🚀 go-pugleaf

fbonsignore@beethoven.com wrote:
> fbonsignore@beethoven.com wrote:
> This can be easily understood by recurring to the analogy of a
> computer. The 2 and 3 D objects we see in the screen are not "really
> real objects", but in a pool simulation, for instance, it is as
> impossible to make a ball go through another as it is in Reality to...
> (what can be really impossible?). Even when those balls are not real,
> it is their interaction, the interaction of the lumps of information
> what
> makes them act according to what we expect of "real" balls; without
> being real they will bounce and change trajectories, and the more
> _information_ is in the simulation the more 'real' they will look and
> act.
>
> They cannot help but bouncing as much as "real" balls will bounce since
> it is in the instructions of that particular program. This instructions
> are the equivalent to Nature Laws, as unchangeable as a compiled
> program's instructions, though "at the beginning" several sets of rules
> can be chosen, where the beginning would be the "origin" of the
> Universe. What matters here is that there are no balls in there, only
> information interacting with information according to fixed rules which
> an observer outside the simulation can study and given some form
> (mathematical language, for instance, or graphics), even if the actual
> implementation of the rules is totally unknown...
>
> Fabrizio J Bonsignore now Danilo J BOnsignore

[Interestingly, nature description rules need not be _identical_ to the
actual "reality" or "implementation" of nature's laws! Our science is
customary and reality can only be completely understood by building a
model which in the limit is Reality itself! As a consequence our
science can only go forward so much, before Science turns into
Engineering and then Art as the only way to express Reality in its
Ultimate Consequences. Art is then the goal of Nature, which points to
what we call the Creator...]

Fabrizio J Bonsignore now Danilo Jose Bonsignore
FabrizioJBonsignorenowDaniloJoseBonsignore
(notLuisBistrainGonzalez, sorry but I am who I am and he very probably
is in my place...)