How big is The Matrix?

This is a very good point. I agree with you serpent. There is no real way of knowing. I will continue on the computer game analogy. I think the matrix is as big as it needs to be. Its like in a game if you are not playing that level than it is not loaded on your system. It is only when you come to the next level (in lets say enter the matrix) that it even loads. I think the same can be said for the matrix.

Of course there is no evidence backing this issue up either way except for logic. But if the matrix is anything like a video game or computer program it would try to save energy and memory and only render that part as needed.

How do you know it is actually you that is dying? You are not looking back at your death. When you die you feel it. But in the "world-dream" that the A.I. created it is unknown "just how deep the rabbit hole goes..." Especially if it is a multi-layered A.I. generated "reality" created for the human inhabitants. 🙂 "I had a BAD dream that I died..." that sort of thing. So it keeps the human bodies safe from believing it is dead.

I am talking in terms of "expanded universe" for the MATRIX movies. I don't know what the outcome of REVOLUTIONS will be. I am having tremendous enjoyment out of this kind of speculation. I am exploring all the different dark avenues of the story. Excellent story.

As for your "desk universe", if you are referring to the "electron theory of the universe", then I believe that it is closer to the truth than we can possibly realize. And if it is true then it is true. An observer isn't necessary for it to be substantial. Humans also suffer from delusions and various other debilitating psychological situations so whether or not it sees something is irrelevant for absolute reality. We can never see "absolute reality". We are not psychologically nor spiritually equipped for "absolute reality".

As for the "desk universe" that you have, I will have to concede that it exists because I am incapable of "seeing" it. Regardless of what you tell me. 😄

There is no way of knowing if something is there or not unless it is observed. If it is not then it is in a constant state of flux. It will never be known if it is there or not because the moment you look to see it has to choose.

Now how this relates to the matrix. I think that the rest of the matrix world is not there unless it needs to be. If nobody is observing that part of the matrix it won't be there. There is no purpose in the system creating and substaining something if there is no need. And the program is all about purpose and logic.

The "knowing" doesn't make it unreal or real... the universe exists without us knowing about it just as it always has. It will be in existance eons after all humanity is gone forever. The knowing that it exists makes the sense of its awesomeness and its unimaginable timespan existance all the more acute... but that is only for us. It does not NEED us to be substantial. It is we who are on the road of "discovery" of existance.

We are still in the process of "knowing" who we are. Discovering "who" we are. 1,000 years ago humans believed the world was flat and nothing else existed anywhere else. 1,000 years later we "know" that was incorrect and that the Earth was ALWAYS round. So and so forth. Our perception does not change absolute reality, but absolute reality changes us. 😄

As for the different levels of the Matrix itself, the inhabitants don't have to observe it or even know it exists. That is for the benefit of the A.I.

that is an excelent point, but there is no denying proability. Until the first person observed the earth was round by what ever means they used the earth could have been flat. There is an inherint chance that is given to everything. You only know the earth is round because it has been observed and recorded. In fact the world could still be flat for all you know. Have you been around the world yourself. Maybe all of the books and pics are lies. How would you know that everyone is telling the truth or that it's real.

And that ladies and gents is the main idea behind the matrix movies as stated in m1. What is real; what you can touch, see, feel, or hear? What you can sense? These are all tools of observation. We have know idea what something is until we observe it ourselves. And from the movies, even then we don't know if it is real or not. Very scary when you start to think about it.

Like I said, it is all a matter of absolute reality. It can enhance and elevate or it can destroy. Humanity can either be enhanced by "seeing" absolute reality or humanity can self-destruct because that "knowledge" was too much for it. But in either case, humanity doesn't change what is absolutely real from being that. He may even try to destroy what is real to save itself, just like in the story where it tried to destroy the A.I. when humanity realized "what" it had created. Absolute reality. Yes its scarey because some of it is beyond our comprehension and some of it seems very threatening.

In fact, even now, humans still believe that there is no other life in the universe. Nevermind that the universe is about somewhere around 20 billion light years long in some directions and about 13 billion light years in other directions; with trillions upon trillion upon trillions of galaxies composed of stars and planets and moons. We still believe that there is no life out there but on earth. For many of us it will frighten us to the core if we discovered that there is intelligent life inhabiting a world only 4 light years away. Why? Because reality to us is that God created us in "his" image and nothing else exists.

So the utimate reality in the movies that an A.I. has incarcerated humanity for its own purposes will cause the crashing and bleeding out of the human crop. So illusions and dreamstates are preferable. 😄

I personally believe there other intelligent life forms somewhere. But as a rational scientifc mind i can not rule out that there are none. Your absolute reality is crap. There is only observed and unobsereved. You can not say that there is life in outer space because their are so many planets. There is a chance there isn't any.

So back to the point of this thread. You can not know if the matrix is a whole earth simulator because we haven't observed it yet. It might very well be. I personally BELIEVE (since that is all we can do until the movie tells us otherwise) that places and objects are only their when they are needed. Rather this is true or not is impossible to be determined because the moment you try to look (observe) than the items have to come out of flux and pick a state.

Jesus, Serpent, you talk an incredible amount of crap in the face of modern scientific knowledge.

Whether a consciousness perceives something or not is irrelevent to any point I was making.

And my whole point was simply saying that you were wrong in saying that things did not happen unless someone was looking at it. I was correcting you and saying that 'observation' does not mean 'people looking'- and to think so REALLY pisses off the people who worked this sort of thing out.

And show you the dead/alive cat? WTF? What kind of non sequitur is THAT? I was simply, again, pointint out that the only stage at which something was uncertain was when it was not connected with anything in the universe, which was the basis of that theory.

Everything else you said in reply to me was COMPLETE irrelevance.

Now, listen, people, these threads are being dragged RIDICULOUSLY off-topic and I do not intend to stand for it any more.

Further attempts to drag ANY thread in this area into a scientific and/or philisophical conversation not relevant to the thread subject will be eidted. There are some people who don;t want to be so ridiculously anal about these things and these threads are being ruined for these peole with this total mush. It ends.

Thankyou, Mac, for at least TRYING to stay on-topic.

mac11586 said:
… There is no real way of knowing. I will continue on the computer game analogy. I think the matrix is as big as it needs to be. Its like in a game if you are not playing that level than it is not loaded on your system. It is only when you come to the next level (in lets say enter the matrix) that it even loads. I think the same can be said for the matrix.

I agree.

Maul’s Woman said:
As for your "desk universe", if you are referring to the "electron theory of the universe", then I believe that it is closer to the truth than we can possibly realize. And if it is true then it is true. An observer isn't necessary for it to be substantial.

It sounds like you are preaching the Religion of Materialism (i.e. the matter is real [i.e. the Matrix is “real”]).

But as a wise man once said … There is no spoon!

M.W.:
Humans also suffer from delusions and various other debilitating psychological situations so whether or not it sees something is irrelevant for absolute reality. We can never see "absolute reality". We are not psychologically nor spiritually equipped for "absolute reality".

Maybe that is because You are the only absolute reality?

How do you know for certain that all of the things you perceive (the universe around you) is “absolutely” real? Maybe you are just imagining it all?

You are certainly capable of such a feat (creating a reality around yourself), you do it every night when you dream. Maybe everything is just a dream, and you imagining these films as your subconscious’ way of explaining it to yourself?

M.W.:
As for the "desk universe" that you have, I will have to concede that it exists because I am incapable of "seeing" it. Regardless of what you tell me.

Yet I am willing to bet that you do not believe that I have a pet dragon in my garage based on similar “evidence” …

Well there is one way to end the debate.

Like i said earlier until it is observed this situation is in flux. Until we see another city, state, country, or continent we have no way of knowing. There maybe only one big city or the whole world. But until it is OBSERVED we won't know.

No matter how much we believe in absolute reality.

mac11586 said:
There is no way of knowing if something is there or not unless it is observed. If it is not then it is in a constant state of flux.

If you don’t observe it, then how do you know it is in flux? (maybe it isn’t there until you “observe” [imagine observing] it?)

Maul’s Woman:
The "knowing" doesn't make it unreal or real... the universe exists without us knowing about it just as it always has.

So there is no Matrix?

How can you be so sure?

Maul’s Woman:
It will be in existance eons after all humanity is gone forever. The knowing that it exists makes the sense of its awesomeness and its unimaginable timespan existance all the more acute... but that is only for us. It does not NEED us to be substantial. It is we who are on the road of "discovery" of existance.

I agree with you, but the second part of this statement seems to contradict the first. Consciousness can create a Matrix, but a Matrix cannot create consciousness. (ergo the Matrix [the matter] isn’t real. … and that is the entire point of these movies in my humble opinion.)

mac11586 said:
So back to the point of this thread. You can not know if the matrix is a whole earth simulator because we haven't observed it yet. It might very well be. I personally BELIEVE (since that is all we can do until the movie tells us otherwise) that places and objects are only their when they are needed. Rather this is true or not is impossible to be determined because the moment you try to look (observe) than the items have to come out of flux and pick a state.

I agree with what you are saying mac, but isn’t that analogous to saying that you can’t imagine what something is like without imagining it first?

The fact is the Wachowski brothers are making an attack against the philosophy of Materialism in these films. In my opinion it is the main reason the movies have such a cult following.

Mac, having a rational scientific mind does not believe or entertain the belief that there is no life in the universe but humanity on a small planet somewhere in the outer rim of our galaxy, in a universe with trillions upon trillions of galaxies; Centrillion upon centillions of stars of every kind and planets of every kind and moons of everykind. That is not a logical scientific mode of thought. 🙂 It would believe in the opposite. 500 years ago thinking that there is no one but us would be acceptable on any score because our knowledge was EXTREMELY limited and threatened by religious edicts.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Serpent
[B]If you don’t observe it, then how do you know it is in flux? (maybe it isn’t there until you “observe” [imagine observing] it?)

Maybe my termanology isn't clear by flux i mean that it can be in either state, there or not there. I say flux because it might even be changing for all we know. And obviously it isn not there ( or there for that matter) until you observe it.

I think that we might be arguing the same point though. Not sure yet. I do agree with your whole conc. makes the matrix theory.

🙂

ya kind of missed the point. Maybe you missed my first line. I do believe it but their is a chance there is none. A scientfic mind would not rule out anything until it has been tested and observed. That was the point i was trying to get across. No matter what my beliefs are I can't impress them on you with out proof. Now do you understand

An enlightened scientific mind isn't rigid. It will also realize that not everything in life and existance can be observe. That would not negate its existance either. Observation is for our benefit and it doesn't change the nature of existance. Our ability to observe anything is at best very very very miniscule.

There are very very rigid "scientific" minds who negate the existance of anything and everything that it cannot prove scientifically. THAT is an arrogance in classical scientific thinking.

Those who negate without proof or evidence are people who don't want to be led any other way. Tunnel vision comes to my mind. A person must always be open to new ideas or that is when they stop progressing. You will never know if something is changing until you can observe it more than once.

There are many things in the universe that cannot be observed. There are things in inner space that cannot be observed, but that does not mean they don't exist in absolute reality. Many humans find it safe and secure to think that if they cannot observe it then it isn't there.

Maul’s Woman:
An enlightened scientific mind isn't rigid. It will also realize that not everything in life and existance can be observed. That would not negate its existance either. Observation is for our benefit and it doesn't change the nature of existance. Our ability to observe anything is at best very very very miniscule.

I agree. Observation alone is not what constitutes existence. An unobserved phenomena could have objective existence (if not now, then in the future), but nothing can exist which cannot even in theory be perceived. In other words, Logical Consistency is also a hallmark of objective (“scientific”) reality.

For example, it is impossible that a 4-sided triangle exists.

There are very very rigid "scientific" minds who negate the existance of anything and everything that it cannot prove scientifically. THAT is an arrogance in classical scientific thinking.

Once again I agree. There is a difference between being a Skeptic, and being a Cynic (or pessimist).

i]Originally posted by The Serpent [/i]
[B]I agree. Observation alone is not what constitutes existence. An unobserved phenomena could have objective existence (if not now, then in the future), but nothing can exist which cannot even in theory be perceived. In other words, Logical Consistency is also a hallmark of objective (“scientific”) reality.

What is reality though? Who is to say that a triangle is three sided? It is what we have been told, but does that make it true? Yes it all people constitute it as so, but if someone else obsevers something different, does that make it less of a reality? REality is always being replaced by something higher, ie. newton's lae, theory of relativity.

I LOVE science but I am TERRIBLE in math. Love math too but... *sigh*. I love that saying where mathematics is the language of nature. Did you ever see that movie called PI (the symbol for pi). Love it.

Well anyway the foursided triangle is a dimensional theory isn't it? I believe there are many continuums as well, but they cannot be observed but that doesn't mean that the 4th, 5th, and maybe even a 6th dimension is unreal. The 4th dimension is very very real, but we do not yet have the technology to utilize it or observe it. But then who knows what the United States and other advanced western nations know scientifically. We do not make all our knowledge available to the masses.

But in terms of the MATRIX I used that logic to explain some of the things the system was doing to the human subjects. After 200 years such a system would have incredible scientific knowledge, but decided to keep its human subjects at a certain level. For it's own safety?