We live in the best of all possible worlds because it is all possible worlds and the only world. That is how it is written in the big book, the apparent horizon. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1003.5952.pdf
An actual hologram of an object is made by interfering light from a reference beam and the light scattered by an object. To make this work effectively, a light source goes through a beam splitter to create the coherent illuminating beam and the reference beam in order to maximize the possible interference effects. How would this happen for the Universe? Well the entropy flux takes all possible paths on the light sheet including the past and the future light sheet. This means for the central objects there is information from the most distant past and a roughly equal future epoch which match (modulo the flux through the horizon) at the apparent horizon. If one moves to a new location away from the central object, then it will have an apparent event horizon centered on it and have the same information available to it. The idea is that all the information in the universe is encoded in two dimensions on projection points, which may be black holes or the edge of the universe. There are enough papers on this to stock Allan's chemists. Shades of RP in the stuff too. We are also thinking on how the brain works in the hologram metaphor. it is considered that formation of human mind starts in the womb by joining cloud-computing facilities in the Holographic Universe. A decisive question is how the brain gets instructions for performing its countless tasks. The suggested computational scheme for the brain is data-driven; it runs by a transition diagram from memory as a Turing machine not by special software instructions as a von Neumann computer. The notoriously slow processing of neural circuits is offset by fast memory access, and learning occurs just through the amassment of Big Data. No wonder we need to keep taking the tablets. On Friday, February 27, 2015 at 11:36:46 AM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: > > There are more twists and in seeking an understand than a pharmacist has > pills. > > تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين > Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others > > -----Original Message----- > From: archytas <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:28 PM > Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Presence > > Agreed RP - origin just remains obscure and the notions we have of the > universe may be wrong. Human beings are apparently a small part of any > order, though one can imagine we may have some significance, possibly > rather a lot. I may be Allan's pet hamster as Gabby suggests, or not. We > may be a bigger part of the universe than we think - the biocentric view > Molly posted a link to some while back. The 'dark' may be more significant > than we think and our destiny not in light-speed dominated-limited > space-time. One idea being pushed now is that reality is two-dimensional > and we and space-time a hologram and certainly we have given up thinking of > space as nothing. The whatever may still be god. > > On Friday, February 27, 2015 at 10:31:06 AM UTC, RP Singh wrote: >> >> Big bang, or whatever came from something that is God. >> >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:43 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I'm not sure RP's position is logical, but it is consistent. >>> >>> Pol - we do just react to other people. One of the universities I >>> taught at had 35% public school (posh UK type) and we called them the >>> 'Yahs' because they were so full of themselves compared with State school >>> kids. Taking time to work through the reaction phase is how we try to >>> apply tolerance and rationality to personal relationships. Most don't do a >>> right lot of this. Psychopaths and narcissists are very good at charming >>> people at the reaction level. The Yahs were much easier to teach because >>> they spoke up, but in the end did not do better than the others at >>> university. They did agterwards. >>> >>> Big bang may not be creation, merely an incident - say when two existing >>> universes collided. I'd say the future in which our galaxy collides with >>> Andromeda in 2.5 billion years and the Sun goes red giant sometime later >>> and 'eats' Earth is more likely knowledge than big bang. >>> >>> >>> On Friday, February 27, 2015 at 9:25:35 AM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: >>>> >>>> It is not the source of creation i find difficulty with.. it is here. >>>> >>>> "We know that there is predetermination but why think that he has >>>> predetermined, think that it all naturally happens and evolution is a >>>> natural predetermined process. >>>> >>>> Your predetermination theory is where the problem lies.. >>>> predetermination removes free will. And free will is what allows us to >>>> chose how we respond to our environment. Without free will the soul might >>>> as well be a boring old robot running its unending program with no choice >>>> involved.. >>>> >>>> This is exactly the same point you joined the group with.. >>>> >>>> تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين >>>> Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: RP Singh <[email protected]> >>>> To: Minds Eye <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 8:58 AM >>>> Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Presence >>>> >>>> Allan, in subjective matters proving your point is difficult if not >>>> impossible, I cannot prove my logic about God or the Source of creation. >>>> If >>>> people think that I am illogical, I can do nothing about it. I don't find >>>> your views correct, yet they are your views and to you they are logical >>>> and >>>> as such acceptable to me. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 1:18 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> See RP we both agree that God existed before the creation of the >>>>> universe.. beyond that your theology and logic becomes questionable.. >>>>> >>>>> تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين >>>>> Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: RP Singh <[email protected]> >>>>> To: Minds Eye <[email protected]> >>>>> Sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 5:07 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Presence >>>>> >>>>> Neil, why think of God in the usual way, think of him as something >>>>> before the big bang from which the universe emerged. Think of him as the >>>>> mind which contained the unmanifest which became manifest as the >>>>> universe. >>>>> We know that there is predetermination but why think that he has >>>>> predetermined, think that it all naturally happens and evolution is a >>>>> natural predetermined process. Why should God be aware like us, as the >>>>> source of all he need not be bound by the limits of consciousness and can >>>>> very well be unconscious. Have faith in such a God and your destiny. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:19 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Postmodernism is supposedly a set of critical, strategic and >>>>>> rhetorical practices employing concepts such as difference, repetition, >>>>>> the >>>>>> trace, the simulacrum, and hyperreality to destabilize other concepts >>>>>> such >>>>>> as* presence*, identity, historical progress, epistemic certainty, >>>>>> and the univocity of meaning. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tony could be seen as replaying the liar's paradox here. To admit to >>>>>> hypocrisy may be to admit the truth. For some postmodern writers, one >>>>>> has >>>>>> to go further than any set of analytic rules and recognise madness at >>>>>> work >>>>>> and restriction of dialogue to safe metaphors like Freud's Oedipal >>>>>> family, >>>>>> when the world of real desire is very different (quite a few writers >>>>>> were >>>>>> gay). >>>>>> >>>>>> Skepticism, over many centuries, has taught a kind of suspension of >>>>>> judgement to a point when one works with many different arguments. >>>>>> Humour >>>>>> can often be the only thing left after rigorous doubting, a kind of >>>>>> self-depreciation in the face of conflicting evidence and themes. Those >>>>>> of >>>>>> us who 'know nothing' still know how to jibe "and even this is to know >>>>>> more >>>>>> than them, those who claim to know everything". This doubting process, >>>>>> in >>>>>> science, comes to at least a temporary end in crucial experiments that >>>>>> anyone, in principle, can demonstrate. This is rarely the case in >>>>>> ordinary >>>>>> living. >>>>>> >>>>>> Descartes had it that we could undergo these difficult skeptical >>>>>> processes with faith in a warm, benevolent god. It would be good to >>>>>> feel >>>>>> such a presence, but I don't. He had the instruments of torture to >>>>>> contend >>>>>> with for that matter. There is a presence of thinking on god without >>>>>> ancient fable, much as there are ways of thinking on economics without >>>>>> the >>>>>> dominating manners of neo-classical fantasy. The admission of >>>>>> perplexity >>>>>> is something of a start, but has something of the vulnerability of >>>>>> sensory >>>>>> deprivation. >>>>>> >>>>>> I am interested in the still mystical point of argument resolution >>>>>> after doubt that is not merely conviction, superiority.or promises so >>>>>> vague >>>>>> they are empty. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 9:12:31 PM UTC, facilitator wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Of course Allan! My narcissism is baptized in hypocrisy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I espouse to walk in the light and yet there are plenty of >>>>>>> "Neighbors" I don't treat better than myself. I claim spiritual >>>>>>> superiority and yet find myself in constant need of attitude >>>>>>> adjustment. I >>>>>>> want world peace but have done little to push that round peg into all >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> the square holes I have encountered. Maybe only 1 out of three times >>>>>>> do I >>>>>>> turn the other cheek. And, I am definitely superior to most of the >>>>>>> people >>>>>>> I meet in this life. My spirit is ill equipped to take on a higher >>>>>>> plane >>>>>>> of existence. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> --- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > ""Minds Eye"" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
