It simply depends on the framework. Science observes the illusion and reports it and measures it. (when they can.)

They don't know what causes it or what it's made of.

But since this is an observer created reality, science actually plays an important roll in perpetuating it with their observations.

They quite literally are part of the fabric that holds it together.

Yeah, but don't tell the monkeyboy scientists Russell's views were my doing. See, I used the Infinite Improbability Drive and the lightspeed breakaway factor to go back in time to attempt to derail modern science. Almost worked, too! I nearly had Russell and his followers believing that m=E/square root of the speed of _darkness_. That gravity sucks darkness, giving the appearance of light. And that the monkeyboy conciousness is the most powerful force in the Universe. It can do anything. Do. Be. Do be Do Be Do.

Alas, that Einstein fellow just ruined everything with math.

So.

I came up with another, more nefarious plan. It's called simply, "The Internet."

And I think it's got a shot, too. It spreads misinformation at the speed of light!


-Kerry Omega

light-speed time is still a perception, nothing more than a unit of measurement, nothing physical or elemental about it.

The beauty of the Universe is that it is not an observer created
reality. There do not need to be any observers. In fact, a blink
of the cosmic eye ago and there were no observers. Mankind has
only been around for a very short while on the timescale of the
Earth let alone the timescale of the Cosmos.



So that "observer created reality" stuff is a huge pile of hogwash.

And if light didn't travel then when you turned on a flashlight
and pointed it at a wall then you would not see any light reflected
from the wall. But you do. And so does a detector independent of
anyone observing it...etc. etc.

This is why it is easy to see that kindergarteners everywhere
recognize that light travels and that half-baked fantasies about it
not traveling are *ahem* deficient.

s1owhand, quantum physics proves you wrong.

You are thinking that "mankind" is the only "observer." You are defining "observer" as a human being. That's pretty much very narrow thinking.

Anything that can sense and interact with anything else is an observer. Technically, we don't actually 'see' with our eyes. What happens is we sense frequencies which are interpreted as light and sound and given to 'the invisible observer' who has no eyes.

What you are describing is the illusion. It is not the truth.
Albeit its a great illusion, and a damn persistent one.

This simulated reality is quite the work of art I would say.

light bends cause of gravity,i really don't see how it's reflected

Space is warped.

but mass causes it to warp and mass creates gravity also which causes light to bend it really doesn't reflect off of mirrors in space then become waves...not to my knowledge it doesn't,though i could be wrong

I can conclusively say that this article is nonsense. It is not scientific that is for sure, his word usage is sloppy, non-distinct, and provides no data to back up his vague claims.

Early clues to determine nonsense: Using words like simulated without detailing what is being simulated, compared to what is not a simulation.

Its new age garbage to be a little harsh. This stuff might sound good in a star Trek film, that is about as close to Science as this gets, Science Fiction.

Example of the nonsense:


He equivocates water and light, and details that the only difference is in the positive or negative "preponderance".

From the princess bride," I am not sure that means what you think it means" comes to mind when reading his usage of the word preponderance, lol.

This is drivel and he later contradicts himself, he says water and light are different because of negative and positive . . . preponderance, but then poo poos scientist becuase particles are detailed by using negative and positive charges, lets ignore that the interactions of these particles is what informs us of the charge differences.

Uhhhh, NO.

Matter is distinct from light. The fact that at various scales we may use different descriptions of waves for matter and light does not allow such simplistic equivocation. No scientist would be so vague and simplistic, or equivocate different scales of inquiry and different scales of energy.


Word soup.

Example of his confusion that he tries to place on the scientific community.
NO, we designate these particles as different becuase they act differently. The interactions are different, the properties are different, the characteristics of interaction describe these particles and THAT is how we know, becuase we have observed it. Empirical science: its right becuase it works.

Sadly there are tons of these kinds of Crack pots out there now a days, just skim the physics section of usenet, or google groups.
They want to be seen as pioneers of physics, but without doing any of the hard work. They want to be able to spit out theory without worrying about that pesky reality, physical experiments, or conclusive testing; complete disregard for core scientific principles such as empiricism, falsification, or peer review.

Frankly its insulting to even myself, a lowly graduate of physics working in the radiology field, no less real theoretical and experimental physicists. The amount of work required just to attain my degrees and certifications would crush this guy squarely into non-existence, its nearly unimaginable the weight of research of all the physicists that came before to build the pyramid of knowledge that is modern physics that he so easily disregards and claims WE are ignorant for supporting.

I really feel this kind of drivel requires some not so respectful insolence.

Of course scientists are insulted. Especially when people like him turn out to be right.

Whether you like his credentials and his writing or not, everything boils down to vibration and frequency. Of course there is a lot of information and differences between things like water, earth, light, etc. But looking closer they all break down into what?

A particle that we can't even measure.

Yes, I know tons and tons of science and knowledge etc. is involved. This is an extremely complex and detailed universe.

We they get it all figured out, I will be over joyed.

Meanwhile let the dreamers dream and the observers observe. Stop getting "insulted."

Mystics have described things like atoms long before science ever even discovered them. Yep, I guess that's insulting.

Yes mass causes it to warp and creates gravity which causes light to appear to 'bend.'

That is why Matter, energy, space and time are all bound together as a single thing.

If you want to believe that light does "travel" then you have to remain with the premise that there is such a thing as "time" and "space" and "matter" and "energy" and that they all exist independently from each other creating a three dimensional universe within which we live.

That is the common belief concerning the nature of reality.(Common but not agreed upon by all.) Even some scientists realize we are living in what might be referred to as an illusion.

I'm just not so sure that what we think we observe is the true nature of reality. But if that is what people want to conclude, that is fine with me. I just like to consider other possibilities that will make sense where quantum physics is concerned.

Dreamers dreaming, sure that makes sense. However any professional who has dedicated his life to his craft will be peeved when a no nothing dreamer tells him he has got it all wrong and then when the dreamer tries to explain it, it comes out as nonsense.

Science learns, adapts and explores whilst discovering truth becuase it has a solid methodology. There is no discernible methodology described by this person. It IS meaningless word soup.

If he can formulate a theory, that makes falsifiable predictions, then he can start to claim at least a small amount of credit. Until then its all just blather not even good blather like string theory that leads to real advances in mathematics even if it never describes reality.

They aren't.



There is no connection or logic to the above statement. Space-time exists just fine without matter and/or energy. They do not create each other nor limit the dimensions in which they exist.



If you don't understand science, nor believe in it, how is it that you think you know so much based on "non-science"? You believe in goofy ideas because it doesn't sound goofy to you?


Reading that quantum physics has something to do with wave functions and vibrations does not allow you to extrapolate the statements you have made. It really doesn't work that way.

All science isn't about light. Many scientific observables have nothing to do with light. Physics is generally about force and matter but light is a small part of the party.

When you use statements like "... where quantum physics is concerned." it looks like you are pretending to understand the subject. Then you mix it with something that just makes you look silly.

If you stated "I believe ..", no one can question your beliefs. We are all entitled to them.

When you state garbage as science fact, you simply come across as a fool.

Correct, JB I like you, but sometimes it is hard when you take the position of having knowledge of some of these topics that are scientific topics, trust me you are far from having any kind of real grasp of physics, that is fine I have many friends that fall into that category, the difference is they do not try to tell me about my craft as if they know better.

I am not an artists, and so would never try to tell you, say for example, that you are using the wrong brush or wrong media, it would be me dreaming up an answer to a real problem, and you as the professional with MANY hours of REAL experience should feel, even if only slightly, insulted.

My internet is too slow to be the speed of light

but if light travels in wave or partical measuring its speed would require space age technology. what is the speed of light is not constant but an average of 186000 miles. what if my motive force is so great that it blows pass the speed of light into worp speed I published this on hight school paper. sound is a wave compression decompression but light is visible darkness is not

on the other scientific speculation goes by the name of theory as long a is stays a theory is not a fact. A fact represent momentary reality that last longer at times. sciences is an illusion at best a tool use for control of the slave mind

Metalwing explain how space-time can exist without matter or energy.




Metalwing I never said I did not believe in science.

Metalwing, What doesn't work that way?




Metalwing, I did not say that all science was about light. I may have said that "reality" is all about light..."



Metalwing, actually I do understand the simple basic idea of quantum physics.

Of course I "mix" it with the subject of reality, because the quantum world is the foundation of this reality. Are you saying it is not??




What I am stating is not garbage.

What I believe (for certain) is that I exist.

Everything else is just an opinion.

Bushibillyclub,

I have never said I have scientific knowledge or any kind of grasp of physics or the details therein.

I look at the whole picture. No, I don't and can't grasp the scope of the patterns and the information and the details of how it all works any more than I know how my computer works.

What I am trying to say, is that REALITY is simply not what we think it is. This I believe to be true. There are many other people who also explore this line of thinking, and many of them are respected scientists.

I did not just make this stuff up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn7-fVtT16k