Interesting Conversation on the Basis of Reality
 

I was talking to my 15 yr old Daughter about atomic theory and the topic of the speed of light came up. I told her that while many refer to that particular rate as the speed of light it is actually really the speed of causality and that not only photons but other wave functions 'travel' that that rate. The conversation progressed to the consideration that reality is wave form energy and she said 'well, its all math then, a really complicated equation I guess.'

But then the conversation got even more abstract covering the notion that all that one is, is an algorithm. That maybe we are all a type of software program? Or maybe, the entire universe rests between the observers ears. That maybe those that are perceiving are only witnessing mere suggestions and not a true 'thing'. That we each create our individual universes?

So if this is a program, I wouldn't mind a reset now and then!

It doesn't matter what it is, it's what you do with it.

That that is is, that that is not is not, is that it it is.

As a theoretical physicist by training I am delighted to hear of your daughter's conversation, perhaps in her or her ilk there is the necessary progression beyond the approximation that quantum and relativistic physics really is.

Too many interesting dilemma's ranging from Schrodingers cat to how does a photon know to travel in a straight line (and, since moving at the speed of light does it experience time or is there only a single photon that is everywhere at once).

Sigh....brain too old, math too far in the past to really indulge.

I envy her and what sounds like a gifted brain.

Dennis

I'll go with the universe rests between the observer's ears. Reality is what you think it is.

Ha! Philosophical conundrums sometimes are most easily expressed in a series of two and three letter words.

The Universe would exist without us. We are less than a spec of dust in the big scheme of things. We're not important by any measure.

We are extremely lucky to even be here. More than a 1,000 different things had to line up before life could exist on our planet.

Mr. Descartes explored this. As did Mr. Russell. Our perceptions begin as stimuli. We see colors and shapes. From them we infer....assemble....a story around those electrical impulses. The world is the STORY, separate from the stimuli.

Put another way, when I see the color blue, you look at it and declare it to be blue also. However, we may not be seeing the same color.

Mr. Kant wrote a VERY interesting treatise suggesting that our brains cannot possibly be a Tabula Rasa. He argued convincingly that there has to be a framework in order for the data to be arrangeable into a world view. Like...boxes that we can put data into so that it can be categorized or ranked in a way that allows a 'world view' to be assembled.

One thing that atheists and Christians apparently agree on is that there is MUCH more going on than we can see.

Properly cooked, catfish can be really good.

"Here Daddy, have another mushroom!" :D

Or does it Peter? Maybe you are a manifestation of my program? Perhaps there is a default portion in the program that won't allow for complete revelation, that there will be counter actors providing enough doubt to keep the energy going?

My question is what difference, at this point, does it make?

So far, I've gotten up every morning, experienced my day and did it again and again and again without once ever being concerned about whether or not I made the whole thing up, whether it was real or not or what protons know or don't know.

Whether it's all some kind of matrix or simulation or a super complicated algorithm is totally irrelevant; when I'm hungry, I gotta eat, etc.

If that were true there would be people who could manipulate the programming and so far I've never seen anything with my own eyes that I couldn't explain rationally.

The Universe exists in a real physical way. We're just extremely lucky to be part of it.

I believe there have been other societies like ours but they are so far away or the existed so long ago that we'll never over lap.
Most likely all of them have run their course and are no longer here.

It would take about 10,000,000 years for us to fully explore and colonise our Galaxy. When compared to the age of the Universe that's a very short period of time. Why hasn't it been done by another society before us?

I suspect we have a built in shelf life. Or, will we still be here in 10,000 years?

See! You could be that coefficient variable in my mind equation that is set to establish a particular type of cognitive dissonance when it comes to driving towards revelation!

Unless all that is, is just in my mind and you are a mere variable in the program to help me question more thus producing more energy to feed the program perhaps.

Douglas Adams wrote that the answer to "the" question was...cat.

That's good enough for me.

Did you take the red pill or the blue pill?

From the Matrix...

“...what is real? How do you define ‘real’?”

Or maybe “...all we are is dust in the wind...”

42 wasn’t it?

Using the equations of Lorentz, if you travel at the speed of light you will arrive anywhere in the universe instantly, due to space contraction. So a photon could be anywhere in the universe at any given time, in its own reference frame. But not from an observer's reference frame. We see the photon traveling in a straight line (well, sort of), but the photon thinks it's everywhere at once.

So I guess time really is just a big ball of wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey stuff, as The Doctor states.

At some point the difference is, what does my interaction do to alter reality, and what kind of interaction, and at what level ?