$10,000 question: Is reality digital or analog?
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
Well then what reperesents the pipe? I say nothing is between them.
The pipe is a visual aid for which i put as a placeholder for your response. The pipe is between the dashes. Replace it...and now i ask anyone here to replace it. Otherwise there is nothing between them. And i have proven this.
So then we now can say...the universe is analog. In so much as analog represents the organic for which time is the beginning therefore analog stays analog. Digital is man made intepretaion and it is a damn good one.
Close as it is. Now also remember that analog is curved there are no hard angles, no 90 degree clips. Just like the universe. Problem solved, answer has been given.
Close as it is. Now also remember that analog is curved there are no hard angles, no 90 degree clips. Just like the universe. Problem solved, answer has been given.
"A Digital system[1] is a data technology that uses discrete (discontinuous) values. By contrast, non-digital (or analog) systems use a continuous range of values to represent information. Although digital representations are discrete, the information represented can be either discrete, such as numbers, letters or icons, or continuous, such as sounds, images, and other measurements of continuous systems."
The world of our senses seems to be analog.
However, it is built from quantum level entities/processes which seem to be discrete rather than continuous.
Due to the quantum level foundation, I would say that reality is digital. Its analog appearance is due to the extremely small scale of the quantum entities on which it is built.
For example, can you tell that digitally recorded music is not really continous?
However, it is built from quantum level entities/processes which seem to be discrete rather than continuous.
Due to the quantum level foundation, I would say that reality is digital. Its analog appearance is due to the extremely small scale of the quantum entities on which it is built.
For example, can you tell that digitally recorded music is not really continous?
kriminal99
Registered Senior Member
Digital.
This question can also be to a question of whether or not there is really any such thing as an infinity as a number? We have no experience of anything that is infinitely small or infinitely large.
For example, how precise of a telescope would we need in order to differentiate an infinitely universe from just a really large one? An infinitely precise telescope. The same goes for infinitely small (which the concept of analog reality depends on) and microscope precision.
Our reality also is realized by our perceptions of atoms, light molecules etc. These things are all made up of discrete quanta.
Of course we can't prove that it is digital either, but we have actual experience of digital systems and how they make sense and work. We have no experience of a truly analog system, just analog systems realized by discrete quanta on a smaller scale than is relevant to the system.
The infinitely small is just something we imagined. I can image a lot of things...
This question can also be to a question of whether or not there is really any such thing as an infinity as a number? We have no experience of anything that is infinitely small or infinitely large.
For example, how precise of a telescope would we need in order to differentiate an infinitely universe from just a really large one? An infinitely precise telescope. The same goes for infinitely small (which the concept of analog reality depends on) and microscope precision.
Our reality also is realized by our perceptions of atoms, light molecules etc. These things are all made up of discrete quanta.
Of course we can't prove that it is digital either, but we have actual experience of digital systems and how they make sense and work. We have no experience of a truly analog system, just analog systems realized by discrete quanta on a smaller scale than is relevant to the system.
The infinitely small is just something we imagined. I can image a lot of things...
Phlog was right:
------------------
it's both, why is it both....
... because we use both.
If it was one or the other, the counterpart wouldn't exist.
(Now to go about filling the other 24,000 characters for the paper... J/king)
We should really of put this forwards as a Sciforums.com member joint paper attempt.(Which would aid those that well..., would never write paper on their own.) The people that are involved could be listed in the first post (of a new thread) and any monetary gain (should their be any) could be shared between all parties or spammed away on some charity or other. (Which is what you do if everybody was going to recieve 99c's each, Heck now I know where "Thats my two cents" comes from.)
It's of course the members call as to whether or not they want to give this a bash.
------------------
it's both, why is it both....
... because we use both.
If it was one or the other, the counterpart wouldn't exist.
(Now to go about filling the other 24,000 characters for the paper... J/king)
We should really of put this forwards as a Sciforums.com member joint paper attempt.(Which would aid those that well..., would never write paper on their own.) The people that are involved could be listed in the first post (of a new thread) and any monetary gain (should their be any) could be shared between all parties or spammed away on some charity or other. (Which is what you do if everybody was going to recieve 99c's each, Heck now I know where "Thats my two cents" comes from.)
It's of course the members call as to whether or not they want to give this a bash.