The Matrix is Real

What if you were told that the Matrix is real? What if you were told that Zion exists?

What if you were told that Neo is alive, here in this world, in your world?

What if you were told that everything you saw it the Matrix Trilogy is true? What if you were told that while you are sitting right here in front of your computer and reading this very message, more and more redpills are being freed?

What if you were told that you are one of these redpills?

We can only show you the door. You have to walk through it. You can choose to believe it or not. You can choose to close this window, forget about this message and carry on with your life. Or you choose to act now and see how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Changes are coming. Minds will be freed. New future awaits you. Where do you want to be?

We’re not saying that here, now, you’re all walking around inside a massive computer simulation. If you think that: think again. But even when worlds shift, truth remains the same: that’s what makes it truth. And one way or another, most of you are walking around in a Matrix: the confines of what is described to you as ‘real’, ‘true’, ‘possible’, or ‘impossible’. Most of the time, these are just words, concepts. No, we can’t ‘leap tall buildings in a single bound’, or what have you. Were we to say that, we’d be lying… or role-playing. But we believe in freeing minds, on the path to building real peace. Curious? Visit http://www.truthofthespoon.net

What do you want me to answer that?

:confused:

Philosophy is becoming a grotesque sport which consists in inventing fanciful hypotheses which can’t be refuted (cf: multiverse) in order to cast doubt on any belief or system which aims at truth.

Yes, I agree. A good example would be reincarnation.

you mean the hypothesis of reincarnation being objected to the belief that the soul perishes with the body?

Fine Tuning of the Physical Constants of the Universe Parameter Max Deviation

Ratio of Electrons:Protons – 1 in 10 the 37th
Ratio of Electromagnetic Force:Gravity – 1 in 10 to the 40th
Expansion Rate of Universe – 1 in 10 to the 55th
Mass of Universe1 – 1 in 10 to the 59th
Cosmological Constant – 1 in 10 to the 120th

These numbers represent the maximum deviation from the accepted values, that would either prevent the universe from existing now, not having matter, or be unsuitable for any form of life.

Recent Studies have confirmed the fine tuning of the cosmological constant. This cosmological constant is a force that increases with the increasing size of the universe. First hypothesized by Albert Einstein, the cosmological constant was rejected by him, because of lack of real world data. However, recent supernova 1A data demonstrated the existence of a cosmological constant that probably made up for the lack of light and dark matter in the universe. However, the data was tentative, since there was some variability among observations. Recent cosmic microwave background (CMB) measurement not only demonstrate the existence of the cosmological constant, but the value of the constant. It turns out that the value of the cosmological constant exactly makes up for the lack of matter in the universe.

The degree of fine-tuning is difficult to imagine. Dr. Ross gives an example of the least fine-tuned of the above four examples in his book, The Creator and the Cosmos, which is reproduced here:

“One part in 10 to the 37th” is such an incredibly sensitive balance that it is hard to visualize. The following analogy might help: Cover the entire North American continent in dimes all the way up to the moon, a height of about 239,000 miles (In comparison, the money to pay for the U.S. federal government debt would cover one square mile less than two feet deep with dimes.). Next, pile dimes from here to the moon on a billion other continents the same size as North America. Paint one dime red and mix it into the billion of piles of dimes. Blindfold a friend and ask him to pick out one dime. The odds that he will pick the red dime are one in 10 to the 37th (thats 10 followed by 37 zero’s)

An Interesting Read with more links at the end of the first post.

evidence suggests to over 40% of scientist who have come of age, that such a fine balance can only leave one suggesting there IS a creator.

there are more weird things happening

another explanation for all that could be that the universe, by means of certain mechanisms, would make itself find balance
en effet, most things in nature seek to balance themselves right?
i can’t speak of actual forces or occurances, i’m not an astrophysicist
but to me, that sounds at least as plausible as a creator…

In these last two posts, you can see a perfect illustration of my point. :wink:

indeed they are :laughing:

The matrix is real :astonished: well not really, but I do think that its a good analogy, and also I think that the wachoski brothers (however you spell it), did inject a fair amount of philosophy into the movies. Mostly the matrix is taken to be “the brain in a vat”, but really in reality the majority of people(myself included at times) live in illusions. They create they’re own reality via their conditioning. Hence the majority of mankind are living in illusion, its just not a computer simulation(not that I could prove it isn’t). Anyways… that being said…

Is anyone out there? :sunglasses:

see somebody painted a red pill blue and then told me it was asprin, i never really had a choice. :laughing:

I would tell the person that he/she has watched The Matrix too many times! :smiley:

Yea, I also thought the Matrix was a good analogy. Not only for the reasons you mentioned but also how people who were inside the Matrix were “asleep”. Other things included “Agents” who want to keep the people “asleep” and the “Machines” who benefit from the people being asleep.

It was a very good trilogy but that website was a little too far-out for me.

Man, The Matrix was far too mediocre and vapid a flick to be inspiring “philosophy” discussions for this many years. :confused: For the love of God, Montresor, it must end.

The matrix is nothing but a mediocre retelling of the jesus myth.

No, I was refering to the nonsense of reincarnation being one of those fanciful irefutable ‘hypothesis’ (I use that word extreme loosely)

Argh - Artifact/Willem !!! Don’t you know this already…? :confused:

The answer’s there - right at the start of A.'s post:

*Universes have constants.
*For Human life to exist in a universe, said universe must possess
a given constant at value x(+/- value y).
*Humans notice and measure/calculate universal constants.
*This universe has humans living in it.

Therefore:

*Humans always measure/calculate the given constant as
value x(+/- value y) [Any other value would mean there’d be no humans around to measure it. ]
*No creator required - besides blind chance. :unamused:

It’s called the Anthropomorhic principle - go and read some Hawkings…

Easier way of saying it is that “the reason we see the universe exist the way it exists, is because we exist”

[edit] and I’m pretty sure its the anthropic principle.

I agree the philosophy of the matrix is not very deep, especially in the sequels. “but what is love?” “love is just a word, its what the word implys that matters”. Its all to basic, and lacks deep meaning for it to have crepted up in “philosophy discussions” as often as it has.

[edit] you might judge me because my avatar, and quote is from fight club :stuck_out_tongue: but I just think fight club paints a fairly accurate picture of the society we inhabit

Ahh - but my version’s got bullet points and algebra… You know - more scientific… :smiley:

(hurriedly checks book) :blush: :unamused:

On the Matrix - this prompts me on a subject related that’s been bugging me for a while - the old chestnut of ‘sense-data’ and not being able to prove what’s ‘real’.

When (not if) virtual reality gets to the point where all senses are covered: see example links…

sight/sound: http://www.eetimes.com/futureofsemis/directions/OEG20030923S0053
touch/smell/taste/body position awareness:
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:fWgJkGsY41IJ:terra.cs.nps.navy.mil/DistanceEducation/online.siggraph.org/2001/SpecialSessions/Sensapolooza-GuidedTourOfTheNewSiliconSenses/cdrom.pdf+prosthetics+"human+senses"&hl=en

…to an extent where ‘real-life’ and ‘virtual life’ become indistinguishable from the nuts and bolts sense-data POV, what then…?

Magic would work - Superman would fly through the sky - dragons would make you toast in the morning…

Every bugger’s going to want in on it… Imagine the classic D&D fantasy world brought to life… (I suspect the ‘summon babe’ spell would be high on the most-used list… :smiley: )

But seriously - wouldn’t society as we know it just keel over and die…? :wink:

Thoughts on a virtual post-card please.

Fer chrissakes, the ‘philosophy’ was moronic, the acting wooden (especially Reeve- yikes! :astonished: Watching that fuck attempt to act makes my skin itch), and it among the most overrated films in recent history. Even the ‘ground breaking’ effects have been so parodied by and bested by other, better films as to now look a bit dated. And that’s a pity since that’s really the only thing it had going for it.

Don’t get me wrong- I didn’t hate the film. It was an interesting bit of fluff (although I thought the second film was the best- God save us all from the third one, though…), but hardly weighty enough to be referenced in a discussion of philosophy. Or even a discussion of good movies, for that matter.

I dont know but i can say one thing for sure. “quoting from the movie”

Ignorance is surely NOT bliss… when it comes to the real world.