would it be real?" Well, it doesn't really matter, since we're not in such a simulation, and even if we were, there would be no way to tell and it would in no way affect our lives.

/rantThat's because people are simply talking about the connotations of an age old debate that has been redrawn to fit the story of the matrix. The usual argument is not that we are in an electronic simulation, but that we are in a dream. Most people cannot tell that something is a dream until they wake up. For some people the sense of what is real can even last hours after they wake up, and it takes a conflicting thought for them to be able to deduce that something is a dream memory. For others who are capable of lucid dreaming, they can tell that they are in their dream and can take control of factors that they wouldn't normally have control over in reality. How can you tell that this world is just simply a concoction of your imagination?

Again, still not much practical application. If you break it down though, what is being asked is 'Is reality independent of our perception of it' e.g.
'If a tree falls down in the woods and no one is around to hear it - does it make a sound'.

If we take the stance that reality is what we percieve then, quite simply, it did not make a sound. Conversely if reality is independent of our perception of it then it does make a sound as it can be theorised that it fell in a similar way to a tree that we did percieve fall, hence it creates a series of compressions and expansions in the air and ground around it, and that is sound.

Still, not much practical application, but then that's philosophy for you.

I mean do we really have to accept what we see, feel, smell, and hear? Theoretically, no; practically, yes, generally (unless you have good reason to believe it's an illusion, like e.g. optical illusions).

You could only begin to consider it "real" if it had near-infinite detail and was absolutely flawless. That's not really necessary; you just have to make sure flaws aren't noticed, and that the detail is sufficient for how closely people in the simulation look at their world (which in general isn't every closely if we are any measure.)

The reality check is in the mail.

Oh I do love responding to threads via the medium of lyrics from songs that no-one else will have heard :p

As that French guy once said.
"I think therefor i spam."

That's not really necessary; you just have to make sure flaws aren't noticed, and that the detail is sufficient for how closely people in the simulation look at their world (which in general isn't every closely if we are any measure.)

Given that computers would have to be billions of times faster that they are today just to model the simplest of multicellular organisms alive today to a fairly accurate degree , I think its pretty much impossible to make sure the flaws arent noticed.

Given that computers would have to be billions of times faster that they are today just to model the simplest of multicellular organisms alive today to a fairly accurate degree , I think its pretty much impossible to make sure the flaws arent noticed.You should know that every computer is equivalent, regardless of speed (as far as computational power is concerned).
You don't need a fast computer to simulate an organism to an accurate degree, you need a fast computer to do it fast. But as everything in a simulation is equally slow they wouldn't notice whether they're in a slow simulation or not.
Now memory/data storage, that's a much bigger problem.

You should know that every computer is equivalent, regardless of speed (as far as computational power is concerned).
You don't need a fast computer to simulate an organism to an accurate degree, you need a fast computer to do it fast. But as everything in a simulation is equally slow they wouldn't notice whether they're in a slow simulation or not.
Now memory/data storage, that's a much bigger problem.

Well, yeah. Thats rather pedantic but yeah, thats what I should have said. You need a ridiculously fast computer to be able to simulate anything fast enough and to a reasonably accurate degree, happy now? Anything from computational speed to memory would make a world simulation impossible.

Well, yeah. Thats rather pedantic but yeah, thats what I should have said. You need a ridiculously fast computer to be able to simulate anything fast enough and to a reasonably accurate degree, happy now? Anything from computational speed to memory would make a world simulation impossible.Nothing pedantic about it. There is no need for speed. Not unless you want interaction with the 'real' world as well.
However it does put some severe limitation on one certain philosopher's probability calculation that we are in 'the matrix'..

if it's big and rumbling down the trail toward you, you can stand there and argue over whether it's and elephant, a rhynoserous, or a railroad train, but i think just for the heck of it, if you'll excuse me, i do think i'll step off to the side for a moment.

=^^=
.../\...