The ultimate game-world would be one where there is no way to prove your existence beyond the game-world?
We know the brain manufactures the experienced world from derivative information /of/about the world. In the universes refresh rate, in a tiny almost infinitesimal amount of time, the information of the current state is recorded, then changed at all positions of all spatial locations, such to produce the next frame in time.
For a time then, physical information is in the meta-position or between states. So surely this is a different kind of ‘information’ to physical info, in that, it is a replica of physical information but not itself physical in any sense of having mass or other physical attributes.
Now; which comes first, the physical information, or the meta-information?
A ‘real- game-world’ is still real even if projected, if we say that all of its constitution is real.
There is no answer to which comes first, since they are arranged in relative simultaneity. Second, both, are a differential product of a certain unity. There is consciousness sub atomic material, the behavior of
substances can be seen as proof of that in the two
slit experiment. Third, this ‘set-up’ is intentional, since, one cannot ‘exist’ without the other.
Intentionality is a pre-existential 'tendency', is the
best way to put it, as is various field of gravitation.
So you think they always exist together, as if orbiting one another?
That may be true, but if we see the set of meta positions or info not in physical but metaphysical terms, and put the physical set of informations to one side, are they not infinite sets?
The universe would be like a chord being played on an infinite guitar, where the chord represents comparative attractions [notes].
This attempts to resolve the original beginning issue ~ of the first incarnation of universe, being the same problem as if there were only a single universe with a beginning.
Since positing the metaphysical one one side and the cosmological in the other, infinity becomes another word or concept for unity. As difficult it it to imagine both, in terms of one another, whether it be two orbiting spheres, as Leibnitz has done, it is but a
description. Descriptions are derivative , as all of nature seems predicated on duality, and the duality results in a two fold representation. But it is only a
re-presentation, and it is the condition of it’s
perception. Nature’s wisdom saw to it that the particular can be filtered from the unity, which otherwise would remain hidden. The hidden unity is
the transcendental ideal. You are right in holding of
The harmonic analogy , again calculated by Liebnitz on that model. The concept of infinity, again is based on the dual, or dialectical reason of it’s foundation as
existence, this is why it becomes inconceivable, the
quantitAtive becomes differentiated from the conditions of it’s existence. Infinity is condition, whereby the idea of a quantum-of infinity becomes a
possible concept. There may not be finity,in the first place, the metaphysical may suffer infinite regress, and the infinitesimal is , a metaphysical concept of
meta-infinity. It exists only as a possibility, since there are no breaks of finite limits in a continuum. Infinity and finity are merely descriptions within given conditions of existence.
We do seem to be in a duality and that does seem contradictory in terms of infinities [which should not have limits]. But as you say; the duality is the reality and not the relative values yielded from that ‘engine’. Hence reality ‘uses’ measure however it wants to, be it ‘infinite’ or ‘finite’, and perhaps that is why we can have infinite sets and why infinity can be given cardinality.
It is not that this or that is the answer, but that everything is used and hence all answers/schemata are true even if contradicting.