Crystyano:



Congratulations!!!


You have spoken your mind!!!

LOL!!

TenQ:

LOL!!

Say that again!!!

LordReed:


So how is it expanding if it is nothing?

That’s why I said there first has to be redefinition of terms for it to make sense. There is no finiteness in nothing and there is no finiteness in now (and also btw there is no finiteness in numbers). For any of those terms to be finite you have to make it clear you mean something other than what they mean in every day English

LordReed:


A response:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9lfZAMF7HQ

Thanks for the vid but this is a very poor response.
I was expecting him to refute, or at least not concede, that the probabity is so small. Instead he is using semantics after conceding it’s true. What does it matter that the probability in every throw remains one in 6. He’s talking like a kid - and not a very smart one at that

LordReed:


I don't see how quantum mechanics is proving simulation hypothesis in what you posted.

Well for one thing quantum mechanics proved that our universe is made of information not particles (as is the case in classical physics).

Crystyano:

Is it possible for you to give me anything except derogatory remarks
Even before anyone asks you for help,
You're already mocking.....
If you keep calling me names,
That will not make you special....

All you need is a bowl and few rags then sit pitifully by the roadside begging in the name of "Charles Darwin" i swear you go get more than one million naira that day. Because that name will make a lot of sense to passersby.

Olòṣì, Ọ̀lẹ, Olè!

LordReed:


The Article you linked is one of the reasons I made this statement:

I think the thing is that you see these statements as absolutes. Of course NO ONE knows if we are living in a simulation or not.
What these folks are saying is that the evidence suggests it is highly likely. And they’re always folks who spent years studying physics or building simulations.

Check out this video. See how it dovetails with what I told you - that strange occurrences are glitches in the matrix - things you atheists always attribute to coincidence!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWajxzWrMAg

FreeIgboho:


I think the thing is that you see these statements as absolutes. Of course NO ONE knows if we are living in a simulation or not.
What these folks are saying is that the evidence suggests it is highly likely. And they’re always folks who spent years studying physics or building simulations.

Check out this video. See how it dovetails with what I told you - that strange occurrences are glitches in the matrix - things you atheists always attribute to coincidence. You really are helping them by always saying they don’t exist (which is what they want!). It would be funny if u r the ones who go to “heaven” because you made their work easier while on earth!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWajxzWrMAg

They are not using the language of possibility but of certainty. Even you most times use the language of certainty. For instance you say Musk has information we don't have because he is somehow in touch with these other beings. If I asked how you know this you'd revert to the language of possibility. Look at the title of the video, they are using the word discovered as if it is a proven fact.

Now I don't mind speculations, they are fun to think about but when people like you talk like they know things they can't possibly know then I think we are no longer speculating. If you want us to speculate, we can but if you want to state your opinions as verified facts then be ready to defend your position.

FreeIgboho:


I think the thing is that you see these statements as absolutes. Of course NO ONE knows if we are living in a simulation or not.
What these folks are saying is that the evidence suggests it is highly likely. And they’re always folks who spent years studying physics or building simulations.

Check out this video. See how it dovetails with what I told you - that strange occurrences are glitches in the matrix - things you atheists always attribute to coincidence. You really are helping them by always saying they don’t exist (which is what they want!). It would be funny if u r the ones who go to “heaven” because you made their work easier while on earth!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWajxzWrMAg

So a guy just narrates 5 stories with no way to verify them and we are supposed to accept them as penitence we are in a simulation? LoL. No buddy, that is not how it works.

FreeIgboho:


Well for one thing quantum mechanics proved that our universe is made of information not particles (as is the case in classical physics).

Still not saying HOW. Simply stating something is not enough when the question is how.

LordReed:


They are not using the language of possibility but of certainty. Even you most times use the language of certainty. For instance you say Musk has information we don't have because he is somehow in touch with these other beings. If I asked how you know this you'd revert to the language of possibility. Look at the title of the video, they are using the word discovered as if it is a proven fact.

Now I don't mind speculations, they are fun to think about but when people like you talk like they know things they can't possibly know then I think we are no longer speculating. If you want us to speculate, we can but if you want to state your opinions as verified facts then be ready to defend your position.

U r funny. The very first thing I ever said to u was that I was not certain of anything except that something exists. There was a whole thread of argument on that, with all of you claiming to be sure if things!

LordReed:


Still not saying HOW. Simply stating something is not enough when the question is how.

It’s all over the internet na. Okay, I’ll pick one and post for you

LordReed:


So a guy just narrates 5 stories with no way to verify them and we are supposed to accept them as penitence we are in a simulation? LoL. No buddy, that is not how it works.

Read the comments. The glitches are all over the place. Even one happened right in front of us and we all know it but can’t do anything about it - Buhari was switched!

FreeIgboho:


That’s why I said there first has to be redefinition of terms for it to make sense. There is no finiteness in nothing and there is no finiteness in now (and also btw there is no finiteness in numbers). For any of those terms to be finite you have to make it clear you mean something other than what they mean in every day English

Why are we defining what has been well defined?

FreeIgboho:


U r funny. The very first thing I ever said to u was that I was not certain of anything except that something exists. There was a whole thread of argument on that, with all of you claiming to be sure if things!

Then stop giving me stuff with people stating they know.

FreeIgboho:


Read the comments. The glitches are all over the place. Even one happened right in front of us and we all know it but can’t do anything about it - Buhari was switched!

LoL! I am not accepting unverified stories as evidence for a simulation.

LordReed:


Why are we defining what has been well defined?

Let me put it to you this way, when you get to the end of that your space-time fabric, and nothing is outside it - in English language we call that nothing “empty space”

LordReed:


Then stop giving me stuff with people stating they know.

You have all previously been persuaded by me that we have no way of knowing things for certain. That’s the context of all our discussion - that, based on evidence, one thing is more likely than the other, not that anything is certain

FreeIgboho:


You have all previously been persuaded by me that we have no way of knowing things for certain. That’s the context of all our discussion - that, based on evidence, one thing is more likely than the other, not that anything is certain

Then go find people who agree with you that it is merely a possibility, if you have evidence then we are no longer talking possibility. So which is it, are we discussing a speculation or do you have evidence.

Besides you didn't convince me of anything, don't kid yourself.

FreeIgboho:


Let me put it to you this way, when you get to the end of that your space-time fabric, and nothing is outside it - in English language we call that nothing “empty space”

LoL! Where did you learn this physic from cos as far as I aware nobody says this. You are the first person I am hearing this "empty space" idea from. Besides what evidence do you have of this "empty space".

LordReed:


Then go find people who agree with you that it is merely a possibility, if you have evidence then we are no longer talking possibility. So which is it, are we discussing a speculation or do you have evidence.

Besides you didn't convince me of anything, don't kid yourself.

Have you forgotten? You all FINALLY agreed with me.

I have circumstancial evidence you exist, doesn’t mean you exist!

LordReed:


LoL! Where did you learn this physic from cos as far as I aware nobody says this. You are the first person I am hearing this "empty space" idea from. Besides what evidence do you have of this "empty space".

That’s what we call where there is nothing in English language - empty space!

LordReed:


Still not saying HOW. Simply stating something is not enough when the question is how.

See below

FreeIgboho:


Have you forgotten? You all FINALLY agreed with me.

I have circumstancial evidence you exist, doesn’t mean you exist!

Like I said don't kid yourself, I didn't agree that with you.

FreeIgboho:


That’s what we call where there is nothing in English language - empty space!

This is not an English language lesson. We are talking of physics and here your assertions are meaningless without evidence.

LordReed:


Like I said don't kid yourself, I didn't agree that with you.

So we are back where we were: prove to me I exist outside your head

FreeIgboho:


See below

SMH. Still doesn't answer the question.

LordReed:


This is not an English language lesson. We are talking of physics and here your assertions are meaningless without evidence.

No we are not talking physics otherwise there’d be all sorts of equations and technical talk. I wouldn’t have asked you what’s at the end of time or space. I would have been talking space-time and such. In everyday English time is always now, which is infinite, likewise at the end of empty space you have more empty space - infinite

FreeIgboho:


So we are back where we were: prove to me I exist outside your head

What would constitute evidence to you?

FreeIgboho:


No we are not talking physics otherwise there’d be all sorts of equations and technical talk. I wouldn’t have asked you what’s at the end of time or space. I would have been talking space-time and such. In everyday English time is always now, which is infinite, likewise at the end of empty space you have more empty space - infinite

Well I have been talking about physics and physics is how we learn to describe the natural process including space. If you aren't taalking about phyics then the discussion is pointless.

BTW how come you have been mentioning classical physics and quantum mechanics but now you aren't talking physics because it doesn't support your assertions. LoL

LordReed:


Well I have been talking about physics and physics is how we learn to describe the natural process including space. If you aren't taalking about phyics then the discussion is pointless.

BTW how come you have been mentioning classical physics and quantum mechanics but now you aren't talking physics because it doesn't support your assertions. LoL

Is this how the physicists you know talk? How many equations have you cited? What studies have you cited to prove that speed of light is the speed limit of the universe?
My friend we are talking lay man not Physics - which is why I was talking of end of space and end of time NOT space-time.
Which is also why you can’t deduce from what I posted how quantum mechanics supports simulation theory - because you can’t talk physics - you want lay man explanation.
Well here it is:
In quantum mech particles exist only when observed - just like our simulation. Also at core our reality is information not material - ”coding” - simulation!

FreeIgboho:


Is this how the physicists you know talk? How many equations have you cited? What studies have you cited to prove that speed of light is the speed limit of the universe?
My friend we are talking lay man not Physics - which is why I was talking of end of space and end of time NOT space-time.
Which is also why you can’t deduce from what I posted how quantum mechanics supports simulation theory - because you can’t talk physics - you want lay man explanation.
Well here it is:
In quantum mech particles exist only when observed - just like our simulation. Also at core our reality is information not material - ”coding” - simulation!

[img]https://c./2Um1tZHImfMAAAAC/face-palm-no.gif[/img]