Return Home

My Big Toe Forum

Discussion and Explanation of the Writings of Tom Campbell: The Paradigm Changes Here

To register for the forum, click here

It is currently Thu Aug 21, 2014 9:57 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 6:34 pm 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:57 pm
Posts: 26
I haven't read Tom's book yet but hope to borrow a copy from a friend. I have watched the London lecture on YouTube though. In the lecture Tom says that in the same way that video games only create trees when they have to, the computer behind reality only decides which slot an electron goes through when somebody observes it. This seems to present a reason for quantum physics to exist. However, quantum physics is much more difficult to compute than classical physics. In fact, people are trying to harness the extra computation involved in quantum systems by creating quantum computers. How can this be?

Neil.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:40 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 10515
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Hi Neil,
Welcome to Tom's discussion forum. Have you read these viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3572?
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:56 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 9095
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Neil,

You might try reading the chapter I wrote on how the virtual reality works via a 'virtual reality rendering engine'. This discussed an explanation of quantum anomalies related to conscious observation. In short, it is the fractal nature of reality as opposed to computation of probabilities that simplifies and reduces computational requirements. It will work much better and efficiently if you follow the link Bette provided above and read the subjects on the two links there, which includes my chapter on the VRRE. Then we can talk about any remaining questions that you have rather than start at the beginning and tell you everything all over again here.

Ted


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 3:58 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:57 pm
Posts: 26
Thanks Bette and Ted for your replies. The VRRE chapter certainly provides a useful overview of the concepts involved. Let me see if I can summarize it and you can correct me if (when) I go wrong.

The VRRE models PMR at varying levels of detail depending on the amount of detail required by a conscious observer. If an observer uses a measuring device to examine some (virtual) object in greater detail, the VRRE calculates that object to that greater level of detail. All the levels of detail below that and any objects which are not being observed at all are represented as probabilities only. These probabilities are carried forwards and adjusted with each time delta. This gives rise to the abnormalities we see in quantum physics where the position of a particle is only determined when it is observed.

Is that a fair summary?

Cheers, Neil.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:13 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 9095
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Neil,

Yes, a good summary for something so short. You might substitute beyond for below and be entirely clear that things are always projected ahead as probabilities.

Ted


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:57 pm
Posts: 26
Thanks for the reply, Ted. The thing which I'm not clear on is why it should be cheaper or more accurate to evaluate a probability density function over phase space rather than simply determine a single consistent location in phase space. All our experience of performing these computations indicates that evaluating a function over phase space is much much more expensive that evaluating a single location in phase space.

Neil.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 11:53 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 9095
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Neil,

I do not, nor do I think that Tom, or 'anyone' at this level of involvement in VRs for that matter, has access to the precise algorithms or the rule set of the PMR VR. In general, my understanding, is that we are talking multiple levels by which the calculation requirements are reduced; what I call computational parsimony. If physical reality is expressed as fractals at multiple levels or scales, then you only have to deal with those levels of which an IUOC can be aware at a given time. That means you deal with lights in the sky rather than cosmological calculations and dirty water rather than bacteria, etc. for most of the existence in time of PMR and beyond into the future for most of the billions of IUOCs 'living' here. You don't suddenly have to start doing quantum calculations just because someone invented quantum mechanics or celestial calculations just because someone invented a telescope. Only if a device capable of making such an observation is active and an observation being made.

Then there is a further resulting reduction in required calculations that occurs because you, for instance, never have to calculate and keep track of the identity of ever grain of sand on the beach or star in the sky. Only if you are an IUOC lying there sunbathing with your nose close enough to distinguish individual sand grains or perhaps are a mollusc of some kind squirming it's way through the sand at the tide line. Even then, you don't have to keep or calculate detailed records. A sunbather is incapable of keeping track of or observing at a level that these details are available, much less that they need to be remembered. All they need is the sun glittering off of the wet granules. And any kind of micro fauna operates at such a low level that the model of PMR does not have to be fully populated with all of their varieties and numbers. A dung beetle rolling a ball of manure is a dung beetle rolling a ball of manure. A gut bacteria is a gut bacteria. The gut bacteria of all of the PMR reality in all of the bellies of PMR entities do not have to be allocated and have their environments modeled for them. When they are being observed, their population exists where observed and their environment is fully detailed when it is observed, perhaps by a medical scientist or technician investigating for the cause of an infection. Otherwise, your gut bacteria can be simulated perfectly well by the VRRE in terms of your sensory perceptions. And the environment of the IUOC taking the role of the gut bacteria can have it's environment also simulated perfectly well by the VRRE. A relatively few IUOCs are actually thus required to function in the roles of gut bacteria, only where they are under observation.

Smoke and mirrors. It's all illusion to the fullest extent possible. Every saving in computational resources is a saving in computational resources. I suspect, rather than know, that eventually they will come up with explanations for dark matter and dark energy. But then again, perhaps not. If you think about the above described techniques for creating this VR and the resulting VR experience, for the vastly long time of it's existence, there has been and in fact, might never have been, any reason to calculate the properties of quantum level 'particles'. The same goes for the full cosmos as revealed to us by the Hubble telescope and other advanced viewing devices such as radio and x-ray telescopes. Would all of the rules required to make sense to PMR scientists of the present and future have been put into the system if only needed far into the future and possibly not even then? And the purpose was not making a sensible system for future PMR scientists, but rather for creating all of the interactions for IUOCs to improve their quality of being. The system was not intended, after all, to last forever. You can always start up a new one if needed. I would not be at all surprised if at some time in the future that it is discovered that the explanations for dark energy and dark matter amount to 'fudge factors' needed to make the present equations of PMR science work as we expect. Something like the epicycles of Ptolemaic astronomy, used basically as fudge factors to make the model work. Perhaps some cosmic engineer has had to explain why his committee never thought it would be necessary to set the equations up to account for the anomalous observations of galaxies far, far away as opposed to just making it look good. Will it be good enough to say, 'how were we to ever know that anyone would ever be able to tell the difference?'

To go with a point by point style model and account for everything existing at a give point is clearly very intensive in computational resources. Then you are not only keeping track of every grain of sand, but of every sub atomic particle. We are not talking 'holodeck' here. Perhaps I don't understand the method of simulation you are talking about. After all, when I did early modeling, the IBM mainframe used probably had less power than my present desktop. And since between my NAS and installed drives, I have nearly 3TB of storage, I know I have more disk storage than we, the whole university, had then and mine is all on line. I don't remember how much a disk pack held, but I remember that it wasn't much and getting one assigned to you alone was an achievement. Otherwise why would we load in a carton or two of punched cards for every run rather than just store the program on disk and recompile the whole program, rather than just a subroutine every time as needed? That was long ago and in a galaxy far away. I am way out of date now.

Ted


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:48 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:57 pm
Posts: 26
Ted, thanks for the reply. I've not had much time to get back to you. It looks like I've not explained the problem well enough. Let me try another way.

As I understand things:
  • PMR is modeled at varying levels of detail in order to reduce computational effort.
  • PMR is modeled as probabilities when not being observed.
  • This gives rise to effects such as the collapse of the wavefunction in quantum mechanics.

The problem I have is to do with the modeling in terms of probabilities in the second point. Our experience of modeling with probabilities has shown that it's harder to do than modeling with actualities. What you end up having to do is consider all the possible actualities and follow them through to their logical conclusions. You have to model every possible actuality instead of just modeling one.

Let me put some numbers on it. Suppose you wanted to model an atom with 6 electrons. In classical mechanics which models actualities, you'd need about 21 operations at each timestep - work out one variable in each of 3 directions for each of 7 bodies. In quantum mechanics which models probabilities, you'd need about 1000000000000000000000 operations to model things in a fairly course way. Many more if you wanted better detail. Of course you can make approximations to simplify things but you never get back down to the 21 operations required to model just the single actuality.

So my question is this: Why does something which is supposed to reduce computational effort end up generating a system which is so difficult to compute?

Tom glosses over this point in his London lecture when he says that you only have to work out a probability instead of working out whether the tree fell over (in his example).

I appreciate that you have an engineering background so perhaps aren't best placed to answer this. Maybe this is one for Tom.

_________________
"Of several acceptable explanations for a phenomenon, the simplest is preferable, provided that it takes all circumstances into account." -- Occam's Razor


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:12 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 9095
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Neil,

The disconnect is that you are not following the explanations that I have been giving. You are starting from the assumption that the creation of reality is based upon the very bottom reality of quantum scale. This appears to not be the case and this is the basic reason that we have the anomalies of quantum level behavior. While it is logical that a physicist should assume this, reality appears to not operate based upon the logic of a physicist.

The purpose for the existence of this virtual reality is for the exercise of choice and the interactions of the IUOCs that are participating therein for purposes of improving the quality of their being and lowering the entropy level of their understanding and communications and thus improving the quality of being and lowering the entropy of all of Consciousness Space. If this reality existed for furthering the careers and logical thought processes and purposes of the physicists among us, then it would no doubt be based upon a totally bottom up generation of reality as you are considering. It however exists for other purposes and it's generation as a reality starts from the middle ground instead of either of the extremes. The range of raw perceptions of participant beings rather than augmented perceptions. So the probabilities from which the reality derives are more in the range of 'Jerry Springer' or 'Dr. Phil' rather than Einstein, Planck, Heisenberg or Schrodinger. They deal with the configurations of geology and vagaries of weather, not with how many electrons can dance on the head of a pin. They do not deal with the extremes of size at either end and this works just fine as a reality in which to train beginning consciousnesses.

When (and if) things develop to the point that these extremes must be considered, they are added on. They might well have never had to be considered. This results in a great computational saving for much of the history of this virtual reality. They were apparently not considered to begin with or we would not have the anomalies resulting when quantum physics was discovered. Nor would we likely have the anomalies that result in the consideration of 'dark energy' and 'dark matter'.

Try rethinking on this basis. Your explanation of modeling differences was much as I anticipated. But this misses the point. If we were generating this reality based upon your considered approaches, we would never have to be considering the anomalies originating with quantum physics.

Ted


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:56 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:57 pm
Posts: 26
Ted,

You're sounding more than a little ungrateful. I for one would like to thank the scientists who worked their butts off figuring out how quantum mechanics works. It made it possible to build the computer in front of you, your TV, phone and automobile. Your mockery with "how many electrons can dance on the head of a pin" speaks volumes.

Neil.

_________________
"Of several acceptable explanations for a phenomenon, the simplest is preferable, provided that it takes all circumstances into account." -- Occam's Razor


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:29 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 9095
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Neil,

It is the scientists who 'worked their butts off figuring out how quantum mechanics works' who decided and frequently state that they don't really know how it works, not me. Sorry you did not like my humor regarding the electrons dancing on the head of a pin. This goes back to medieval thought and theological arguments about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin. Can't remember who/when/where I read this in relation to, perhaps St. Augustine, but I thought it an amusing parallel. Sorry about that chief.

Ted


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 9:43 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:54 pm
Posts: 2777
Location: Miami, FL
Hello Ted, Neil.

You guys seem to be experts in your fields. I hesitated to add something but I am going to try.

1. Everything should be created as a probability no matter what in a VR creation by TBC

If it is already there it is not more costly to add it again.


2. This is an attempt to relate to my programming experience.

I have a function (or routine) to calculate the probability in my computer code (bunch of bits). TBC has those bits already assigned, so no extra cost.

If nobody (no consciousness) observes the object related to my function, my function is not executed (no CPU time and memory are used).

If somebody observes it my function then executes (uses CPU and memory) and gives a result.

I hope I added a couple of cents.

Claudio

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:05 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 2:34 am
Posts: 352
I think the big challenge in understanding the VRRE is our desire to adhere physical ideologies and expectations when regarding the fundamental nature of existing in a virtual reality at all.

The way I see it, we can approach the model by looking at the end result which is the final rendered output, however in doing so we are not clearly seeing the computation behind the output which is what we are trying to see when addressing the probability matrix.

Physical reality is a virtual reality where we as IUOC's are being transmitted a data stream which we interpret and expand into our model of perceived reality. If we look at the data stream, it is just a conduit of information and the theory that only what needs to be observed is rendered from this stream. That does make a lot of sense when you look at a model of reality where everything is just a network of data exchanges (ideas and thoughts).

The matter of physics really starts to lend to the observation of rule-sets that govern a certain reality system but may not have relevance to other systems at all.

The core fundamental nature of reality is consciousness. Consciousness creates reality by organizing thoughts and ideas into data streams by which it then transmits to itself at a varying degree of complexity and design. With a trickle down effect reaching the IUOC level where we are right now.

In the end, it's all just organized thought creating the reality that consciousness is directing and projecting. Consciousness obviously wants to ensure certain outcomes with the final actualized reality so a process of pre-calculated probabilities are then thought of first, to help with the optimal choices for the actualized reality.

"There is no spoon."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:20 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 10515
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Good stuff Ian, how'd you dream that up? Rhetorically speaking, and all that.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 1:12 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 2:34 am
Posts: 352
Nice Bette :D As you know, reading MBT helps, but also having time to observe reality in different stages of the data stream, for example, a dream before it comes true, up until the dream actualizes and becomes reality does give way for some interesting observations of what the final rendered output is as opposed to the underlying probability observed as a dream.

I am lending myself more and more over to the realization that all that exists is consciousness, and what consciousness perceives as reality is it's own thoughts, organized into a myriad of systems and states.

Let's take an initial precognitive dream as an example. For an example, lets say the dream is just in a simple room with a door, a window that has sunlight coming through, a couch, a TV and I am sitting watching the news.

In the initial dream, the TV is not made of atoms or molecules. Nor is the couch, the window and the sunlight is hardly sunlight at all. What they all are, and share in common is one thing: thought. They are simply thought.

Well, time passes and this dream just so happens to come true. Now there I am in the couch, observing the same TV and news cast as in the dream, what is different now is there is a belief in atoms, a belief in sunlight and a belief in all the physical elements which describe the physical actualization of the current physical event. But in reality, the same underlying force is at work, as it was in the dream and what they both now share (dream and reality) is: thought.

Just a little more organized and detailed then before, but there it is in all it's hidden and sublime glory.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group