Return Home
It is currently Thu Aug 06, 2020 8:37 am

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 4 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:10 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 12:12 am
Posts: 288
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/techno ... hesis.html

The paper is here: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0801/0801.0337.pdf
-


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:28 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:32 pm
Posts: 815
Location: Statesville, NC
Here is another link to some more information and an interview with Brian Whitworth.

http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?ID=1 ... ry=Science

The quote from one of his students is great.
“If I’m in a virtual reality, the graphics are great, but the plot sucks.“
- Student of Prof. Brian Whitworth

I guess the student hasn't figured out that he has helped write the plot so he is partially to blame for the aforementioned suckiness.


Top
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:55 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 7:13 am
Posts: 173
Location: Boonville, Indiana
Thanks for the link! I just finished reading his article and I thought it was a very good one. I can see a lot of MBT theory mirrored in what he wrote. Its good to see the same conclusions from unconnected sources. I sent Brian a note to have a look at Tom's work, he may find it useful. :)

_________________
always, John


Top
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:10 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
This is a very good article you posted Ramon, and I have written to Ms. Howe thanking and encouraging her for bringing attention to virtual realities. Hopefully it will induce Dr. Whitworth to continue working in this field. When I wrote to him after reading his article, he indicated that he was no longer working in this field but perhaps would return to it in a later paper. Since his name is being attached firmly to the idea of virtual realities with apparent popular interest and he has been referred to these discussion threads, perhaps he will continue to write about virtual realities in the regular science journals.

Ted Vollers


Top
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:43 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285
1) A new book for general audiences by Jim Elvidge called "The Universe Solved" may help popularize the idea that reality is virtual. The link is: www.theuniversesolved.com/food.htm I haven't seen the book but it was brought to my attention by a friend.


2) Brian Whitworth took delivery of the MBT Trilogy about two weeks ago. Perhaps, if he relates to the Big Picture he finds there, he will join us one day here at the MBT forum.

The virtual reality idea as serious science started with Edward Fredkin and digital physics over a decade ago. For a long time, Nick Bostrum http://www.simulation-argument.com was the primary other advocate within credentialed academia. Now, the virtual reality idea seems to be gaining ground.

Tom


Top
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:48 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 12:12 am
Posts: 288
After reading Whitworth's article (I don't know what happened to the edited version of my post), I understood the VR theory in context, and much more thoroughly. I have found an abundance of lectures, from quantum physics to theories of consciousness that reference VR theory, or allude to a VR. Case in point; on google video search McKenna + metamorphosis; find a video (c. 2 hr.) with Terrence McKenna, Rupert Sheldrake and a mathematician (don't recall name). During the talk they hit all around essentually the same ideas of consciousness and VR, but never state it outright. And a number of books I've re-read lately contain bits and pieces of this concept as well. But Whitworth's paper solidified the ideas in my mind, now I want to dig deeper. He'd said that he had a more detailed explanation coming out in a 2nd paper--maybe he changed his mind; it's unfortunate.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:45 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 12:12 am
Posts: 288
Tom: 1) A new book for general audiences by Jim Elvidge called "The Universe Solved" may help popularize the idea that reality is virtual. The link is: www.theuniversesolved.com/food.htm I haven't seen the book but it was brought to my attention by a friend.

Rol: Jim Elvidge was on Coast to Coast AM 2008.02.02. I'm listening to the first hr., now. So far, OK. As usual, interviewer has not read the book.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:43 am 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:45 pm
Posts: 11
Roland, I recently bought the book by Jim Elvidge called "The Universe Solved" and to me it is not readable material compared to Tom's Trilogy. I guess I am spoiled by Toms writings but it does not hold a toe to "My Big Toe". I waded through the book and finally skimmed the last two chapters where the meat was suppose to be and then put it aside upside down in my book case, forgotten.
JMO.


Top
PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 9:06 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 12:12 am
Posts: 288
Lardog:

I'd forgotten about making that post. I have to agree with you. The post was made before I read the book, and after I heard him on C2CAM. He was a great guest and seemed to have far more knowledge than he displayed in the book. The book, in fact, was a big disappointment; I even returned it to Amazon.

It's unfortunate; the book is needed. Perhaps Whitworth will write his follow-up paper on physics and VR. If memory serves, I believe he intended to expand his first paper into more detailed explanantions.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:23 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 6:54 am
Posts: 417
I've only just picked up on the Brian Whitworth paper, seeing the link on the AfterlifeKnowledge site. Fascinating how this idea is gaining momentum. I've tried Googling, but can't find any more recent output from him (as Ted reported, he was apparently leaving the topic for now). I wonder how he's connected with the MBT trilogy, which Tom said he'd received - has there been any feedback there?

Arthur

_________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."


Top
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:35 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 12:12 am
Posts: 288
Arthur:

I've perused his site within the last month. He stated (somewhere) that he was pondering an additional paper on the subject. However, his present work seems to be in the societal aspects of human/computer interface. I'm not sure of his credentials in physics either. There's always a political aspect to your work in academia, so that may be a factor in his decision to write on the VR topics further. He certainly did an outstanding job of explaining VR theory, the first time around. For me, he hit the ball out of the ball park, so to speak. I've listened to and read the opinions of many other very popular physicists on the nature of reality, both the digital aspects and the VR aspects, and none of them make good arguments, IMHO. Could be he's studying the matter even more deeply before writing further - or not. =)


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:43 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Arthur,

Brian Whitworth is not connected to the MBT trilogy. He wrote his paper on virtual reality before he was aware of it based on trends in scientific thinking. I made him aware of MBT and he contacted Tom and received a copy of MBT. Whether Tom has heard from him since, I do not know. Academic scientists pursue their own interests, but within the environment of the thinking of their colleagues and as reflected in publications in the literature. When and if he gets back to this subject will be uncertain. Since it was picked up on so many fronts that will appear to be 'fringe' to an academic scientist, he may be turned away from the idea, to not appear to be part of the fringe himself. An academic scientist must keep up his credibility.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:59 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Quote:
An academic scientist must keep up his credibility.
This is something that is close to my heart; this is an experiment (I hope not 'in terror') I am in the midst of now, and am happy to be able to report have been able to find enough credible links to MBT concepts that I can use them in my current scholarly thesis. Consciousness as a nonphysical digital information system, decision space, quality of consciousness (QoC), intent based on QoC, and probably others are currently sufficiently referenced for scholarly use based on MBT.
The reason I almost say 'experiment in terror' above is that my BS degree Capstone (the big 'tada') experience ended badly (C- grade after straight A's) because I tried to open a psychology professors mind up to the bigger reality back in 2005, and he balked. My topic, which he approved, was the neural correlates of mystical experience, but he wouldn't accept my evidence (the easiest way to say he couldn't grasp the concept) and tried to reject the entire paper. My other chair person stepped in, got the guy to give me a C, so I said fine lets be done with it. I guess the C- was just evidence of an extra lock on that guys mind, it really bugs me to this day. Someday I will get the data from my old computer where this paper exists, I have to have it mined professionally as the computer gave me the blue screen of death years ago. It would be interesting to read it again now, 3.5 years worth of quality intake (specially since I found you all) later. If I ever get it out of my old machine I'll share it with anyone whom wants to look at it.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:28 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:32 pm
Posts: 815
Location: Statesville, NC
Arthur: "I wonder how he's connected with the MBT trilogy, which Tom said he'd received - has there been any feedback there?"

I got you Arthur. Has he mentally connected with the information in MBT? Hard to say. I have to agree though that if he wants to continue working in academia he probably won't come out and say it if he has. That is so sad that the world functions that way. Hopefully soon that will all change.

Ramon


Top
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:41 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Quote:
Arthur: "I wonder how he's connected with the MBT trilogy, which Tom said he'd received - has there been any feedback there?"

I got you Arthur. Has he mentally connected with the information in MBT? Hard to say. I have to agree though that if he wants to continue working in academia he probably won't come out and say it if he has. That is so sad that the world functions that way. Hopefully soon that will all change.

Ramon
It really is beginning to open up from what I have witnessed in the last 12 or so earth years ;) I have been academic. There are enough mucky mucks who have experienced something mind opening to allow other less mucky but deeper experientially experienced to speak their piece in a scholarly journal. There is an award in psychology which allows one receiving it to give the opening speech at the annual American Psychological Associations (APA) on any subject they desire with no censor. This is one of my goals, and now I know exactly what I will talk about when that happens based on what is happening in the world, but founded on MBT and me ;).

Arthur my daughter and I were talking about truth and how when something is many people come to it from many different ways, but there is a commonality in all. Maybe if enough people come up with parts of the truth (whatever that ends up being) and get a good portion of their person puzzle completed, and then come together and throw together all their personal puzzle pieces to put together to put together into one bigger picture, then this experiment will take it's bigger picture puzzle to meld into the fractal at the next level of experimentation, etc. It's Jung collective consciousness mixed in as well, as I see it. At some point so many consciousness have organized good data (MBTesque) that brains are picking it out and actualizing it, like Bentov says brains do, they amplify thoughts. A theory anyway.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 4 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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 Limited