I am currently in the process of gathering all kinds of information about the idea that our universe is just a virtual reality.
Doing this is a result of listening to Tom's lecture in Malaga. While it didn't strike me as that important when I was reading MBT, because it seemed to me to be just one detail of many in understanding MBT, I think now that any chance to gain ground in mainstream science will be through the idea of digital physics / virtual reality.
Look for example at three decades of consciousness- and PSI-research at a renowned university like Princeton (PEAR Labs). Despite the many results, the simple idea of researching paranormal things like telepathy or telekinesis is still ridiculed by the majority of the scientists. Dean Radin and others filled books with a truck load of experiments done under proper scientific protocol and still nobody cares. I liked Tom's explanation of the PSI uncertainty principle very much, which is another reason for me, that changing the way western societies will view the world will hardly be accomplished through any more research or experiments in the consciousness area. You just won't convince the majority with any kind of experiments based on things that can only be experienced on a personal (subjective) basis.
So I think (accompanied by a strong gut feeling) that, if through the acceptance of the idea of this being a virtual reality physicists can accomplish better and easier results and create better models, this might be the potential break through.
Right now physicists have to cling to all kinds of beliefs and weird theories like a Big Bang creating a whole universe without any cause and out of sheer nothingness to explain how our world came into existence. Or that there is an infinite amount of parallel universes just to explain some weird effects observed in quantum mechanics. Or that strings combined with a 10- or 11-dimensional universe are the way how electrons and quarks are existing in our reality.
Those are all nice theories so far, but without any verifiability through experiments. And to me they are making a somewhat desperate appearance by trying to explain our world with a model that seems to be more complicated than the reality itself. That reminds me of the complex models in medieval times, when they were trying to explain the movement of the sun, the planets and the stars in an earth-centric model. :-)
You somehow got results in perceived accordance with reality, but gosh, the complexity of the model and the objects paths was just weird.
Ok, I am digressing here, sorry. I just wanted to provide a background for my question.
Now in Einstein's special relativity the speed of light is a constant (c) limited to 300.000 km/sec. And according to him time and space are inseparable and thus create together a four dimensional continuum called space-time.
And there is his famous twin-brother Gedanken-experiment to explain the phenomena of time dilation, where one brother stays on earth while the other travels in a space-ship with near lightspeed for some time and then comes back. And while the brother on earth is now maybe 30 years older, the other in the space ship has only aged a few months. The reason being, that when you reach velocities close to the speed of light, time starts moving slower for you. Of course the person itself won't notice it, because everything feels normal, but for a person seeing for example the watch from the outside, the hands on the watch would move slower. Experiments with planes and atomic clocks also have confirmed Einsteins Theory.
So far so good.
I can easily follow the thought, that in a 3D space with an absolute speed limit like "c" you can't move into all three directions with full speed. Either you go for example upwards with 300.000 km/sec, but then there is no speed left for going left or right or into the third dimension anymore. Or you move into any of the other directions but thus reduce your speed in the upward direction accordingly. Assuming time is just the 4th dimension, it makes absolute sense that by moving full speed through the other 3 dimensions there is thus no speed left for moving through the 4th dimension so therefore time comes to a halt for the object (or person). Again so far so good.
In a physical 4D universe I can understand why this makes sense. You have an absolute speed limit and can only distribute (or spend) it over the 4 Dimensions so that the total velocity never goes beyond the limit.
But we are talking about a virtual reality (VR) here. So the simulation is incremented at one delta-t at a time, which means all the objects and their necessary updates are also calculated every delta-t, right? So when I am just sitting in my chair, time is for me passing by normally and at the same speed as for my imagined twin-brother sitting next to me and thus I am also aging as defined by the rule-set of the VR.
And the formula that Tom uses in his lectures and that explains why c has to be a constant is this:
So we are limited in the speed of moving an object from place A to place B because the simulation is limited by the delta-t increments to update the respective position within the virtual 3D space. I get the mathematics so far.
Now here comes my question and maybe it's completely stupid and I am overlooking something totally simple:
But why can't the simulation, when an object is moving at full speed through the virtual 3D space, still update the time-increments for that object at the regular intervals as it would do for an object not moving at all?
It shouldn't be a question of the necessary computing-power. Just because TBC has to constantly update the position of the object in the 3D-grid because the object is moving with lightspeed can't be the reason why TBC stops to also constantly update the timing-process (e.g. aging for a person or counting the digits on the clock) of that object.
Please be reminded that I am not talking about a purely physical universe. I am talking about a VR. For a VR incrementing the time-frame for an object should be possible independently of its speed. Actually it should be even easier, because the VR algorithm wouldn't need to check the current speed of movement for that object every time before it decides if it should invoke the "time-increment"-subroutine for that thing or skip it this time (which it should do every 2nd time for an object at 50% of the speed of light).
Anybody capable of showing me at which point I took the wrong turn? I greatly appreciate any attempt. Please don't be shy to use mathematical formulas if necessary to show me my mistake. I am far from being a pro in that field, but didn't do too bad following the subject at school and don't run away screaming just because someone uses some Infinitesimal calculus in his explanation.
Thank you in advance,