Binary code cannot account for the physical properties of our reality

Four of these formats of analysing or comprehending reality are fake, constructed nonsense much like the numbers 2-9 in our counting system. Which one is the only one that is necessary to comprehend reality?

BREAKDOWN OF INFINITE RESOLUTION IN PHYSICS

Infinite resolution causes all sorts of breakdowns of known laws of physics, including matter imploding into black holes at sub-Planck scales and the inability to reconcile general relativity with quantum mechanics.  Currently favored theories of matter and energy (string theory) and solutions to gravity and quantum mechanics (loop quantum gravity) assume a minimal length scale.  Furthermore, evidence supports the notion that quantum states are digital in that spin values are quantized and there are no intermediate states, which is anomalous in a continuous space-time. As renowned physicist John Wheeler concluded “every physical quantity, every it, derives its ultimate significance from bits, binary yes-or-no indications.” Trans Planckian

BREAKDOWN OF INFINITE RESOLUTION IN INFORMATION SYSTEMS

It takes an infinite amount of resources to create a continuous reality, but a finite amount to create a quantized reality. The very nature of the computational mechanisms of a computer are essentially the same as Quantum Mechanics - a sequence of states, with nothing existing or happening between the states. The resolution of any program is analogous to the spatial resolution of our reality, just at a different level. In fact, carrying Moore's Law (consistent over the past 40 years) forward, computers will reach the Planck resolution in 2192. However, it is not necessary to model reality all the way to that level for the model to be indistinguishable from our reality. Only the OBSERVED elements of reality need to be modeled, and then only down to a resolution that matches the observational limitations of our measurement devices. A program can do this dynamically. Therefore, given Moore's law and the limitations of "observational reality", we should be able to create Virtual Realities that are indistinguishable from our current reality within 20 years or so. The very fact that our reality appears to be quantized may be considered strong evidence that reality is programmed. pixelated

THE SIMULATION ARGUMENT

Various modern philosophers and scientists have posited that we are likely to be living in a simulation (Nick Bostrom). This is because it is highly probable that we will be able to create ancestor simulations within a few years, when we achieve a trans-human stage. Due either to the number of simulations that will be run, or to the proximity that we are to that stage, it is actually more probable that we are in one than the case where we haven't yet reached that stage. Morpheus and Neo

MATTER AS DATA 

It was once thought that 0% of matter was empty space. In the early 20th century, scientists discovered that atoms are actually comprised of subatomic particles. If these subatomic particles, such as neutrons, were made of solid mass, like little billiard balls, then 99.9999999999999% of normal matter would still be empty space. That is, of course, unless those particles themselves are not really solid matter, in which case, even more of space is truly empty. This was shown to be the case in the 1960s via QCD, or quark theory. Now, string theorists say that even quarks are really just vibrating bits of string, possibly with a width of the Planck length. If so, that would make subatomic particles all but 1E-38 empty space; hence normal matter is all but 1E-52 empty space. Gets kind of ridiculous doesn’t it? In fact, if particles are comprised of strings, why do we even need the idea that there is something “material?” Isn’t it enough to define the different types of matter by the single number – the frequency at which the string vibrates? What is matter anyway? It is a number assigned to a type of object that has to do with how that object behaves in a gravitational field. In other words, it is just a rule. We don’t really experience matter. What we experience is electromagnetic radiation influenced by some object that we call matter (visual). And the effect of the electromagnetic force rule due to the repulsion of charges between the electron shells of the atoms in our fingers and the electron shells of the atoms in the object (tactile). In other words, rules. In any case, if you extrapolate our scientific progress, it is easy to see that the ratio of “stuff” to “space” is trending toward zero. Which means what? That matter is most likely just data. And the forces that cause us to experience matter the way we do are just rules about how data interacts with itself. For example, probability wave functions follow patterns described accurately by relatively simple mathematical equations that resemble probability functions that apply to data. Data and Rules – that’s all there needs to be. By Occam's Razor, this is a simpler and more likely way to describe matter and only requires pure data. string theory

COMPUTATIONAL ANALOG AND THE OBSERVER EFFECT

Of course, one does not need to model reality all the way to the Planck level for the model to be indistinguishable from our reality. An efficient program would dynamically generate incremental resolutions of various components, as needed, such as when an object is put under a microscope. Extending this concept to the quantum level, once a subatomic particle is observed, the program must then establish properties for that particle, effectively resulting in the collapse of the probability wave function. In 2008, the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information (IQOQI) in Vienna, determined to a certainty of 80 orders of magnitude that objective reality does not exist by itself and only comes into being when consciously observed. Thus, the uncertainty of this result is 1 in 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, clearly a ridiculously small number. This effectively put a nail in the coffin of the last hope for objective realists, the hidden variable theory. Interestingly, we can establish a very real explanation for this effect by turning the evidence question on its head; thus, "If you were to program a universe-simulation, what kinds of programmatic efficiencies would be needed?" Most important would be to employ dynamic reality generation. In other words, for any space unobserved by a conscious entity, there is no sense in creating the reality for that space in advance. It would unnecessarily consume too many resources. Instead, macroscopic reality may be modeled with an extremely high degree of compression, which I've estimated to be about 100 trillion. But once you decide to isolate a subatomic particle in that macroscopic object and observe it, the program would then have to establish a definitive position for that particle, effectively resulting in the collapse of the wave function, or decoherence. Moreover, the complete behavior of the particle, at that point, might be forever under control of the program, like a finite state machine. After all, why delete the model once observed, in the likely event that it will be observed again at some point in the future? Thus, an efficient process of “zooming in” on reality in the program would result in exactly the type of behavior observed by quantum physicists, fully explaining the Observer Effect as well as Quantum Entanglement. In other words, in order to be efficient, resource-wise, the Program decoheres only the space and matter that it needs to. double slit experiment, observer effect

EQUATIONS CREATING REALITY

To cite one of many examples, it has been shown that the negative frequency solutions to Maxwell’s equations actually reveal themselves in components of light. Were our reality what it appears to be, solutions to equations should only make sense in the context of describing reality. However, it seems to be the other way around. Data and rules don’t manifest from the reality; they create the reality. maxwell's equations

OTHER COMPUTATIONAL SIMILARITIES -

Many researchers have also noted that a simulation model solves the “prime mover” philosophical problem. While the big bang theory implies a universe that arises from nothing, which has no grounding in objective reality, a virtual reality can easily "boot up" from an external context. In Brian Whitworth's paper "The emergence of the physical world from information processing", he outlines several additional examples of circumstantial evidence that our universe is a simulation, including:

- Randomness and apparent lack of hidden variables

- It never made sense to Einstein, nor many other scientists, that particles would behave randomly (e.g. radioactive decay) as opposed to following deterministic rules. However, in a computational model, random number generators are a simple concept even in today's systems, and can easily be used to drive apparently random behavior.

- Probability waves are easy to create - Related to the point above, the probability waves that describe all matter and are responsible for the real effect of quantum tunneling, have no basis in objective reality, yet are easy to construct programmatically.

probability wave function

EXPLANATORY POWER - The huge set of well-studied anomalies facing us in fields as varied as physics (entanglement), philosophy (near death experiences), geology, anthropology (OOPart) , metaphysics (precognition) and psychology can all be explained only by a programmed reality model. No other theory has that explanatory capacity. quantum entanglement.

THERMODYNAMICS AND THE INFORMATION CONTENT OF THE UNIVERSE - There is an uncanny similarity to Boltzmann's formula for entropy (S=k*ln(W)) and Shannon's formula for information entropy (H=E(-ln(p(X))). In thermodynamics, entropy is proportional to the logarithm of the number of states that matter can be in. In information theory, entropy is proportional to the logarithm of the probability mass function of some random variable. This doesn't necessarily imply that matter is information, just that they behave similarly at a macroscopic level.

Information underlies the universe.

While that sounds like an uncontroversial understatement, what scientists mean by information is a theoretical series of numbers.

This would mean that the universe is basically written in binary – zeros and ones.

In 1948, mathematician and engineer Claude Shannon related information as a stream of numbers to entropy – the measure of chaos.

He said that the chaos of the numbers relates to how much information they carry. For example, 000 carries less information than 101, according to New Scientist.

Binary information underlies the universe

Sean Carroll of the California Institute of Technology (CalTech) told the magazine that it “is simply our best mathematical description of the universe.”

He added: “You can find people who think that information is all there is.”

Dark force is 'killing' galaxies across the universe

Seth Lloyd, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor specialising in quantum information, told Space that the universe is like a computer, “a physical system that breaks up information into bits, and flips those bits in a systematic fashion.”

He added: “So, what is the universe? The universe is a physical system that contains and processes information in a systematic fashion and that can do everything a computer can do.”

The binary code of ones and zeros that we are familiar with from The Matrix film, holds a deeper meaning than we would have ever thought.

The plot of the film is about an unreal, holographic, world wherein there are millions of slaves, performing a role in the society, such as doctors, teachers, lawyers, politicians etc.

They all carry on, fueling the very system that enslaves them, yet they are unaware of the truth because their “minds” are essentially still plugged into what is called the “machine.”

The Machine is what generates the matrix via Binary Code through the mind, and we see the cause and effect of As Within So Without.

Even in our everyday (virtual) reality, computers are also programmed by Binary Code: 1 and 0.

The Binary Code

1 and 0 are two very outstanding numbers within our reality.

In esoteric literature we can easily ascertain that 0 (zero) resembles nothing and 1 (one) resembles something. From Nothing to Something is an adequate axiom of what has occurred to us spiritually, with the result for most being stuck in something and unable to access nothing again (which, paradoxically, is in fact everything).

Everything is beyond something, it cannot be in something because it is the catalyst for something and is all of that something at the same time.

Our limited minds simply cannot fathom our true eternal nature. You are both 1 and (0).

So now begs the question, why was the computer programmed with these two highly influential numbers? Let’s take a deeper look.

We know that in the beginning there was the “word”. We know that words and numbers are the same, which has been proven by numerology and, of course, the computer which can process numbers into infinite amounts of words.

If one doubts the interconnection between words and numbers, one must just conscientize that the letter “O” and the number (0) are exactly the same symbol.

The symbol (O) can be seen as the pin code between numbers and words. This is why it appears in both.

The AI Mainframe inputs code into your mind/machine, which translates to your language, most languages were in fact created to program the mind with code that resonates with the binary code emissions from the Artificial Mainframe Construct. Once the language is embedded within consciousness, Information technology can affect and steer a mind programmed with a host of opposites which we find within the major languages. Literally from the words, manifests your matrix out of your thoughts.

Words are the origin of duality and opposition for power due to the “word” which justifies the existence of separate entities that all give consciousness to their identities made up of the word.

ZERO

Furthermore, in Western numerology the word ZERO equals (Z = 26) + (E = 5) + (R = 18) + (0 = 15) = 64.

The digital root of 64 is (6+4) = 10. In numerology the word zero states that 1 and (O) are both the same, as 1 can only be 1 because of number (O). Why has nobody asked the golden question: “Why isn’t (O)controlling the reality that (1) is experiencing?” There is ultimately only 1 soul-center/whole.

The language is there to make you submit to 1 and build your artificial matrix from the inception point, the first floor, connection to groundfloor thwarted. The language works on the sub-conscious mind through the connection it has with the numbers.

ZION also equals 64. Z (26) + I (9) + O (15) + N (14) = 64.

YHWH, the name of god in Judaism, Y = 25, H = 8, W = 23, H = 8 all together also equals 64.

Why do these two highly influential words in Judaism resemble 10 and ultimately 1 and O in numerology? Is it part of the code that states that this is “everything”, this is “God”? This is control? The very word.

If ZION has been controlling the course of the whole, then zero and one together, mischievously, has done too, as zero is the binary code embedded in the language which controls existence as we know it.

Numerology dates back well over 10,000 years. In Chaldea, all areas of life were inseparably linked with Numerology, the science of numbers. Not only at a mathematical level, but metaphysical as well.

Numbers are the relation between God and man. God has the upperhand because man has been consumed and divided by the numbers and does not know how to put two and two together to release himself from the spell of words and numbers.

“The numeric system known as “Roman Numerals”, the writing style of “Old English”, as well as the languages of “Italian”, “Latin”, “Romanian” and “Romansh” were evidently created hide the Roman Score and disguise the fact that English was the language of Roman Empire. In a calculated attempt to confuse historians and mathematician’s alike, the Roman Score was divided into a set of 10 numbers (i.e., 0-9) and 26 letters, commonly known as the English alphabet (i.e., A-Z). Of the 20 symbols found in the Roman Score, only 10 of them are evident today in the modern Roman-English alphabet (e.g., “H”, “I”, “M”, “O”, “S”, “T”, “X”, and “Z”) which now contains 16 new letters (e.g., “A”, “B”, “C”, “D”, “E”, “F”, “G”, “J”, “K”, “L”, “N”, “P”, “Q”, “R”, “U”, “Y”, and “Z”). Since letters were added to the Roman alphabet at a later date, they were given the name “letter” as in “later”. Aside from scrambling the Roman Code, the creation of 6 additional letters allows for the creation of potentially millions of new words.

Millions of more words also means millions of new spells.

THE ROMAN SCORE (0-Γ):

1. (0) “O” = “O” — \ˈō\

2. (1) “I” = “I” — \ˈī\ \ˈā\, \ˈē\

3. (2) “V” = “B” — \ˈbē\

4. (3) “Ʌ” = “C/K” — \ˈkā\, \ˈk\

5. (4) “+” = “D” — \ˈdē\

6. (5) “Ж” = “CH” — \ˈch\

7. (6) “ǂ” = “F” — \ˈfī\, \ˈef\

8. (7) “⅃” = “L” — \ˈel\

9. (8) “π” = “P” — \ˈp\,

10. (9) “Γ” = “R” — \ˈär\

THE ROMAN SCORE (Ф-Z):

20. (19) “Z” = “Z” — \ˈzē\

19. (18) “T” = “T” — \ˈtē\

18. (17) “S” = “S” — \ˈes\ \ˈsē\

17. (16) “#” = “SH” — \ˈ /ʃ/ \

16. (15) “Ω” = “YU” — \ˈjˈü\

15. (14) “X” = “N” — \ˈen\, \ˈne\

14. (13) “M” = “M” — \ˈem\

13. (12) “W” = “V” — \ˈvē\, \ˈw\

12. (11) “H” = “H” — \ˈh\

11. (10) “Ф” = “G” — \ˈjē\, \ˈg\

1. (0) “O” = “O” — \ˈō\

The “O” symbol is the 1st number/letter in in the Roman Score (i.e., the Roman alphabet) and the 15th letter in the modern English alphabet. Mathematically speaking, the “O” symbol has a numeric value of “0” (zero) in the Roman Score while the letter “O” has a numeric value of “15” in the English alphabet. The symbol “O”, which was likely derived from the Wheel of Fortuna, tends to double as a “0” (zero) and makes up Binary code along with the symbol “I”. The letter “O” is evidently an acronym for both “zero” (nothing) and “sum all” (everything).

From the above text we can ascertain that the first letter of the first roman alphabet was (“O”), and that the zero was embraced as the first numeral out of which all the rest came — the foundation.

Everything comes out of one soul-center and here we see that the Romans knew this in ancient time and realized that they could manipulate people to gain power over them later on, by changing the construct of the language into the favor of a malefic agenda.