Our World is a Computer Simulated World.. and here is proof.
 

This world could just be a computer simulation and there is some kind of evidence to it: Quantum physics. For those of you that haven't read about it, quantum physics basically says that a particle can be in two or more places at once and it only takes a definite position when it is observed. We don't know exactly what 'being observed' counts as but this explains the basic idea:


Now how does this relate to this world being a simulation/game? Well I'm going to compare this to a game that I have played quite a bit. Grand theft auto basically places you in a massive map and you explore it. Now because of the size of the map the developers chose not to render it all at once. So nothing in the game is actually placed on your screen until you walk up to it. So if you are playing on one side of the map, 10 minutes away there is nothing. It's kind of hard to explain.

When you drive a car pretty fast from one area into another you will experience a glitch. There is nothing there: just basic squares. You have to wait a bit until the trees and people start magically appearing around you.

This article basically related this to the real world. The developers of the game did this to save memory. If they rendered every part of the map it would take up incredible amounts of unneeded memory.

So if this world is a simulation then it would also need to save memory. Think how much information would have to be stored to track the positions of every atom in the entire universe? If this is a simulation then the programmer coded using quantum physics to save memory. Until we see something it does not exist. That saves the computer running this place a lot of memory.



If you are confused by what happens in the video..

When particles are shot through 2 slits, they appear on the board as if they behaved like waves..

So, the physicists said "ok, we'll shoot one at a time then, so it'll be impossible for a wave to be created."

They did that and the particle still behaved like a wave.. so they said "ok, we only shot one this time, if it behaved like a wave.. then it would have to have split before the slit and then gotten back into one particle AFTER the slit"

so they went ahead and said "let's observe what actually happens before it hit's either slit, because we don't know through which of the two it actually goes through". So they placed something that would observe it and, as if aware of being watched, the particle started to behave normal again, going only through one at a time...

Basically, just like a video game that renders objects and stuff only when the observer/player is actually exploring , matter does the same thing.

always wondered if this was true since i was a kid LOL

the only proof you need

:suspicious:

:fulloffuck:

my hs physics teacher totally believed this

Was expecting this:

I've seen this a long time ago and it just blows my skull

I think you missed the main point of the double slit experiment

The result from an event is different if you don't interefere with it than from the same event when you "observe" "interuprt" "measure" it.

Hence the saying ( a crude example) the physicsts can never see how much water is in the cup because by simply measuring it, the result will be changed.

not surprised at all. I love interesting stuff like this that gets you thinking.

90% of the main post was taken from another site and is not my wording.

However, I do disagree with the world being pre rendered.
That would mean only one of us is a main character.. but I know that If I'm in one place, the other places I am not in are still there.
IF the universe was pre rendered, then it would mean that there are different instances of the world for every person in every observable place in the universe. Which would kind of defeat the purpose of pre rendering since having that many objects, always rendering would choke you on memory because each instance needs ... never mind I'm going into a different topic here altogether but the point is.. there has to be another explanation.


But as Zyzz said, it's very possible that having other matter (an object, in this case the object that is designed to observe)within proximity of said particles IS then interfering with the waves (since we established that they behave like waves ) and thus resulting in wave interference, causing a different result.

:fulloffuck: That makes no sense.. the way an Open World video game renders its objects have nothing to do with the video. In the video he demonstrates that electrons will interfere with each other until observed. In GTA those "electrons" don't even exist until the character can see them. As you said yourself just because your not looking at it doesn't necessarily mean its not there. I think this would only apply to a very specific situations

OP's title makes me skeptical

What you see is being created in your own mind. We all see the same thing because we "vibrate" at the same frequency, so we are tuned in to that same channel. When I mean frequency and channel, I mean dimension. With the majority of the human population on this earth being tuned to this current dimension, we all see "similar" things. Some people can be at a state of a higher dimension and see "more", but that's a totally different topic.

Notice how I said "similar", not everyone looks at an object the same way. The colour, the shape, the heaviness, etc etc may be slightly different. For example, the colour red. When we see the colour red, we all know what it is. But, is the shade of red I look at the same one you're looking at? Some may see it as a deeper red and some may see it as a lighter red. It's however your mind perceives it as. Basically, there is no absolute in what everyone sees.

If you really think clearly and openly, you'll basically get an answer that the world isn't "technically" real. We are taught to see things a certain way. Red has to look a certain way. Chairs, grass, fish, sidewalks, etc etc has to look a certain way. That's how we are brought up. So, in turn we put these things that we learn and input it to our brain at a young age.

For example, our brain is basically a computer. Everyday, we install something to enhance it, but every so often you'll get a virus. Actually with all the useless garbage we receive on a daily basis from media, we get more Viruses than actually good software. It's these so called "Viruses" we get on a daily basis that blocks our mind from understanding more and vibrating at a higher frequency. That my friend is why we're always only tuned to this specific frequency/channel (third dimension).

Anyway, that was sort of an off topic rant.

its not a memory problem...its called a bug in the game. lol

I've seen this video before, and I know what film it derived from. The experiment is based on Werner Heisenberg uncertainty principle; it states that a particles position and momentum could not be known simultaneously. So basically the more precisely you know about one, the less you will know about the other.

What this guy (Dr. Quantum) speaks of is true for the most part. But I'm disappointed that he (or the producers) made it seem like the mere act of just observing causes the wave function to collapse. This is actually a common misconception. The particle is in no way 'aware' that it's being watched. It's been known for some time now that any type of measuring device, no matter how small, always interacted with the electron, subsequently destroying the interference pattern.

Werner Heisenberg states,
It is impossible to design a device to determine which slit the electron passes through, that will not at the same time disturb the electron enough to collapse its wave function destroying the interference pattern.

The documentary is called, What the Bleep Do We Know!? It's a philosophical feel good film based on pseudoscience. It has no real grounds in any academic circles. I knew this right when they started talking about quantum channeling of Ramtha, the 35,000-year-old Lemurian warrior (wtf??). If you guys don't know who she is look her up.


The film had a few entertaining moments, but unfortunately the science is poorly served. If you believe in that stuff (spiritual connection and altering the material world with your mind), fine. Other than that it was just good for a few laughs.

Like the great Carl Sagan once said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

pseudoscience indeed

There is a actually a whole branch of computing that depends on the the principle demonstrated in this video. Many people think this will be our next step forward to continue in order to sustain our growth in processing powers because we are approaching the physical limitations of silicon transistors. I have written a very short article describing it and part of it is below if your interested.

I remember reading about this in a Michael Crichton novel before. This is the first I've seen the "simulation" gimmick added to it. Makes it far less interesting imo, unless you're stoned maybe
Posted via RS Mobile

cool! A glitch in the Matrix :fullofwin:

Timeline I believe?

Yeah I think so. He was using it to explain how the act of observation actually can skew what you're trying to observe, or something to that effect.

God I miss Crichton. RIP :(
Posted via RS Mobile

maybe its a fail safe from the computer letting the program learn only to a certain point

just gonna post this in here

Scientists say they're getting closer to Matrix-style instant learning