[EVERYTHING] The Universe. A Dream? An Experiment? Or just a game of Sims?

[Vaporized Steel]

I have a very special idea about what the universe actually is.

I think the universe works in near infinite or possibly infinite dimensions.

What people can understand there is a microscopic universe.

Basically our whole bodies contain *trillions* of cells, bacteria and so many more protons, electrons and all the other many elements and particles that it contains.

Basically the amount of stars and galaxies we can see in the night sky is the same microscopic scope of dimensions that play within our own bodies. So basically the universe is in us.

For a single cell our body is like a galaxy.

The further we look into the universe as we have done through time we understand new laws of physics where scientific models evolved through our understanding.

Even on the microscopic level we find new elements like the higgs boson particle. And perhaps its conceivable that there are levels of dimension even lower down the microscopic plane.

The same goes for the larger dimensions of the universe. Our cosmic horizon from which we estimate that there are several hundred billion galaxies.

Maybe the vast universe is just one single element which is made from the stuff we can see in a dimension completely beyond the cosmic horizon and the big bang is nothing but the birth of a single element in a higher dimension.

And the very few hundred billion galaxies are nothing more but the microscopic features of a higher dimension with possibly it's own laws of physics.

Yeah I know what you may think. It's a totally unconvential theory as to answer the OP question. But when a question is so much a poke in the dark of the unknown I'm willing to make it all up. And perhaps coincidentally it might not be so far from the truth. I don't think I'm ever going to find out. And I'm also somewhat afraid that the very model of the universe prevents us from finding it all out.

[WinkAllKerb'']

electron are nothing more than celestial bodies around a star.

Human are limited by there sight horizons and times perception related to the species scales from micro-scope to macro-telescope.

yup yup this is an endless loop

Edited May 30, 2014 by WinkAllKerb''
singular & plurial here and there

[TheDarkStar]

electron are nothing more than celestial bodies around a star.

Human are limited by there sight horizons and times perception related to the species scales from micro-scope to macro-telescope.

yup yup this is an endless loop

Of course, electrons don't go around nuclei like planets go around the Sun.

[Rainbowtrout]

Maybe, only what we see is real. Does it exist if we cannot see it, therefore we have no proof? Even if we can feel/hear/smell/etc it, it could just be our brain. This is a deep topic, if I do say so myself.

[Tery215]

Maybe, only what we see is real. Does it exist if we cannot see it, therefore we have no proof? Even if we can feel/hear/smell/etc it, it could just be our brain. This is a deep topic, if I do say so myself.

Everything within a ~14 billion ly "bubble" has been "observed", if the definition of observation stands as anything indirect. Gamma rays could be coming from a distant star, and they can be observed.

What would be the difference between simulating everything and creating things that are about to be "observed" on the fly?

Heck, interactions among particles could count as "observations" just as well as interactions between men and the universe.

Aliens, if existing, would have to count as "observers" just as well as men. This would then have to apply to any living thing, and then to everything in existence.

I conclude that the universe, if simulated, is simulating everything rather than just what men can see.

[vger]

electron are nothing more than celestial bodies around a star.

Human are limited by there sight horizons and times perception related to the species scales from micro-scope to macro-telescope.

I sure hope we're not living in the quantum model of the atom then.

All that unpredictable bouncing would give me a nasty headache.

[WinkAllKerb'']

atom move faster than human, and human move faster than universe in there relative referentials. "speed= whatever x time that pass observer scale relative"

if we would be able to miniaturize our eyes so they fit an atom nucleus and electron scaleS related to stars and planets i just wonder what the sky would look like

Edited May 31, 2014 by WinkAllKerb''
if we made it to the moon with a rocket, not yet to the atom.

[Red Iron Crown]

Everything within a ~14 billion ly "bubble" has been "observed", if the definition of observation stands as anything indirect. Gamma rays could be coming from a distant star, and they can be observed.

What would be the difference between simulating everything and creating things that are about to be "observed" on the fly?

Heck, interactions among particles could count as "observations" just as well as interactions between men and the universe.

Aliens, if existing, would have to count as "observers" just as well as men. This would then have to apply to any living thing, and then to everything in existence.

I conclude that the universe, if simulated, is simulating everything rather than just what men can see.

I would have to assume they're not using the Unity engine.

[WestAir]

The (observable) macro-structure of the Universe looks like neurons, axons, and dendrites in a brain.

Another interesting fact is that the only way to observe the ultimate fate of the Universe is through (near) infinite acceleration. Driving "fast" gets you to the "destination" that is the end of time much quicker. @ 0.999 999 999 999 999 999 999 9951c, you could witness the "Big Freeze", "Big Crunch", "False Vacuum" or any other likely Universe-ending phenomenon in just a second or two.

[WinkAllKerb'']

hehe Westair a "mitochondria" would say: 'let's meet the atomans if we will be ever able to (observe/interact) with them'; writers&scenarists @ your pen pls