What is the world made up of ?

[BurnedOut]

I am basing off this question in terms of Philosophy and Science both. However, in this scenario, I would like to define philosophy as scientific, derived from logic and technical.

I'm thinking that the world is made of mathematical functions. The mathematical functions are made up of binary logic gated and binary logic gates are made up of binary digits. What's your theory ?

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

(E8 lattice) 8-dimensional cellular automata (baseline rules of physics) 10^99 per cubic centemeter.

See:
Quantum Gravity Research - YouTube

 

[BurnedOut]

Holy fucking shit, I didn't know until now that I've been writing a philosophy essay on this without even knowing about this concept yet conceiving the idea in the exact similar way. I'm talking about elementary cellular automaton

I suppose you can deduce that from the fact that I've already mentioned 'binary digits'

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

If you ask a worm what the world is made of, he will say "dirt". In the same way, some humans are under the impression that since we use mathematics to describe various phenomena, the world must be made of mathematics.

 

[Black Rose]

If you ask a worm what the world is made of, he will say "dirt". In the same way, some humans are under the impression that since we use mathematics to describe various phenomena, the world must be made of mathematics.

Colors are mysterious. Experiencing blue currently, has no math equation. A math equation will probably not explain the taste of strawberries. We will be able to model in computers all the spikes and their locations when we taste strawberries and see blue.

 

[onesteptwostep]

I'm inclined to think that the world is actually made up of nothing, like how the buddhists think about existence. Some scientists at CERN think that the world shouldn't exist anyway, because of antimatter, but we do anyway. On a purely mathematical reasoning, the universe shouldn't exist, apparently.

 

[Black Rose]

I'm inclined to think that the world is actually made up of nothing, like how the buddhists think about existence. Some scientists at CERN think that the world shouldn't exist anyway, because of antimatter, but we do anyway. On a purely mathematical reasoning, the universe shouldn't exist, apparently.

In the movie The Dark Side of Time the solution to the missing antimatter is that because the spin of antimatter changes when going backward in time that matter-antimatter cancelation is not done to release megatons of energy.

The basics are that antimatter travels back in time and mater travels forward in time so the spin directions do not make both explode.

As far as the universe being made of nothing. I think it is made of information and rules. When I heat my egg I have breakfast. A solid rule people should try.

 

[Haim]

Some scientists at CERN think that the world shouldn't exist anyway,

that just media click bait, "shouldn't " just mean they don't know/understand not that it does not exist.

This is a question not far for asking how created the universe/multiverse, we can not really know.
It just mind boggling, at some point you don't have matter as it can not be infinity divided to more points, and then what the fuck is wave,string,energy and quantum particles.

 

[BurnedOut]

I can say the world is made of mathematical functions but then we hit a roadblock. Now, we can't decide whether these mathematical functions are sentient in nature and create their own mathematical functions or they already exist (randomness prevails). If they already exist and are simply being executed (every process is predetermined) then the concept of time seemingly vanishes. I'm talking about randomness vs determinism over here.

But the only thing is, the universe is infinite. Considering the hypothesis that binary digits have made the universe, there will be infinite number of floating binary digits and infinite number of mathematical functions arisen from it. These mathematical functions are like atoms waiting to get ionised and by that I mean, the mathematical function is executed by a binary digit or a string of binary digits which creates an anomaly and causes a chain reaction. I surmise this is how interaction between entities take place

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

From the quantum gravity research channel, I learned that under certain conditions information can travel faster than light and the future can affect the past (eliminating determinism). As to the math function being what everything is made of, nothing is smaller than planck's length. The E8 lactic is like a logic gate. Information is nonlocal yet follows interaction rules by proximity. We could say entanglement is a set of new gates that exist outside of space as we know it. A lattice can connect to another lattice with no in-between space travel.

An analogy is that a computer can connect to any computer over the internet but usually stays close to the computers next to them. Entanglement is when two computers stay linked by the internet no matter where they move. Time travel may happen as experiences have shown the answer to particle interactions could have only worked out if the answer came from the future. Quantum particles problem the future and choose a future pathway.

adinkras.

Simplified: the cellular automata connection rules can connect nonlocally across space and atemporally across time (past, future)

Why these rules exist in our universe is still a big question. They allow the energy in our brains to ask these questions.

 

[Bad Itch]

It's 40% Bad Itch. The rest isn't important.

 

[BurnedOut]

The E8 lattice quantum theory is groundbreaking. Took me a while to assimilate it but now I get it and it's based of the cellular automata theory. However E8 lattice theory too has some assumptions which might seem mandatory I.e the presence of sentience in a single lattice cell or in reality (as it says) a 3D tetrahedron.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[BurnedOut]

From the quantum gravity research channel, I learned that under certain conditions information can travel faster than light and the future can affect the past (eliminating determinism). As to the math function being what everything is made of, nothing is smaller than planck's length. The E8 lactic is like a logic gate. Information is nonlocal yet follows interaction rules by proximity. We could say entanglement is a set of new gates that exist outside of space as we know it. A lattice can connect to another lattice with no in-between space travel.

An analogy is that a computer can connect to any computer over the internet but usually stays close to the computers next to them. Entanglement is when two computers stay linked by the internet no matter where they move. Time travel may happen as experiences have shown the answer to particle interactions could have only worked out if the answer came from the future. Quantum particles problem the future and choose a future pathway.

Simplified: the cellular automata connection rules can connect nonlocally across space and atemporally across time (past, future)

Why these rules exist in our universe is still a big question. They allow the energy in our brains to ask these questions.

No no no, the whole point of presence of rules is that they are merely illusions. Rules are inducted from the result. And the number of inductions can be infinite. Hence, there can be infinite number of theories and ways the way the universe was formed.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[TAC]

I've often wondered what "space" is made up of. As in if I were to bottle up a jar of the stuff between atoms, what would I find? Nothing seems to obvious answer, but think about atoms in motion. To be in motion they must exert energy (heat generally), but when they move what are they displacing to occupy new locations. Once again, if there is nothing there, than you could say the space is vacant, but then why would atoms need to exert energy to move? Back to square one. It cant be antimatter as antimatter in contact with matter produce photons. It'd be a lot brighter in that scenario. Unless night time is just a giant blackout curtain over the atmosphere.

 

[Black Rose]

No no no, the whole point of presence of rules is that they are merely illusions. Rules are inducted from the result. And the number of inductions can be infinite. Hence, there can be infinite number of theories and ways the way the universe was formed.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

Yes, an infinite number of ways but only in the category set of infinity that allows this universe to produce life. Many universes can exist that have no possibility of life forms in them, so that is a category of infinite universes without life by rules inducted not in the category of infinity where humans are possible. In a universe with rules that prevent life gravity may make it that only certain star types exist that prevent planets from forming. The speed of life maybe 12 times faster. The universe expands faster so heat death occurs before life happens. All sorts of things to prevent life. Infinite rules sets exist for universes without the possibility humans.

The rules in our universe allowed life but not all possible rule allow this.
Only a subset of rules that is still infinite as a sub infinity of rules allowing life or not.

 

[BurnedOut]

Yes, an infinite number of ways but only in the category set of infinity that allows this universe to produce life. Many universes can exist that have no possibility of life forms in them, so that is a category of infinite universes without life by rules inducted not in the category of infinity where humans are possible. In universe with rules that prevent life gravity may make it that only certain star types exist that prevent planets from forming. The speed of life maybe 12 times faster. The universe expands faster so heat death occurs before life happens. All sorts of things to prevent life. Infinite rules sets exist for universes without the possibility humans.

If you consider that every 3D tetrahedron contains sentience, every entity existing in this universe, the universe itself its a living being.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

If you consider that every 3D tetrahedron contains sentience, every entity existing in this universe, the universe itself its a living being.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

But very few can self-reflect.

What do you think of the difference between a 12-year-old kid and a rock of 2 pounds?

 

[BurnedOut]

But very few can self-reflect.

What do you think of the difference between a 12-year-old kid and a rock of 2 pounds?

None actually. The 12 year old kid is made of up logic gates which are numerically more than a rock. However, both of them have the capability to exercise sentience in order to ensure their existence in the universe to a certain point

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

None actually. The 12 year old kid is made of up logic gates which are numerically more than a rock. However, both of them have the capability to exercise sentience in order to ensure their existence in the universe to a certain point

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

Is it important for the rock to understand what you just said here?

Would a 12-year-old be more able to understand what you just have said?

 

[BurnedOut]

Is it important for the rock to understand what you just said here?

Would a 12-year-old be more able to understand what you just have said?

Ahem, we are talking in universal terms. Quit nitpicking.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

Ahem, we are talking in universal terms. Quit nitpicking.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

In some universes under certain rules, human life is possible. Only in a subset of infinity do these rules show up. I assume that only human like life forms can self-reflect and ask questions we ask right now: what rule make it possible for us to exist and ask these questions. So well it may be that all tetrahedrons can have experience, humanoids can ask questions about existence. I see that the importance of humans existence is to know these things. Not all rules can allow for the existence of creatures that have the ability to ask questions. Some rules do.

 

[Black Rose]

Hence, there can be infinite number of theories and ways the way the universe was formed.

No, only some rules allow human life. Our universe in order to sustain human life needs a specific subset of the infinite number of rules. The rest of the rules in the other subsets do not allow human life.

 

[sushi]

i think graph theory (math) is a possible explanation for things in a very small level, like points and lines, but below the planck length everything is uncertain.

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

One can make up any model one wishes about the world – cellular automata, graph theory, or whatever – just like there are several different models for the atom, which are not mutually exclusive and have each their use in different circumstances. But ultimately, what the world is made of is not a scientific question. Science will never answer that question, because how would you empirically test any conjecture regarding that?

But my personal opinion is that the world is made up of Buddha's ass sweat

 

[Niclmaki]

Stuff

 

[kora]

I don't understand what you mean maths is our brain's method of processing the world not what the world is actually made of. Maybe I've misunderstood you or have not done enough math

 

[Niclmaki]

I don't understand what you mean maths is our brain's method of processing the world not what the world is actually made of. Maybe I've misunderstood you or have not done enough math

It’s a classic argument. Mathematicians fall in love with math so much they want it to exist in reality. Like the literal number 5 exists. This idea does get a lot of support because of how unreasonably useful and correct math has been.

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

I don't understand what you mean maths is our brain's method of processing the world not what the world is actually made of. Maybe I've misunderstood you or have not done enough math

The world contains certain regularities. We can make perfect mathematical models which capture these regularities yet this is quite far from knowing what generated the regularities, or what the true innate reality of those regularities are. Newton himself made this point in his Principia. "I feign no hypotheses" he wrote.

You can take a perfect mathematical model, say of water flow via differential equations, and code it up on a computer. That doesn't mean your computer is going to get wet.

 

[onesteptwostep]

It’s a classic argument. Mathematicians fall in love with math so much they want it to exist in reality. Like the literal number 5 exists. This idea does get a lot of support because of how unreasonably useful and correct math has been.

Goddamn Pythgoreans and their number forms.

 

[sushi]

the answer used to be atoms, but then that turns out to be false in many sense.

you cant zoom past the planck scale because lightwave and electrons is too large.