Reality

2. Objective information is Processed into Reality by Human Cognition: Objective information produced in this manner is cognitively processed by the human mind into a perceived reality that is coherently intersubjective. Nothing outside this realm has any objective meaning. Nothing outside of this cognitive reality is to be considered "real".

3. Cognitive Reality is defined by a Language, whose Tautological and Inferential Syntactic Structure Mirrors the Syntactic Structure of the World: The CTMU assumes that the syntactic structure of the language of cognitive reality is reflected in the syntactic structure of the World, the World being conceived as a set of Wheelerian observational-participatory events that yield objective information.

http://best-possible.wikia.com/wiki/PZ_comments_on_Langan's_CTMU

Reality is processed into a language (cognitive reality). 0s and 1s. And information is processed into reality by the mind. Where mind and matter share the same reality there is a direct feedback loop between the two. Holding neither as primary and the other as secondary.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The CTMU has some salient points but I'm starting to doubt whether or not it proves the existence of God the more I study it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Chris Langan might be intelligent as hell, but personally from what I've seen of him, he's an arrogant asshole who refuse to see any other viewpoint than his own.

Hopefully you'll get over your obsession with Langan and god (I must admit I don't see a reason to try to include god in any science scenario).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course it doesn't.

Congratulations on getting a clue.

 

Hmm...

Thing the is , if you look at the the Universe as Brain-Mind concept ; hence a god , and this Universe is this manifestation of this brain-mind -god concept , we are no better off for knowing this .

Since in the end , this god absorbs the information from his outside and gives it to us , us, meaning all beings in this Universe. Hence this of this brain-mind reality is not different from ours.

 

The mind is reality in an informationally coded form. The CTMU claims the mind consists of pure information and nothing else, which makes sense. It assumes that the external world of physical reality doubles as a self-operating mind. The SCSPL. Where the invisible laws of Physics cannot be contradicted hence no miracles. But this mind conceals itself and runs everything teleologically.

 

Unbound Telesis may prove to be more than a pseudoscientific concept. Here is how Langan describes it:

Let me explain. If you really start out with nothing, then there is no preexisting information. You must first tell cancellation how to occur, and tell zero how to "fission" into two or more mutually cancelling entities. Since these "instructions" on how things should cancel consist of constraint - of restrictions that limit the nature of "nothing" - constraint has logical priority over cancellation. So we have to explain how the constraint got there in the first place, and we have to do it without appealing to any preexisting cancellation operation supposedly inherent in "nothing". By default, the entities comprising the system that you call "the sum of components within the space-time manifold" must themselves combine to form the constraint, and since neither the constraint nor its constituents equal "nothing", we're forced to introduce "something" at the very outset. This tells us that we're not really starting out with "nothing", but with unbound potential or UBT... something which, by its nature, contains everything that can possibly exist. This amounts to interpreting 0 as "0 information" and replacing it with a combination of unity and infinity. I.e., by interpreting 0 as the absence of something called "information", which implies that it equates to superficially unrestricted homogeneous (and therefore unitary) informational potential, which in turn equates to existential infinity, we're making it possible for 0 to represent the sort of cancellation point you envision. Since this implies that existence is a self-defined attribute - after all, there is no preexisting informational framework capable of defining it - only possibilities with the intrinsic ability to define and sustain their own existences can be actualized. This is what it takes to get "something" from "nothing".

From: http://web.archive.org/web/20020619055425/http://www.ctmu.org/CTMU/Discussions/CTMUForumZero.html

 

There are absolutely no distinctions or differentiations in nothingness. Hence no being.

 

No. Unbound telesis is nothing more than pseudoscientific claptrap.

 

Thank you for the explanation.

 

CTMU assumes cognitive reality is the only reality and that nothing is beyond it.

See: http://gadgets.ndtv.com/science/new...ms-reality-doesnt-exist-until-measured-698868

 

5. The syntactic process of linguistic self-determination and self-generation of cognitive reality through the SCSPL is guided by a "telesis" defined as optimization of "general utility": The SCPL includes syntactic rules of optimization of something called "general utility" that result in a self-determinative teleological evolution of cognitive reality that mirrors the teleological evolution of the cosmos, facilitated by a mechanism of "telic feedback".

http://best-possible.wikia.com/wiki/PZ_comments_on_Langan's_CTMU

Guided by telesis.

 

Nothing but pseudoscientific word salad.

 

I disagree.

 

LANGAN'S SCSPL IS A BULLSHIT POSIT!!! IT DOES NOTHING TO ELIMINATE HUMANITY'S PAIN AND SUFFERING WHICH ARE PURE ILLUSIONS. HE CAN TAKE HIS CTMU AND SHOVE IT UP HIS ASS.

 

Instead of using a computer why not simply use mathematics (i.e. equations) within your brain, as someone posted?!

 

God has re-emerged in my mind. As most of you know, I reverted to atheism for the last three days. Now in apologies to Sarkus and other atheists, I went back to believing in God. I am terribly sorry but I feel that my love for humanity and God go hand in hand. I cannot get away from it for long.

"For essentially logical reasons, reality incorporates variously-bounded levels of freedom. Accordingly, bad things can happen, even to good people. That's what "freedom" means; goodness or teleology, not being universally determined (at least on localized scales), can be counterinstantiated.

As a conduit of reality, man too is free. He therefore has the following choice: either cooperate intelligently to reduce and/or make the best of whatever pain intrudes into the world, or not. Unfortunately, man often compounds his pain through errors of commission or omission. To blame God for this is irrational and irresponsible. It is also to fail a certain kind of test inherent in the nature of existence."

- Chris Langan.

 

In this particular instance, an observation that does hit the nail on the head in regard to people desiring their freedoms to take risks and willingly chance compounding their misery. For instance, there's a cacophony of squealing from all class-levels whenever a government (one of the more tangible gods / authorities) desires to restrict or outright eliminate certain products and habits / behaviors due to health and safety concerns.

If ending the continuing problems of history requires humans becoming strict robots that are micro-regulated by a variety of formal systems and templates, then time and again they decry that loss of liberty or the right to spawn trouble for themselves. Tyranny is tyranny, but being so unshackled from it potentially opens the undisciplined up to being prey for a feral and random brand of horrors.

Like the classic, rebellious teenager archetype that wanted its parents to give it "space to do its own thing", while during the same period contradictorily whining about being abandoned to rot in legal consequences for a month or being kicked-out on its own after the last straw is committed, it's kind of a coin toss as to which is the crazier. The putative callous gods that let Johnnie lie in the bed of his own desired freedom or Johnnie blaming others for allowing him to bumble into disaster after giving them "the finger" in the past after they tried to do so.

Not really an issue of sane or insane policy, but the result of the complexities of a contingent world of interacting particulars, as opposed to an ideal realm of static generalities and statistics abstracted from that. No perfect strategy is possible, only a shifting equilibrium or compromise between the two extremes of protective control and emancipation which inevitably permits a reality where satisfaction and suffering persistently abide together.

 

Agreed.

 

GOD IS REAL.