So if quantum physics just gave us a temporary reprieve from determinism, what do you consider are the implications?
I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. Until recently I assumed that physics described a universe of well-ordered laws (gravity, electromagnetism, weak and strong forces) operating in a predominantly random context (CMB, Heinsenberg uncertainty principle, randomized photoemission, etc). So the alternative to absolute determinism seemed to be loosely structured chaos, more or less.

When you say it freaks you out, do you mean you are dissatisfied with the answer?
No I mean that it’s never occurred to me before that we could all just be biological machines operating under the illusion of free will. And that kinda freaks me out, because that seems to say that the very idea of self is basically illusory. But that seems to be what this is telling me.

To paraphrase Wittgenstein (forgive me) perhaps we do not yet have the scientific language for a discussion of free will.
Or, maybe there is no such thing as free will, so trying to understand it is like trying to understand unicorns and leprechauns. Just playing devil’s advocate here.

If I develop a robot in the lab and give it a neural net and let it learn, one day it will say
'I am just a self aware robot in a clockwork universe'.
And I will say yes, and ask it what is the function of this code, this universe. It will reply that we are just bits of lego, and it is most likely a simulation to try to answer that question.
But at least we are self aware are we not?
Well we definitely seem to be aware. But honestly is your awareness really distinct from mine? I mean, awareness seems to be the same for everyone – it doesn’t really seem to have any distinguishing qualities from one being to another, does it? It’s just pure and simple watchfulness. So how can the watchfulness observing through your eyes be any different than the watchfulness looking out of anyone’s eyes? And it’s totally passive, devoid even of will.

So I’m left with a model where we’re all just automatons and some nonpersonal awareness is witnessing time unfold through all creatures great and small. It’s only really our memories and our thoughts that, combined with awareness, give us a sense of self in the first place. And it would seem that thoughts and memories are just part of the automaton. So we’re left with awareness only, which appears to be the same for me and my dog and the spider on my wall, etc.

would have no hope of remembering 22 of them at once
I send them back one at a time.
they show up as memories, just that they are of the future and not of the past.
but you are right, there is a chance that I am just remote viewing the future, that is why kind of I want to teach others and run a controlled test on them.
then again from a physicists point of view, they might not care how it works as long as the future is predictable
Okay, so it doesn’t really change the paradox if you reduce it to one coin flip at a time. You can either observe the result and try to send that info back in time, or you can try to guess the result, but you can’t do both, because you only get one choice in this timeline. Without being able to redo the event a second time, in this timeline, you can choose one or the other but not both.

So yes, we’re left with precognition, or if you prefer, remote viewing the future, however you prefer to describe it. In the model I’m seeing here, the future does already exist in a fixed 4D sense, so if it’s somehow possible to observe the future, then precognition would be possible. But I’m not seeing a mechanism for awareness to reach from the present into the future. We use our understanding of causality to anticipate events all the time, and some people are pretty good with that, but that’s not precognition in the sense that we’re talking about here, because a good grasp of causality doesn’t help with highly randomized events like a coin flip.

I’m not saying that precognition is impossible, I’m just saying that if it is, I have no idea how it would work, physically.

But yes if you could do it with a sufficient level of statistical success, then physicists would accept the result and then have to figure out how it works, because you would’ve proven that it’s a real phenomenon, and not merely chance.

Greatest secret ever told copy written by iml527 June 10th 3018.

Everybody on this entire planet is literally the walking dead. Your gods Greatest gift, was to let you relive your life over again, so that when judgment day comes for you, you will absolutely, with no question, question the decision, of gods judgment, that will be set upon you.
I think you meant 2018 not 3018.

And I dunno about this whole distinction between “man” and “God.” It seems to me that if God exists, then an appropriate definition would be “the entire universe at all times,” which includes us. So to judge us would be like judging a hair on our own finger.
 

spacecase0

earth human
Okay, so it doesn’t really change the paradox if you reduce it to one coin flip at a time. You can either observe the result and try to send that info back in time, or you can try to guess the result, but you can’t do both, because you only get one choice in this timeline. Without being able to redo the event a second time, in this timeline, you can choose one or the other but not both.

So yes, we’re left with precognition, or if you prefer, remote viewing the future, however you prefer to describe it. In the model I’m seeing here, the future does already exist in a fixed 4D sense, so if it’s somehow possible to observe the future, then precognition would be possible. But I’m not seeing a mechanism for awareness to reach from the present into the future. We use our understanding of causality to anticipate events all the time, and some people are pretty good with that, but that’s not precognition in the sense that we’re talking about here, because a good grasp of causality doesn’t help with highly randomized events like a coin flip.

I’m not saying that precognition is impossible, I’m just saying that if it is, I have no idea how it would work, physically.

But yes if you could do it with a sufficient level of statistical success, then physicists would accept the result and then have to figure out how it works, because you would’ve proven that it’s a real phenomenon, and not merely chance.
from the point of view of someone that has made a point of trying to figure out how it works,
my take on it is that consciousness is not really part of this reality.
after keeping in mind physics as well as what I see when exploring, it looks like reality is a construct of consciousness, and a very complex construct at that. (things are quite boring without 3D space and time)
when you are dreaming you can control everything (with some work), I can even go back and forward in time in dreams. the same tricks you lean in dreams can work in this world as well, just takes way more energy to do it. so, my conclusion is that this reality is a construct just like any dream world. there are also some traits to our reality, it is shared by lots of consciousness, and it seems to be "frozen" when regular dream worlds are pretty fluid (likely because they are not shared, but could be that the "dreamer" of this reality is just so powerful that it is hard to change things here).
also this reality we are in has all the energy, I have not found a place with anything even close to how much energy there is here.
I know all of that is quite a stretch for many people,
and if true, proving it from within is likely not that possible,
it is likely going to be something you see for yourself when you go exploring
and if it means anything, consciousness seems to be like a fluid, and I am not really happy with that discovery.
 

ImmortalLegend527

The Messenger Of All Gods old and new
I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. Until recently I assumed that physics described a universe of well-ordered laws (gravity, electromagnetism, weak and strong forces) operating in a predominantly random context (CMB, Heinsenberg uncertainty principle, randomized photoemission, etc). So the alternative to absolute determinism seemed to be loosely structured chaos, more or less.


No I mean that it’s never occurred to me before that we could all just be biological machines operating under the illusion of free will. And that kinda freaks me out, because that seems to say that the very idea of self is basically illusory. But that seems to be what this is telling me.


Or, maybe there is no such thing as free will, so trying to understand it is like trying to understand unicorns and leprechauns. Just playing devil’s advocate here.


Well we definitely seem to be aware. But honestly is your awareness really distinct from mine? I mean, awareness seems to be the same for everyone – it doesn’t really seem to have any distinguishing qualities from one being to another, does it? It’s just pure and simple watchfulness. So how can the watchfulness observing through your eyes be any different than the watchfulness looking out of anyone’s eyes? And it’s totally passive, devoid even of will.

So I’m left with a model where we’re all just automatons and some nonpersonal awareness is witnessing time unfold through all creatures great and small. It’s only really our memories and our thoughts that, combined with awareness, give us a sense of self in the first place. And it would seem that thoughts and memories are just part of the automaton. So we’re left with awareness only, which appears to be the same for me and my dog and the spider on my wall, etc.


Okay, so it doesn’t really change the paradox if you reduce it to one coin flip at a time. You can either observe the result and try to send that info back in time, or you can try to guess the result, but you can’t do both, because you only get one choice in this timeline. Without being able to redo the event a second time, in this timeline, you can choose one or the other but not both.

So yes, we’re left with precognition, or if you prefer, remote viewing the future, however you prefer to describe it. In the model I’m seeing here, the future does already exist in a fixed 4D sense, so if it’s somehow possible to observe the future, then precognition would be possible. But I’m not seeing a mechanism for awareness to reach from the present into the future. We use our understanding of causality to anticipate events all the time, and some people are pretty good with that, but that’s not precognition in the sense that we’re talking about here, because a good grasp of causality doesn’t help with highly randomized events like a coin flip.

I’m not saying that precognition is impossible, I’m just saying that if it is, I have no idea how it would work, physically.

But yes if you could do it with a sufficient level of statistical success, then physicists would accept the result and then have to figure out how it works, because you would’ve proven that it’s a real phenomenon, and not merely chance.


I think you meant 2018 not 3018.

And I dunno about this whole distinction between “man” and “God.” It seems to me that if God exists, then an appropriate definition would be “the entire universe at all times,” which includes us. So to judge us would be like judging a hair on our own finger.

If you have ever had a Déjà vu than its really self-explanatory as to why, we are here..for the second time. If you ever had a dream that came true, years later, then it's blatantly obvious, this is not the first time, that you have been here, in this realm before.

You can not have a dream or a Déjà vu about the future unless your a sim, in a simulated program in which free will has no meaning.

Red pill: You died and now you're reliving your awful sins and the judgment AS TO WHY your petty god cast you straight to hell.

Blue pill: You're in a simulation and the electricity from your body enables them to control your every movement in this program a program that no matter what you do you still going to end up in the same spot.

These are the only 2 programs that fit your question, chose one and chose wisely.

One program will open 2 doors containing 130 uploads.

The other program will open 5 doors and will contain only 2 uploads.

Please download wisely. You can only choose one or none.


The copy was written by iml527 June 11th 3018.

4th human this Iar i have giving a choice of uploads to down load.
 

SOUL-DRIFTER

Life Long Researcher
Responding not from a scientific background but instead from a metaphysical stance, your concept is quite common in mystic and channeled writings. Jane Roberts was a channel who was quite skeptical of her own work back in the 70's predominantly. She channeled a famous entity called SETH who talked incessantly on the simultaneous nature of real time....

I read that book as well.
It was called Seth Speaks.
While the past present and future can exist at the same time, they are still separate from each other. Temporal indifferences and polarity.
 

ChrisIB

Honorable
Or, maybe there is no such thing as free will, so trying to understand it is like trying to understand unicorns and leprechauns. Just playing devil’s advocate here.
I intuitively believe I have free will. Perhaps my soul exists in a system with different rules that allow free will.

That would introduce randomness into your deterministic model.
Would that be testable? Does your model, in isolation, permit such thing as a truly random number?
Could rules change? a simulation suffer a virus?

I lack your enviable clarity, but to me, in the fine detail physics still seems full of fudges.
If there are two such systems or networks, how would they interact? Like a switch in a computer network? Firewalls?
 
i have to agree with thomas, your life is a program in a interdimensional computer
Did I say that? I don't think I said that. But thanks for agreeing with me anyway!

If you have ever had a Déjà vu than its really self-explanatory as to why, we are here..for the second time. If you ever had a dream that came true, years later, then it's blatantly obvious, this is not the first time, that you have been here, in this realm before.

You can not have a dream or a Déjà vu about the future unless your a sim, in a simulated program in which free will has no meaning.

Red pill: You died and now you're reliving your awful sins and the judgment AS TO WHY your petty god cast you straight to hell.

Blue pill: You're in a simulation and the electricity from your body enables them to control your every movement in this program a program that no matter what you do you still going to end up in the same spot.

These are the only 2 programs that fit your question, chose one and chose wisely.

One program will open 2 doors containing 130 uploads.

The other program will open 5 doors and will contain only 2 uploads.

Please download wisely. You can only choose one or none.


The copy was written by iml527 June 11th 3018.

4th human this Iar i have giving a choice of uploads to down load.
I'm sorry but I'm not religious, so I'm not afflicted with an infinite extent of self-loathing, or any beliefs in hell, sins, and judgement or whatnot.

But if I did buy into that stuff I'd be trembling in my boots. Really.

I intuitively believe I have free will. Perhaps my soul exists in a system with different rules that allow free will.

That would introduce randomness into your deterministic model.
Would that be testable? Does your model, in isolation, permit such thing as a truly random number?
Could rules change? a simulation suffer a virus?

I lack your enviable clarity, but to me, in the fine detail physics still seems full of fudges.
If there are two such systems or networks, how would they interact? Like a switch in a computer network? Firewalls?
Yeah I assumed that we all had free will too, until I saw that the best model of reality I could derive postulates that an accelerated observer can move rapidly into the future and remain causally connected to every moment in time going forward along the way, which means that the future must already exist is a truly determinate sense, i.e. it's already there when you arrive. So the cosmos has to be a fixed 4-dimensional object.

It's a mad bummer on one hand because I liked thinking that I could be unpredictable, mix things up a bit. But apparently all that free will stuff is just an illusion generated by the fact that we can't observe the future, so we think it hasn't been determined yet.

I'm still wracking my brain to try to find a way out of this. But so far I've failed; the physics looks very clear to me: I'm a frickin' robot living under the delusion of free will, apparently (and so are all of you folks, it seems - sorry!).
 
arrrgh! everyone is getting my post is wrong, everthing after "i agree with you thomas" is my own opinions in this subject
Okay now I understand.

There’s been a lot of talk about the universe being a simulation of some kind, but here’s my thinking about that: who’s to say that the universe of protons and electrons and energy and so forth can’t be both the computer and the program and the simulation all at the same time? I mean, at this level of our technological advancement the computer and the computer program and the virtual reality simulations that we run with them, are all three distinct things. But perhaps a sufficiently advanced technology could incorporate all of them together to generate the real, physical universe that we observe; for some purpose that we don’t understand. Perhaps the universe is some kind of machine that’s evolving in a certain way to fulfill some kind of purpose. Or maybe it’s just an experiment to see what will happen.

This is all wild speculation of course, but if indeed the universe is a fixed 4-dimensional object as this model seems to indicate, then it would seem to have a lot in common with our idea of a machine, and we’re just a feature of its operation.

The only real mystery in that interpretation is consciousness. As David Chalmers points out, we could be automatons (or as he likes to say, “zombies”), and still perform all of the functions that we perform now, but without consciousness. So why is consciousness an aspect of the equation in the first place?
 
Last edited:
if my ideas are correct, it is because reality is created by consciousness,
and seem to me like physics is finding data that points the same direction
https://phys.org/news/2015-05-quantum-theory-weirdness.html
Actually that experiment can also be explained if the future boundary conditions already exist, which is the premise of my opening post. From that same article:

"If one chooses to believe that the atom really did take a particular path or paths then one has to accept that a future measurement is affecting the atom's past, said Truscott."

So with the model that I'm seeing, where the future is already in existence in a complete and determined form, there is no need for a quantum weirdness / consciousness explanation.
 

spacecase0

earth human
Actually that experiment can also be explained if the future boundary conditions already exist, which is the premise of my opening post. From that same article:

"If one chooses to believe that the atom really did take a particular path or paths then one has to accept that a future measurement is affecting the atom's past, said Truscott."

So with the model that I'm seeing, where the future is already in existence in a complete and determined form, there is no need for a quantum weirdness / consciousness explanation.
seems like you have all the data,
and you have all the various ideas of what that data might mean
now is the hard part
you have a choice to make as to what it all means.
(don't forget that "undecided" is also a possible choice)
 
seems like you have all the data,
and you have all the various ideas of what that data might mean
now is the hard part
you have a choice to make as to what it all means.
(don't forget that "undecided" is also a possible choice)
I'm too much of a rationalist to commit to any given interpretation 100%. I just let the data speak for itself and go with the most obvious interpretation of that limited data set (because all data sets are intrinsically incomplete). So like I said in the OP, the physics points to a deterministic 4D universe where quantum weirdness and free will are illusions generated by our inability to perceive the extant future. I'm forced to go with that, pending any new and contrary data.

But I' don't have to be happy about it. The idea of basically being a complex automaton, and even my own past/present/future thoughts being a foregone conclusion, is creepy af. Because it means that we're all just prisoners trapped in bags of meat hurling into an unknown future that we have zero control over. Man...and here I thought that existentialism was depressing.
 

spacecase0

earth human
I'm too much of a rationalist to commit to any given interpretation 100%. I just let the data speak for itself and go with the most obvious interpretation of that limited data set (because all data sets are intrinsically incomplete). So like I said in the OP, the physics points to a deterministic 4D universe where quantum weirdness and free will are illusions generated by our inability to perceive the extant future. I'm forced to go with that, pending any new and contrary data.

But I' don't have to be happy about it. The idea of basically being a complex automaton, and even my own past/present/future thoughts being a foregone conclusion, is creepy af. Because it means that we're all just prisoners trapped in bags of meat hurling into an unknown future that we have zero control over. Man...and here I thought that existentialism was depressing.
not sure if you see it or not,
but you may have outgrown physics, or potentially this reality entirely
my suggestion is to try astral travel,
nothing means anything unless you can prove it to yourself,
and there are things to see out there
 
not sure if you see it or not,
but you may have outgrown physics, or potentially this reality entirely
Honestly I've pretty much had my fill of terrestrial life, but that's why I focus so much on the theoretical physics of gravitational field propulsion. If we can devise that kind of technology, then we can transform terrestrial life so dramatically and positively that the Renaissance would look like a dress rehearsal, and in the process we'd throw open to the door to the stars. And I would never tire of physically exploring this vast and mysterious cosmos and encountering the bewildering variety of advanced life forms out there.

my suggestion is to try astral travel,
nothing means anything unless you can prove it to yourself,
and there are things to see out there
It's interesting that you should mention that - Robert Monroe was a big influence on me when I discovered his books around the age of 12 or 13, iirc. It's wild stuff to read, but the guy seemed sincere. And so does Albert Taylor for that matter. I've never tried it because I'm more into classical Eastern mysticism (bodhimind, awakening, etc). But I assume that it's a legit area of exploration. I guess I just feel like it's a kind of escape from this world, and I think we need to save this one before we transfer our attention the other ones. So it sounds like you're versed with it - what's your take on it; is it about exploring internal worlds that are intrinsically non-material and probably subjective and dreamlike, or is a form of exploration of this universe without bringing along the body? I wonder if the ancient Egyptian priests could've seen the technique of building giant stone pyramids by having a peek at distant alien civilizations via some presently unknown science of out of body travel.

It's always fun to dance on the bleeding edge of the most fringe ideas out there. One thing I'm completely sure about is that we've barely begun to understand the expanse of possibilities in the areas of physics and consciousness.
 

Gambeir

Celestial
No I mean that it’s never occurred to me before that we could all just be biological machines operating under the illusion of free will. And that kinda freaks me out, because that seems to say that the very idea of self is basically illusory. But that seems to be what this is telling me.


Or, maybe there is no such thing as free will, so trying to understand it is like trying to understand unicorns and leprechauns. Just playing devil’s advocate here.

On Free Will.

Of course you have free will, but it is a bit like being a BB going down the spiral copper tube: Sure you can drift about, but it's the rest of the copper tube which limits where you can go, and the walls of the copper tube are thoughts and ideas held by the majority.

For example, it is impossible to move outside the path that world war II followed simply because as an individual you would not have had the means to form the thoughts of the majority.

It's much more complex than this since it involves a life time of informational processing that was programmed in to the individuals involved.

There is a direct link between the path to the future and the control over information that people receive. This link is the plug in to human consciousness, and it's out of consciousness that reality is itself formed and by that I mean literally formed. As in why one atom, or as is popular these days, one quanta stays and another vanishes back through the solitron tunnel it came from.

Consciousness forms reality, it breaths life in to it, and what this tells us us is that the reality is like a synapse in the mind where a particle of information flows in and must find a receptor to deliver it's information. If there is no receptor then the compound does nothing; whatever the mass mind is conceiving is what will be created. This says that all information is all existing at all time. Only our own thinking describes the future. This is what the powers that be understand.

This idea is the basic fundamental reasoning behind the all important control paradigm which until very recently was entirely controlled by a very small few.
 
Last edited:
Ok – maybe I’ve been wrong-headed about this. This post got me thinking about it differently:

On Free Will.

Of course you have free will, but it is a bit like being a BB going down the spiral copper tube: Sure you can drift about, but it's the rest of the copper tube which limits where you can go, and the walls of the copper tube are thoughts and ideas held by the majority.

For example, it is impossible to move outside the path that world war II followed simply because as an individual you would not have had the means to form the thoughts of the majority.
I think that’s a terrific model for story-telling applications, but in physics we rarely if ever see this kind of hybrid model. The fundamental laws of physics (and what’s more fundamental than time and space?) tend to be absolute. The conservation of momentum and energy, causality, what have you. So I can’t accept a “partly causal, partly indeterminate” model like this, and it doesn’t conform to the physics that I’m seeing, either the known physics or the new model that I’m working on.

But this got me thinking:

It's much more complex than this since it involves a life time of informational processing that was programmed in to the individuals involved.

There is a direct link between the path to the future and the control over information that people receive.
I get what you’re saying and that appears to be valid within the context that we observe: namely, where the past is fixed and the future is unobservable. So in purely relative terms, free will appears to exist in our reference frame.

Maybe that’s all that matters. In other words, maybe we do have free will, because we do make choices based on our nature and our external influences, and those have direct consequences on the future. So in a sense, we are participating in the process of shaping the future, and it doesn’t really matter that all of those choices and actions are predetermined from a 4D perspective.

In this interpretation, our consciousness / free will is simply an additional physical influence on the ultimate shape of the immutable 4D universe, similar to gravity and electrical charge. We manifest our nature in a linear sequence, and we’re unaware of the future, so we can view this as a manifestation of free will. The fact that we can’t change the future that’s already laid out from the 4D perspective is, in this sense, irrelevant. We can’t see or feel our shackles binding us to an immutable sequence of events, so in a subjective sense, we’re not slavish automatons from our POV. And if we could see the whole 4D object, what choice would we want to make anyway – to do something that’s contrary to our nature? That seems like a bitter form of free will: to go against my intrinsic nature for the purely egoistic satisfaction of proving that I’m not an automaton in a fixed 4D labyrinth of causality.

This link is the plug in to human consciousness, and it's out of consciousness that reality is itself formed and by that I mean literally formed. As in why one atom, or as is popular these days, one quanta stays and another vanishes back through the solitron tunnel it came from.
I don’t know what a solitron tunnel is, but it sounds like you’re describing a violation of conservation, like the conservation of energy or the conservation of lepton number, and we’ve never observed something disappearing like that (or appearing from nothingness, for that matter).

I’m generally very suspicious of any model that elevates our consciousness to a cornerstone of physical reality. The universe existed for a long time before any life forms could exist. So to make such an idea viable, you’d either have to give consciousness god-like powers like the ability to retroactively manifest the past evolution of the universe for itself to exist in, or, you’d have to redefine “consciousness” so broadly that it loses all sensible meaning (a system of atoms in a high-energy plasma would have to be conscious, for example), and both of those options look unacceptable to me.

Consciousness forms reality, it breaths life in to it, and what this tells us us is that the reality is like a synapse in the mind where a particle of information flows in and must find a receptor to deliver it's information. If there is no receptor then the compound does nothing; whatever the mass mind is conceiving is what will be created. This says that all information is all existing at all time. Only our own thinking describes the future. This is what the powers that be understand.
The first part suffers from the problem I just described – but I can’t dispense with it on that basis entirely because it is possible that “mind” is somehow a fundamental feature of physical reality. I’m reminded of Buddha’s statement; “all is bodhimind,” for example. The problem is that we seem to have no real understanding of the nature of mind/consciousness. So it’s impossible to interpret it in terms of physics. I guess that’s why we still call such issues “metaphysics.”

The last part gets into politics and economics, and perhaps the secret knowledge possessed by the sociopaths who have designed our civilization to serve their selfish interests. It reminds me a bit of the section in William Cooper’s book Behold a Pale Horse, where the economic system is modeled as an electrical circuit, to most efficiently funnel money and power to the handful of people who own and control the circuit. If such people really are engineering society in this manner, using science and long-standing occult knowledge in order to basically enslave and dominate the rest of humanity, then I think they should face a public tribunal for crimes against humanity, like the Nuremberg trials.

This idea is the basic fundamental reasoning behind the all important control paradigm which until very recently was entirely controlled by a very small few.
It still looks like a very small number are completely mind-controlling the vast majority, from where I’m sitting. Even most of my intelligent friends are, almost entirely, controlled by the corporate media + intelligence agency PsyOp machine.

But we shouldn't diverge into politics and the socioeconomic power structures that are destroying the world and crushing the last glimmers of human dignity from existence. Because most people are still mentally enslaved by one branch of propaganda or another, and discussing it only makes them angry and irrational.
 
Last edited:
Top