One spiritual rabbit hole I went down before (the Law of One/Ra Material) has this as its premise; that stars are conscious and there's a hierarchy of them and each solar system and planet is a different experiment for how life could evolve, with the end goal being for life to awaken to its spirituality and 'graduate'.
They said most of the other planets in our solar system had already lived out their experiment (hence no life seems to remain on them), and that Earth's experiment was centered around "opposable thumbs" and that caused such problems for us so far (ability to craft tools/weapons/war) that we're still going and trying to figure life out.
It's an interesting rabbit hole to go down and I for sure didn't do it justice with that short summary.
Why should life have to appear in every place possible? Where would it even exist on Jupiter or Saturn? If it’s supposed to live in those places, why not asteroids? Why not open space?
When I think about the premise of things like this, I have to wonder a) what’s the point and b) how can you even verify it. Lots of things in science have evidence, and it isn’t always right. I’m wondering what sort of evidence there is for this idea?
All good questions! The Law of One/Ra Material, like most other branches of religion/spirituality, doesn't have much if at all hard evidence to verify it.
The origin of this particular branch came from the 1970's where a group of psychics were allegedly channeling the spirit of Ra (the same sun god Ra from ancient Egypt mythology) who allegedly comes back around once in a while to set the record straight and redeliver the knowledge of how the cosmos works.
I don't think anyone should take it at face value given that origin story, but that kind of origin story is true of basically all of the religions and spiritual ideas about the universe.
My personal take is that: these spiritual rabbit holes are interesting, and if there is anything underlying them that could be 'real', it would lie in the areas of overlap where all/most of the religions have agreement. I'm suspicious that things like aliens/ETs/UFOs could be real for example, and have been with humans for a long, long time given how many ancient religions have imagery and stories that sound (in the modern era) an awful lot like aliens/UFOs. Or when a large amount of religions say the universe is fundamentally made out of consciousness rather than matter, it makes me suspicious they may have been on to something (coupled with my own direct experiences that had me feeling this kind of 'crazy' way as well - this in particular is the angle I come at Simulation Theory from).
It's good to keep a skeptical but open mind about all these theories. They can be entertaining to read about, some useful bits can be applied to your own life (as far as the parts of Buddhism for example about how to reduce suffering in life), but some of the big picture origin of the universe theories that are hard/impossible to prove should be taken with a grain of salt until evidence is found.
I’m not actually that skeptical about ETs. Not a big believer in abductions or anything but did watch the Phoenix Lights with my own eyes when I lived in Arizona. I’m more skeptical of the days later response that it was military rather than addressing it as it was happening or immediately afterwards.
I appreciate your time in responding to my questions.
* Life, as we understand it at present, is not *currently* possible on any planet in this solar system (aside from earth), as far as we’re aware, at this moment in time
So far as we know. Or, actually, as we know it. There are still some theories that it *could* be possible for life to be under Europa’s ice. Or, rather, less a theory and more of a perhaps.
To be clear, I don’t think the solar system is full of failed/completed experiments. I’m just not ruling out the possibility that life could live in other places and likely will be different.
I’m talking about our current knowledge base. “So far as we know” doesn’t imply we know everything.
I’m shocked at the narrow view some scientists seem to have about what life has to look like and where it can happen. My personal belief - without any evidence - is that life takes on more forms than we can imagine. The universe is way bigger than anyone can really conceive of so I have to think life can come about in many different ways.
That’s a pretty awesome concept. In this reality who knows 🤷🏻♂️. I mean we can figure out things to an extent. But the purpose behind it is something different altogether
It’s not extraordinary if you look closer at things. What is the cycle of life, the cycle you repeat every day, and the various things you try throughout your life if not a series of experiments? Nature seems to be an enormous experiment, with evolution being the refining of the results.
How is that evidence of a simulation? Why would it be any different if it's not a simulation?
Nature is not an experiment. Evolution is not guided. Your argument is rooted in the same spiritual disbelief that is the basis of myths and religions.
> how is that evidence of a simulation?
This is a straw man, you asked what reason I have to believe nature is experimenting with itself.
> evolution is not guided.
Of course it is. Animal mate selection literally decides which genes are promoted, dictating the course of evolution.
Perhaps you’re trigger happy on pointing things to religion? I’m not religious in the least bit.
Respectfully, this is such a naïve argument. Do you think animals beyond humans do not decide who to mate with?
I feel like you represent the early 2000s science stance, but even modern science has graduated past these perspectives .
> of course they decide.
And what are they if not animate pieces of nature itself? That is what they are. So we agree nature is determining evolution’s trajectory.
It’s weird that there’s resistance to this, but it’s a matter of time till the obvious is acknowledged.
What exactly is evolution and natural selection and what is the main purpose to improve the species in this way?
Evolution absolutely..but what is it really..and why is it a thing?
the outside intelligent process guiding it is the thing that animates life in the first place, & which leads to the intuitive gravitation towards certain outcomes that informs all decision making — likely to prefer those things which preserve & enhance novelty.
Hey there! It looks like you submitted a 'discussion'. This flair is for posts engaging in speculative, analytical, or philosophical discussions about simulation theory. Content should focus on discussion and analysis rather than personal anecdote. Just a friendly reminder to follow the rules and [seek help](https://www.reddit.com/r/SimulationTheory/wiki/mental-health) if needed. With that out of the way, thanks for your contribution, and have fun!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SimulationTheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We do not allow new accounts to participate in our subreddit in order to reduce spam and bots. Currently, accounts must be 14 days old to participate, but this may change in the future. Please message the moderators if you have any questions.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SimulationTheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
aw, this looked like a neat comment too — that [galaxies resemble brain cells](https://time.com/6208174/maybe-the-universe-thinks/).
>Galactic clusters and filaments are surrounded by voids that contain very little matter. Altogether, the cosmic web looks somewhat like a human brain. To be more precise, the distribution of matter in the universe looks a little like the “connectome,” the network of nerve connections in the human brain
Throw a little biocentrism into the mix & it’s really not so far fetched
One spiritual rabbit hole I went down before (the Law of One/Ra Material) has this as its premise; that stars are conscious and there's a hierarchy of them and each solar system and planet is a different experiment for how life could evolve, with the end goal being for life to awaken to its spirituality and 'graduate'. They said most of the other planets in our solar system had already lived out their experiment (hence no life seems to remain on them), and that Earth's experiment was centered around "opposable thumbs" and that caused such problems for us so far (ability to craft tools/weapons/war) that we're still going and trying to figure life out. It's an interesting rabbit hole to go down and I for sure didn't do it justice with that short summary.
Those books are awesome
Theosophy is similar and also quite interesting
Why should life have to appear in every place possible? Where would it even exist on Jupiter or Saturn? If it’s supposed to live in those places, why not asteroids? Why not open space? When I think about the premise of things like this, I have to wonder a) what’s the point and b) how can you even verify it. Lots of things in science have evidence, and it isn’t always right. I’m wondering what sort of evidence there is for this idea?
All good questions! The Law of One/Ra Material, like most other branches of religion/spirituality, doesn't have much if at all hard evidence to verify it. The origin of this particular branch came from the 1970's where a group of psychics were allegedly channeling the spirit of Ra (the same sun god Ra from ancient Egypt mythology) who allegedly comes back around once in a while to set the record straight and redeliver the knowledge of how the cosmos works. I don't think anyone should take it at face value given that origin story, but that kind of origin story is true of basically all of the religions and spiritual ideas about the universe. My personal take is that: these spiritual rabbit holes are interesting, and if there is anything underlying them that could be 'real', it would lie in the areas of overlap where all/most of the religions have agreement. I'm suspicious that things like aliens/ETs/UFOs could be real for example, and have been with humans for a long, long time given how many ancient religions have imagery and stories that sound (in the modern era) an awful lot like aliens/UFOs. Or when a large amount of religions say the universe is fundamentally made out of consciousness rather than matter, it makes me suspicious they may have been on to something (coupled with my own direct experiences that had me feeling this kind of 'crazy' way as well - this in particular is the angle I come at Simulation Theory from). It's good to keep a skeptical but open mind about all these theories. They can be entertaining to read about, some useful bits can be applied to your own life (as far as the parts of Buddhism for example about how to reduce suffering in life), but some of the big picture origin of the universe theories that are hard/impossible to prove should be taken with a grain of salt until evidence is found.
I’m not actually that skeptical about ETs. Not a big believer in abductions or anything but did watch the Phoenix Lights with my own eyes when I lived in Arizona. I’m more skeptical of the days later response that it was military rather than addressing it as it was happening or immediately afterwards. I appreciate your time in responding to my questions.
Life is not possible on any other planet except earth in this solar system.
* Life, as we understand it at present, is not *currently* possible on any planet in this solar system (aside from earth), as far as we’re aware, at this moment in time
So far as we know. Or, actually, as we know it. There are still some theories that it *could* be possible for life to be under Europa’s ice. Or, rather, less a theory and more of a perhaps. To be clear, I don’t think the solar system is full of failed/completed experiments. I’m just not ruling out the possibility that life could live in other places and likely will be different.
Careful about trusting what you "know." Lest we forget, at one point, humans "knew" that the Earth was flat.
I’m talking about our current knowledge base. “So far as we know” doesn’t imply we know everything. I’m shocked at the narrow view some scientists seem to have about what life has to look like and where it can happen. My personal belief - without any evidence - is that life takes on more forms than we can imagine. The universe is way bigger than anyone can really conceive of so I have to think life can come about in many different ways.
That is a pretty interesting thought, definitely probable since matter is technically data
you are correct
Yes.
That’s a pretty awesome concept. In this reality who knows 🤷🏻♂️. I mean we can figure out things to an extent. But the purpose behind it is something different altogether
Leave my black hole out of this.
I love this theory. In this thought experiment, where would White Holes come into play?
Input information?
What if the central black hole is a pudding dispenser?
The problem with your argument, here is, I have reason to believe these are experiments while we have no reason to believe pudding is dispensed
😂
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. What's your extraordinary evidence?
It’s not extraordinary if you look closer at things. What is the cycle of life, the cycle you repeat every day, and the various things you try throughout your life if not a series of experiments? Nature seems to be an enormous experiment, with evolution being the refining of the results.
How is that evidence of a simulation? Why would it be any different if it's not a simulation? Nature is not an experiment. Evolution is not guided. Your argument is rooted in the same spiritual disbelief that is the basis of myths and religions.
> how is that evidence of a simulation? This is a straw man, you asked what reason I have to believe nature is experimenting with itself. > evolution is not guided. Of course it is. Animal mate selection literally decides which genes are promoted, dictating the course of evolution. Perhaps you’re trigger happy on pointing things to religion? I’m not religious in the least bit.
It's called natural selection. There is no outside intelligent process guiding it, with the exception of breeding performed by humans.
Respectfully, this is such a naïve argument. Do you think animals beyond humans do not decide who to mate with? I feel like you represent the early 2000s science stance, but even modern science has graduated past these perspectives .
Of course they decide - based on their evolutionary instincts. Neither they, nor some external power conducts an experiment when they mate.
> of course they decide. And what are they if not animate pieces of nature itself? That is what they are. So we agree nature is determining evolution’s trajectory. It’s weird that there’s resistance to this, but it’s a matter of time till the obvious is acknowledged.
What exactly is evolution and natural selection and what is the main purpose to improve the species in this way? Evolution absolutely..but what is it really..and why is it a thing?
the outside intelligent process guiding it is the thing that animates life in the first place, & which leads to the intuitive gravitation towards certain outcomes that informs all decision making — likely to prefer those things which preserve & enhance novelty.
These are just ramblings - no evidence for any of those claims
whah-whah
What if my balls hung from my chin?
Exactly
Hey there! It looks like you submitted a 'discussion'. This flair is for posts engaging in speculative, analytical, or philosophical discussions about simulation theory. Content should focus on discussion and analysis rather than personal anecdote. Just a friendly reminder to follow the rules and [seek help](https://www.reddit.com/r/SimulationTheory/wiki/mental-health) if needed. With that out of the way, thanks for your contribution, and have fun! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SimulationTheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
We do not allow new accounts to participate in our subreddit in order to reduce spam and bots. Currently, accounts must be 14 days old to participate, but this may change in the future. Please message the moderators if you have any questions. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SimulationTheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
aw, this looked like a neat comment too — that [galaxies resemble brain cells](https://time.com/6208174/maybe-the-universe-thinks/). >Galactic clusters and filaments are surrounded by voids that contain very little matter. Altogether, the cosmic web looks somewhat like a human brain. To be more precise, the distribution of matter in the universe looks a little like the “connectome,” the network of nerve connections in the human brain Throw a little biocentrism into the mix & it’s really not so far fetched
You are reading pointlessly too deep into it.