Simulation Theory and the Simpsons?
I'm not ready to post the (finished) video technical presentation.? I'm not holding back anything, you can see the presentation and more if you look at "The Fractal Universe," by me (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CKVBFRN6).? I'm editing, but even though it has a few spectacular typos, it's as accurate as anything else on the subject and is the first comprehensive scientific presentation of the model since the bigger loose ends were tied up.? I only mention this because we're running out of time to save the world and this science can accomplish that.
This post, however, tackles the more significant issue, "how does this relate to the Simpsons."
Before getting there, it's worth noting that there is a stream of articles which are where I was between 2012 or 2016, which puts me 6-10 years ahead of everyone else, although the initial work was all over the page, it took quite a while to solve the Rubick's cube it represented.?
But let's talk about these Johnny Come Lately articles briefly before we get to the issue at hand:
Scientists Discovered A ‘Missing Law’ Of Nature That Could Explain The Universe’s Evolution (msn.com);?
This is the smart people coming up with the model I shared in 2019 to the APS, but without all the math.? This is not to denigrate their work which is brilliant, assuming my work is brilliant. The fractal math is missing, the crossover to chemistry, also missing, the explanation of gravity...well you get it. If you look hard enough you can find those early papers of mine which were published for peer review, but there were holes, mistakes, and the transition to chemistry was not until 2019-2020 and even that transition was limited until late 2022.
This is similarly behind, but now someone is adding "infodynamics" a superfluous term, but worth considering, because it turns out that one law runs the universe, not the suggested laws in these non-sensical articles.
领英推荐
I am not, of course, the one who came up with the concept, which happened before I was born, therefore ensuring that I did not have the chance to originate the concept. When I came up with my model, it slowly drifted into Information Physics over several years. Information physics has been around conceptually since 1945. As soon as binary programming came into existence, the idea of information as a state of matter also came into existence. Hologram and simulation theory hobbled along after it, as did my model which is not just information physics, we can call it "information physics plus" although I call it AuT despite the problems that name carries with it.
This article "proving" simulation theory is interesting also because the authors use the same math that I used in 2013, half of it anyway.?www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/scientist-publishes-evidence-that-the-simulation-theory-is-correct/ar-AA1i5q58?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=031c28408d3b4452a1eaab0aca0dec22&ei=17?The underlying article: "On the roles of function and selection in evolving systems | PNAS," gives the details. My early math and this may not look much alike to a non-mathematician, but the relationship between log2 and 2^n is that log2(2^n) = n. This is because log2 is the inverse function of 2^n. In other words, if y = 2^n, then n = log2(y). For example, if we take n = 3, then 2^n = 8. Therefore, log2(8) = 3.
These so-called "real scientists," fail to cite my work, they should be ashamed, but I am sure they are not.
Let's get to the matter at hand. If you take out the comedy and don't care about the math, this provides one of the better explanations of simulation theory out there:? https://youtu.be/qebHw3qLOEw?si=K0yigy5Ovl2zZmiW?Starting at the 5-minute mark, this shows how pop culture views simulation theory.
Over a decade back I started the initial work which was to lead to solving the space-time continuum; something I did not think I'd be able to do.? I'm not even sure I set out to do it.? I did want to look a little more closely at what time was (is? will be?); but it seemed like a fanciful goal.? Now that I know what time is, I'm not impressed.
There was and is a lot of stupidity to get through.? Quantum Field Theory being the latest bit of nonsense.? What is weird is that information physics is getting close to 80 years old.? To think in that period of time no one else would see what is literally all around us, ubiquitous, is hard to believe.? Those "in charge," have turned out to be unimaginative, and in many cases obstinate.
In the Simpsons bit, I find myself being portrayed by Bart Simpson.? The rules falling in front of me as I wander through the alleyways of my life during one of the more difficult and wonderful seasons of my life, now going on 60 plus seasons, slightly more than the Simpsons although I fear they will pass me one day.