Neil Degrasse has been quoted speaking of the Universe as concieveably being a simulation. Is such a notion plausibly possible?

Neil Degrasse has been quoted speaking of the Universe as concieveably being a simulation. Is such a notion plausibly possible?

Views: 483

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You don't understand the BB if you think there is somewhere in the cosmos an "origin point." That point, according to the theory, expended to become the cosmos. There is no origin point. Or, to put it another way, that point expanded and we and the entire universe exist inside that point.

Your evidence?

Do we know where, in space, the Big Bang took place?
It's a common misconception that the Big Bang was an "explosion" that took place somewhere in space. But the Big Bang was an expansion of space itself. Every part of space participated in it. For example, the part of space occupied by the Earth, the Sun, and our Milky Way galaxy was once, during the Big Bang, incredibly hot and dense. The same holds true of every other part of the universe we can see.

Artists may find it more dramatic to draw a "fireball" expanding into space, but as far as we know, there would have been no such "ball." (source)

OR, there's this:

There’s no exact spot that the Big Bang happened. In fact, the Big Bang happened everywhere in the Universe. The problem generally comes from the term “Big Bang”. It brings to mind explosions, detonations, balloons being popped, and everything being blown out to chickenbasket hades. It’s too bad for us regular folk, this isn’t a good descriptive term for what the Big Bang was. (source)

Unseen, your sources lack evidence.
Stop believing all you read; start thinking.

Wow, that's quite a refutation you have there. What are YOUR "alternative facts"?

@Unseen,

"Do we know where, in space, the Big Bang took place?"

That's a contradictory statement. Anything outside the BB is undefined, at least space-time as we know it. The premise is that space-time itself analogous to an expanding sphere, in which 4-space is represented as the expanding surface of that sphere.

Scientists have found 'evidence' that the universe is a hologram. By looking at the universe just after the Big Bang, researchers claim to have discovered the first observational evidence of holographic cosmology – where the universe is contained to a 2D surface, and we only perceive our 3D world.

The idea for a holographic universe is not new. First suggested in the 1990s, it can be likened to characters on a TV show – they do not know their 3D world exists only on a 2D screen. In the same way, our 3D universe may just be an illusion – an illusion that can be tested.



In a holographic universe, all of the information in the universe is contained into 2D packages trillions of times smaller than an atom. Advanced telescopes and sensory equipment is now making it possible for scientists to detect hidden data revealing the "white noise" left over from the moment just after the universe was created (cosmic microwave background, or CMB).

At present there are inconsistencies between quantum physics and Einstein's theory of gravity. If the universe was a hologram, these would be solved.

Publishing their study in the journal Physical Review Letters, the researchers, from the UK, Canada and Italy, looked at the CMB to make complex comparisons between networks of features in Planck data and quantum field theory. Their findings showed some simple quantum theories could explain cosmological observations of the early universe – more so that more traditional theories like cosmic inflation could.

"Observations can be used to exclude some quantum field theory (QFT) models, while we also find models satisfying all phenomenological constraints," the researchers wrote. "We showed that holographic models based on three-dimensional perturbative QFT are capable of explaining the CMB data and are competitive to ΛCDM model (the standard model of Big Bang cosmology)."

http://http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/substantial-evidence-universe-holog...

" it can be likened to characters on a TV show – they do not know their 3D world exists only on a 2D screen"

Michael, although I know what you're trying to say, this is a weird analogy. You're talking about characters on a TV show like they're the guy out the Truman Show or something. Characters on a TV show are just pixels. Originally they were real people in real environments. Pixels on a TV screen don't know or think anything.

The whole text is from the link.
However to address your comment, I believe the author is comparing the TV screen to the 2D surface that we actually exist on if the evidence holds. We have the sensation of 3D which would be proven to be an illusion.
Oh, ok, not your words. Fair enough. I understand the point but think the author's analogy is sloppy.

Watch Black Mirror Season 3. It is a high probability, but someone has to be the first to escape to start freeing the rest of us.
The Matrix goes deep into the concept of how would the Woke people free everyone else? Over a long period of time. We wouldn't accept the new reality so readily if we are Woke suddenly. Possible psychosis or suicide for a large portion of us.

RSS

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service