"Earth as a Simulation Series I: How the New Age movements spiritual sayings are 'correct' for a COPIED population where everyone is 'accurately' living SOMEONE ELSE's LIFE. How 'Confirmation Bias & Cognitive Dissonance' are the deducible 'Fixed Behaviours' a copied population will present BUT, wont figure out because 'software' defined people can easily be managed."
Main Page Headings List
STUPIDLY EASY . .
When I say that we can easily, EASILY be managed if we are in a software defined reality then this is a complete and utter UNDERSTATEMENT.
If we are in a simulation then you, me and everyone else here are nothing but software and data storage. We would each be 100% utterly dependent on software for every single aspect of ourselves.
Perhaps you are thinking in this moment now that all of this is ridiculous?
In which case I’d have to ask you:
“Are these specific ‘ridiculous’ thoughts and reactions authentically spontaneously ‘yours’ OR have these thoughts and reactions been ‘spontaneously’ rendered within yourself because they serve the best interests of some simulation designer & the simulation projects objectives?”
Perhaps you are thinking in this moment now that all of this is horrifying?
In which case I’d have to ask you:
“Are these specific ‘horrifying’ thoughts and reactions authentically spontaneously ‘yours’ OR have these thoughts and reactions been ‘spontaneously’ rendered within yourself because they serve the best interests of some simulation designer & the simulation projects objectives?”
How could you start to become aware of which of your ‘thoughts, reactions and feelings’ are actually REALLY congruent to yourself and which are not?
I DO seriously appreciate that for some of you to even think about this will be very disturbing.
BUT, yet again, I’d have to ask you to question whether any ‘disturbing, worrying thoughts’ you do have are actually congruent to yourself OR is are these thoughts an example of the simulation attempting to divert you away from thinking about REALISTIC possibilities with respect to ‘earth as a simulation’ possibilities?
I’ve seen many people whom consider themselves completely rational and objective reduced to spouting gibberish when confronted with these types of possibilities while simultaneously they don’t seem to be aware that their responses are NOT rational and objective which is unfortunate as they are then not give the opportunity to be suspicious about their own behaviour.
What ‘Possibilities’ Would be Available to those Designing an Entirely Software Defined Population?
Again I’d have to point out that in a simulation where everything is defined by software it would be stupidly easy to have people observably present themselves in contradictory ways while NOT allowing them to become aware IN THE SLIGHTEST that they are BEING ENTIRELY CONTRADICTORY. In an entirely software defined simulation it would even be possible to have each person perceive events and interactions very, VERY differently to each other too.
What have YOU reading this noticed while you have read the last two pages?
For myself personally I start to get noticeable ‘put off’ effects happening on the previous page. My eye sight bizarrely starts to degrade and while reading this page it gets worse. It’s actually quite bad as I’m writing this line to describe these effects. Some specific paragraphs on this page I end up re-reading 2,3 or 4 times because I ‘feel’ as if what I’m reading I’m not taking in correctly (despite me being the one WRITING these lines).
Basically for certain lines on this page IT IS OBVIOUS that even for myself as the writer attempts are made to change the meaning and to jumble up the words while FADING away what I’m taking in, my understandings and ANY insights I get.
This of course would be impossible ‘IF’ we are in a real reality while if we are in a simulation that includes self aware and free thinking people then the designers would have to be seriously unbelievably stupid to not manage their simulated population COMPLETELY.
‘IF’ as a simulation designer you DID implement such personal management strategies to ensure that your population didn’t join stupidly simple dots then what STRUCTURAL ANOMALIES would these strategies ALSO HAVE YOUR POPULATION EXHIBITING?
Well, if they did implement effective strategies such that your population wasn’t allowed to THINK of stupidly obvious things such that they were completely incapable of being able to join stupidly simple dots then this AMAZINGLY would ALSO BE EVIDENCE that they were in a simulation because only in a simulation where every thought you have in your imagined to be ‘real’ head is generated by software it would be STUPIDLY EASY TO MANAGE . . .
EVERY SINGLE THOUGHT & THINKING LINE YOU HAVE IS INITIATED, DEFINED & GENERATED BY SOFTWARE ‘IF’ WE ARE IN A SIMULATION . . .
Which is why on web sites that SPECIFICALLY discuss the simulation argument AND the possibility that we are simulated people in a simulation they:
- NEVER – Define in any detail what a simulation is (apparently either everyone already knows this, or it’s is written ‘somewhere’ but they use invisible writing OR this information is TOP SECRET)
- They NEVER – Define what a matrix is (apparently either everyone already knows this, or it’s is written ‘somewhere’ but they use invisible writing OR this information is TOP SECRET)
- They NEVER list the differences between a matrix and a simulation (apparently either everyone already knows this, or it’s is written ‘somewhere’ but they use invisible writing OR this information is TOP SECRET)
- They NEVER describe in detail what it would be like to be completely software defined AS A PERSON (as I’ve done on this page and many other pages here) because if anyone did do this they’d very likely realize that there would be marked differences in behaviour and response of someone living in a simulation project compared to someone living in one of those MYTHICAL real realities.
In other words ‘IF’ anyone DID DO THIS then they’d likely figure out that confirmation bias is EVIDENCE that we are in a simulation project . . . AND if they did this then . . .
IT WOULD BE A DISASTER FOR THE SIMULATION PROJECT
It would be a ‘disaster’ because if your simulated population figured this out this would VERY likely change their behaviours away from what is defined by their script which would mean your simulation project CANNOT maintain accuracy under these conditions.
What other information would be seriously useful ‘IF’ you wanted to have even a basic chance of ‘THINKING’ about realistic ‘earth as a simulation’ project possibilities which is ALSO completely missing?
Click the right >> link below for the next page in this series . .
Click the ‘definitions’ HEADER below to get access to definitions of Matrix & Simulation
Please NOTE: that these definitions are more attuned to our own circumstances, as self aware, freethinking people living on an entire simulated world . . .
What is a Matrix:
A ‘Matrix’ has REAL flesh and blood people having all of their senses, perceptions and means of expression interfaced to a virtual reality to present that reality as if it is a real reality to the people being interfaced to it.
What is a Simulation:
If we are in a ‘simulation’ then we are entirely simulated people being simulated as if they are real flesh and blood people living in a simulated reality.
Each of the simulated residents would be an accurate copy or duplicate of the ‘real’ person whose life, defining interactions and decisions they would be accurately simulating.
You would very likely be a simulated person in a simulation as part of some defined project that required the use of a simulation to achieve its objectives and aims.
No simulation would present self aware, free thinking people unless the project actually required this level of detail and accuracy for the success of the project (it would be too expensive as a start).
You can also deduce that you would ONLY include self aware, free thinking people if THE PEOPLE were IMPORTANT AND CENTRAL to the project’s objectives being successful.
This being the case the objectives of the project will likely be either to gain greater understanding of the simulation designers’ own population OR to try and use the simulated population to ‘somehow’ change the trajectory of the original population.