The 3 Universe Theory

We live in 3 Universes.
1. Objective
2. Consensus
3. Subjective

With 2 & 3 being subsets of 1
God exist in 2 & (BY CHOICE) 3
But not in 1 (at least, god stands unneeded thus far)

YOU exist in 2 & 3*,

*(but both DO and DO NOT exist in 3)

 

This is interesting. I've been thinking a lot today about concensus vs subjective reality, although I didn't phrase it that way in my head.

I don't believe #1 really exists, and I think #2 is not nearly as relevant as most people make it out to be.

 

I think you're thinking way too hard about something simple.

Could the earth be flat in 2 & 3 also?

 

It seems to me that 2 & 3 should be reversed.

#1 - Objective: The real world that we have limited knowledge of and see through the narrow spectrum of our senses and human understanding.

#2 - Subjective: The delusional world we each create where our imaginations have Spackled up all the holes missing from #1.

#3 - Consensus: The fallacy of affirming our fantasy worlds through the similarities and seed planting of fantasies in others, organized ignorance.

Remove fantasies, imagination and ignorance from the equation and there is only one REAL universe. A universe without God...

 

I like relaxxx's.

 

To me it looks more like three names for the same thing. Or at the very least, something like three interlocking circles that overlap in the middle. This overlapping middle is the place we inhabit.

 

relaxxx:

Remove them? The universe is the universe with or without 'em. lol Maths.

Luckily it's infinite. Eh Geck?

 

That is the point-

#1 is not dependent upon belief.

When you die, will the Universe go on?

 

Yes.
in fact, throughout much of history it WAS flat in all but the Objective Universe and a very few educated subjective Universes.
But as a consnseus-- it was flat.
Alexander the Great conquered a flat world, where as as Hitler tried and failed to conquer a spherical one.
Was one more real than the other?

 

NO. Infinity is precluded by 2nd Law.

but what is Real is not clear at all.

The Uncertainty principle states that it is impossible to observe without effecting the outcome of that which is observed.
The Two Slit Experiment demonstrates this as a component of Reality (there are some excellent animated explanation videos on on utube-- get hi and have your freakin' mind blown!).

Stephen hawking's statement that all possibilities are equal (past or future) agrees with this position.
------------------
many events occur in your life that shape you; yet others were there and their version of the same events differs-- however slightly.
Are they wrong? Both version lead to YOU NOW.
Is ther's less true than yours?
Your's may be more detailed FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE
but their's is as "true" (equal to yours) as yours because BOTH LEAD TO NOW.
Yet if nethier of you ever existed the Sun would still shine.

 

hey man

i hear what you are saying. i've come to a similar paradigm from a different area. I'm reading "Everything Forever" by Gavin somthing. Time Travel explained, tough as nails to trudge through.

Best!
Jacky D

 

Geck:

LOL I had a feeling you'd say that!

Infinity is precluded?! How?

At all? How about to varying observable demonstrations? But let's get this matter of infinity sorted out first. I need the maths for the "preclusion" of infinity, pronto.

 

No offense mate, but this is a perfect example of how big the human ego is, we have to make a whole other 2 universes just to make room for our illusions.

 

In a closed system, entropy MUST increase.
The Universe is a closed system-- by ANY argument that doesn't assume Infinity. No circular arguments.
======
it's quite reasonable to look at all the elements of existence through the lens of E=MC2. Everything and all events are Differences/Changes in Energy Potential, which means interactions increase entropy by the Laws of Thermodynamics.
When Entropy is complete,all Energy Potentials are "even"-- there is no longer ANY DIFFERENCES against which to measure. and A Difference Which Makes No Difference IS No Difference-- and that means no time, no space, no matter (pun intended).
No infinity, because Time itself stops existing and the Universe is a singularity-- a Quanta of Nothing. And IF the Universe re-cycles, it's Time/Space continuum is unrelated to ours.

 

Actually, THIS ^ is a perfect example of human conceit. You've got it all wrong.

the objective Universe Exist with or without the other two.

the consensus is necessary to allow for interactions between Humans only

the subjective is need so we asi ndividuals may deal with life in the other two.

 

Infinity isn't circular! We reach it by inference.

In what could the universe possibly be closed? The only 'conceivable' answer is itself. And yet why conceive it so? If it would appear in all finitude to be an open shut case, ever based in assumption upon assumption, why shouldn't it be open in itself?

I'm not really asking if you're conscious enough to entertain this thought, but whether you'd like to! LOL

 

But the inference implies another infinity for the concept of finite substantial variability of members of the sets with the major universal set. Now the major universal set is only academically infinite. (???)

 

And so we must enter eternity, which requires more than the interference of our inference. To base something we have not yet realized on sensation alone is unscientific. I feel ashamed to be concerned, but at least I've here revealed plainly my portion of doubt, so that everything of my position can perhaps be better understood.

 

Are you meaning something like science and art must be presumed irreconcilable to one another's consciounable concepts. It's not infinity which began the difference of Man performing the application into religious feelings, or was it superstition?