If the universe was fine tuned for our life...

[Heywood]

It has rules, I get that. But what is a space continuum?

Space is a dimensional extant where things happen. By dimensional I mean the space has dimensions. In our reality it has 3 spatial dimensions and 1 time dimension(as far as we know). Continuum refers to continuity. It isn't broken up into chunks. In Second Life, when you teleport to a new land I imagine you are leaving one server and moving onto another. Each server is its own sub reality.

Consider simulation hypothesis which contends that our reality is just a simulation. I think it fair to consider our reality a valid reality even if it turns out to be a simulation....or a procedural generation as Rhythmn would call it. If our reality is a valid reality even if it is a simulation then why wouldn't other simulations also be valid realities?

---

I would be -amazed- if a mathematical description of your second life house was even remotely close to a mathematical description of your actual house......the game is checking files and addresses, not counting inches. But feel free to describe your actual house mathematically, and we'll see how the game engine would handle that, eh?

To mathematically describe the area of a room of your home, we would use the formula: Area=Length x Width. To mathematically describe the area of a room in a Second Life house.....we would use the formula: Area= Length x Width.

[The Grand Nudger]

Space is a dimensional extant where things happen. By dimensional I mean the space has dimensions. In our reality it has 3 spatial dimensions and 1 time dimension(as far as we know). Continuum refers to continuity. It isn't broken up into chunks. In Second Life, when you teleport to a new land I imagine you are leaving one server and moving onto another. Each server is its own sub reality.

Each server is a physical location -within this reality-. There are no "dimensions" in the box, understand? There are descriptions of variables, there is implementation - you aren't teleporting anywhere, your character doesn't even move so far as the engine is concerned (the background moves around the character). This should be obvious...if you've ever run "100yards" in a game...despite your screen being approx half an inch deep........

To mathematically describe the area of a room of your home, we would use the formula: Area=Length x Width. To mathematically describe the area of a room in a Second Life house.....we would use the formula: Area= Length x Width.

We might, but Second Life won't. Second life will use a command that pulls a file. That's how Second Life describes your house, mathematically. Any measurement you might make regarding your Second Life house as if it were an actual house rather than a file that contained artwork....would be an imposition, and the game engine couldn't do a damned thing with it.

Your "observations" are misunderstanding of computing from first principles to implementation. But hats off to the designers of second life....they;ve apparently convinced you that rather than arranging pretty pictures...they've opened a portal to another dimension, chock..full...of rabbits.

[Heywood]

We might, but Second Life won't. Second life will use a command that pulls a file. That's how Second Life describes your house, mathematically. Any measurement you might make regarding your Second Life house as if it were an actual house rather than a file that contained artwork....would be an imposition.

Your "observations" are misunderstanding of computing from first principles onward Heywood.

That file is going to contain things like length of a particular wall that is to be rendered. It might not be in inches....its probably in pixels....but objects in Second Life are still described mathematically the same as they are in real life.

Don't locations in Skyrim use a coordinate system that is essentially the same a latitude and longitude we use to describe points on earth?

[The Grand Nudger]

That file is going to contain things like length of a particular wall that is to be rendered. It might not be in inches....its probably in pixels....but objects in Second Life are still described mathematically the same as they are in real life.

B and I mine..so you could see how ridiculous that statement was. You just described one way (and that's a level of arch down btw, the file that second life pulls won't even be described by pixel count) that they are -not- described the same way. They aren't even in the same ballpark. You couldn't even build a -box- if I gave you the hardware address for the file that contains the artwork made out of pixels that is interpreted by your machine, and no amount of my describing that same box in language that you would understand will get the game engine any closer to rendering a box.

Don't locations in Skyrim use a coordinate system that is essentially the same a latitude and longitude we use to describe points on earth?

Go find me some latitude and longitude markers on the ground? We impose latitude and longitude just as we impose definitions for variables in Skyrim - which would include coordinates on the pictures that move around you as you navigate through the game world.

(seriously, stop using computer games, this is fucking horrible man)

[Heywood]

Space is a dimensional extant where things happen. By dimensional I mean the space has dimensions. In our reality it has 3 spatial dimensions and 1 time dimension(as far as we know). Continuum refers to continuity. It isn't broken up into chunks. In Second Life, when you teleport to a new land I imagine you are leaving one server and moving onto another. Each server is its own sub reality.

Each server is a physical location -within this reality-. There are no "dimensions" in the box, understand? There are descriptions of variables, there is implementation - you aren't teleporting anywhere, your character doesn't even move so far as the engine is concerned (the background moves around the character). This should be obvious...if you've ever run "100yards" in a game...despite your screen being approx half an inch deep........

The character does move from point to point in the game. When you play the game, you are using a viewer. The viewer allows you to see in your reality what is happening in the reality that is the game, or evolution simulator, etc. You are conflating the space in which your viewer exists with the space in which your game character or simulant exists.

It is entirely possible that you Rhythm exist only in some computer somewhere....yet your reality is as every bit valid regardless of where it lies.

[robvalue]

If all realities require a creator, then the reality containing our creator requires a creator. Who is in another reality. Which requires a creator, and so on. So we have an infinite chain of realities. Is that a reasonable hypothesis?

If not all realities require a creator, then how do you know our one does?

[The Grand Nudger]

The character does move from point to point in the game. When you play the game, you are using a viewer.

You mean a computer screen. No, Heywood, the character doesn't move - you are enjoying the illusion of motion as the scenery is moved around your character. That's how motion is handled in a computer game.

The viewer allows you to see in your reality what is happening in the reality that is the game, or evolution simulator, etc. You are conflating the space in which your viewer exists with the space in which your game character or simulant exists.

Because your screen lacks depth, and because those characters are not being filmed (nor could you determine, even if filmed, that it was the characters or the scenery moving, unless it were 50's beach movie wonky ofc)......game designers had to learn to take advantage of your eye. Understand?

It is entirely possible that you Rhythm exist only in some computer somewhere....yet your reality is as every bit valid regardless of where it lies.

I'm leaning towards that being more than just a possibility. But that isn't going to have anything to say about the world exterior to that computer (and validity isn't even a relevant concept in -that- discussion unless you want to do some work).

(Seriously, stop with video game references, you don't have a clue amigo, isn't there some other way you can make this argument? Some other set of observations along this line that are actually observations, rather than misunderstandings? Perhaps use -your observations- and describe all of the ways that these are similar to simulations or procedural generations- you've been a half inch from greatness a couple of times in this thread - I keep thinking that as soon as you drop the requirement of intellect or creator business as camo for god you might actually have an honest to goodness "aha!" moment. Just so damned close...need a push?)

[Heywood]

If all realities require a creator, then the reality containing our creator requires a creator. Who is in another reality. Which requires a creator, and so on. So we have an infinite chain of realities. Is that a reasonable hypothesis?

If not all realities require a creator, then how do you know our one does?

I never said all realities require a creator.

I said our reality appears to be a sub reality. I also said that it appears that sub realities require creators.

I believe there must be some master reality that has always existed.

[robvalue]

It appears to be a sub reality?

What does a reality look like that is not a sub reality, so you can tell the difference?

[FatAndFaithless]

And how can you extrude statements about the reality "above" our own if our only ability to investigate sub-realities involves sub-realities below our own? We have no way of looking at our reality from the "outside", so how the hell can we make any statements about it at all?