Robots debating; ‘what is this’.
Is there anything wrong with what the robots are seeing?..
Image we have a bunch of robots sat around a table, they have been given all the technology required to make an experiment; all I am going to do is place a curly straw [like for milkshakes] on the table in front of them and ask ‘what is this’ - define.
…I will add that to begin with this is not a search at the atomic level or anything complex like that. We will soon see that the debate will super-cede that level of interpretation.
I will then ask a series of questions:
- What is this, where does it begin and where does it end: If you placed two different sized green bracelets onto a black background on your monitor, how do you know if one is smaller or if it’s further away. The black background represents infinity, where we can acknowledge that prior to the universe existing or prior to there being comparatives, there is no way to determine size nor any other dimension.
2.What do you see: Look at the straw on the table in its centre; now send each other the image you are seeing, isolating the straw from anything else, and display the ‘complete’ vision of that object. You now see a circle of straws much like spokes on the wheel of a bicycle. This is what a multi-perspective image of light looks like, irrespective of the consideration that as a physical object the straw is spatially located.
3.Ad infinitum: if we now envision/generate a sphere of points of perspective around the straw, we now have an orb of spoke-like light straws. Keep adding points until the orb is uniform. Now move the straw [as an object on a screen or in the robots processing [not the actual thing]] and the relative sphere. You see how you extend the orb in an organic or otherwise shape-shifting manner, until if we repeat numerous times, we will end up filling the entire visual field.
4.What is a wave of light: Is it possible to determine a wave or any other shape within the visual field? Can we conclude that in fact much like in general relativity where gravity doesn’t exist but is more about differing perspectives, that light only has shape according to ones perspective i.e. If we isolate it via a given perspective view upon it?
Note; Given that the universe is holographic [as this also suggests] and information based, [perspective based things do correlate in the ‘world’], that light is the universal medium, that heat is simply atoms vibrating and above all, that quantum particles can be in two places or more at once and cannot be located with exactitude. Then we add in the problems of infinity being initially without dimension and perspective, we can now view the object differently…
5.When informations correlate a respective energy pattern [e.g. A wave or particle] then exists. When you look at a star its relative distance and physical forms become apparent.
…as opposed to the idea that there is a physical object actually present. In other words, the universe is indeed holographic and not physical. Distance doesn’t really exist, one has but to correlate informations to travel to any part of the universe, it is as if everything is right next to each other. In fact everything is in the same place [is infinite], but your forms are giving it perspective. We should note that the universe [its information system] also gives itself perspective, that is how information based holographic entities exist outside of yours and all of our existence [is the world around us].
Robot questions:
A. Light is a wavelength and so I can visualise it being without ends far more easily than say an electron, which has a spin. One would assume a spin to have finite qualities at least?
Reply; an electron has ‘part of a spin’ and not a full spin, analogously you can imagine it as like a dolphin jumping through the surface of an infinite ocean, and then back into its depths.
B. How many ‘dolphins’or quantum particles are there? Surely there is a limit.
Reply; the limit is in the amount of perspectives & informations relating things which there are out there. I dunno, a denumerable amount? Perhaps there are infinite sets of informations but differences in perspectives only correlate a proportion of them at any one time. Further than that would be a description of how and why the universe exists and is a given size at least in its own eyes. I don’t know that and this is simply a study concerning what any given thing is. My guess is that the universe as per our conclusions, is not a thing.
hmm that was mostly me debating, but do you think the robots would agree with any or all of that?
_