Are we a simulation?

In John D. Barrows book “One Hundred Essential Things you Didn’t Know You Didn’t Know: Math Explains the World” [W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., N.Y. 2008], Barrow presents a chapter [19] Living in a Simulation, from which I’ve culled these passages:

“Once you take seriously the suggestion that all possible universes cab (and do) exist then you have to deal with another strange consequence. In this infinite array of universes there will exist civilizations far more advanced that ourselves, that have the capability to simulate universes…the would be able to watch the evolution of life and consciousness within their computer simulations.” [Page52/53]

“With in these universes, self-conscious entities can emerge and communicate with one another.” [Page 53]

The physicist Paul Davies suggests that there is a high probability that we are living in a simulated reality, and is there a way to find out the truth? [Page 53]

“Even if the simulators were scrupulous about simulating the laws of Nature [in their created world or universe], there would be limits to what they could do.” [Page 54]

“They may know a lot about the physics and programming need to simulate a universe, but there will be gaps or, worse still, errors.”[Page 54]

“…gradually…little flaws will begin to build up.” [Page 54]

“…logical contradictions will inevitably arise and the laws in the simulations will appear to break down…The inhabitants of the simulation…will occasionally be puzzled by the observations they make.” [Page 54, italics mine]

“Mysterious changes would occur that would appear to contravene the very laws of Nature…” [Page 55]

“…if we live in a simulated reality, we should expect to come across occasional ‘glitches’ or experimental results that we can’t repeat or even very slow drifts in the supposed constants and laws of Nature that we can’t explain.” [Page 55]

Don’t these observations by Dr. Barrow resonate – when it comes to quantum theory and the UFO mystery (or even paranormal events themselves)?

Dr. Barrow’s musings were the province of Mac Tonnies blog and interest, and are the pressure points for persons who visit here, such as Bruce Duensing.

That we may be a simulation doesn’t grab this writer but it's an imaginative hypothesis that can’t be dismissed out-of-hand.

Plato, Descartes (somewhat) thought, and many current physicists accept the possibility, that we do live as a simulation.

The UFO phenomenon seems to provide a substantiation for Dr. Barrow’s method(s) to discern if we live as a simulation or not.

The possibility intrigues, but that is all it does….(for me).

RR

UFOs, Moby Dick, and Quantum Theory

Herman Melville’s masterpiece, Moby Dick, is an excoriation of God, with a prescient intuition about quantum mechanics.

Melville’s premise that God is Evil, is “footnoted” by the subtle suggestion that those who give credence to God -- pray to Him/It – get His/Its attention and bring catastrophe down upon them.



Their “observation” interacts with God and draws Him/It to behave intimately with the observer, often malevolently (as was the case with Captain Ahab), sometimes benevolently (but such instances of benevolence are rare).

Melville’s literary tenet and insight ends with the maxim that to survive whole and intact in this life one should take a benign attitude when it comes to God (Moby Dick): Ishmael.

The quantum intution is about how observation of events (measurement of them) affects the outcome – the reality – of those events. (Schrodinger’s cat is the theoretical example.)


Lithograph by Jie Qi, 2007

Now, since brilliant UFO mavens, such as Bruce Duensing who visits here, and a few others, think that UFOs are affected by our observation of the things, one can intersect Melville’s view with the ongoing and historical observation of flying saucers and/or UFOs.

The difference is that UFOs are not God – nor even a manifestation of God – and observing them hasn’t brought dire consequences down upon observers, generally.



But observation/measurement of UFOs has, according to devotees of the quantum effect, caused them to behave in ways they are irrational, much as quantum artifacts behave irrationally when observed/measured.

I, personally, don’t think UFOs are metaphorical quantum artifacts. And I think that while observing them in he past may have had an effect upon them, what they do or how they appear now indicates that observation of UFOs has no bearing upon them.

UFOs have become benign, ineffective, and without obvious purpose or intent; they operate like God before Ahab paid attention to Him/It.



Melville’s God is dead, and so are UFOs, as they once were in their reported incarnation(s).

RR

UFO Conspiracies

A paper on the [UFO] conspiracy mind-set -- a PDF

A New Ufology?

Click here for an interesting take on a movement to create a new ufology

The Paranormal Priority: UFOs?

For those bewildered by or obsessed with things at the fringe of reality, do such things as Sasquatch/Bigfoot/Yeti matter, or Nessie and Champ, or chupacabras, or ghosts?



Why do UFOs have more import, in our estimation, than those other “entities” listed above?

UFOs have a longevity that the listed items do not have.

What UFOs are or may be seem to have more importance in the great scheme of things.

UFOs have paranormal cachet that Bigfoot doesn’t, and certainly more than chupacabras have.



Even “ghosts” don’t impact observers in the same way that UFOs do.



And the Loch Ness monster or Lake Champlain’s Champ don’t provide any great ripples in the paranormal panoply.

UFOs have a cosmological underpinning or a metaphysical ambiance of some kind, deservedly or not.

If UFOs are extraterrestrial in origination, that is very important, for all the obvious reasons: what’s the ET culture? The intelligence? The theology? Et cetera.



If UFOs are an example of someone or something playing with the evolution or mind of mankind, that too is very important. (Need we tell you why?)



If UFOs are merely the fallout of secret military aircraft testings, that isn’t too important but it would quell the ongoing mystery assuredly.



UFOs may be observational trickery or real substantive craft, which is what we believe them to be.

Either way, they present a phenomenon that ranks up there with some of the best mysteries of history and time, like who really parted the Red Sea, or did Jesus really rise up after his crucifixion (and if so, why), or what caused Hitler’s megalomania, or does the Universe have a edge, or can we travel back or forward in time.



As a matter of fancy, UFOs may have something to do with time-travel, whereas Bigfoot doesn’t, nor Nessie, nor those other elements of the imagination.

UFOs get a priority because at the heart of the phenomenon lies a meaningful essence, it seems to us.

Time spent on the other paranormal or Fortean elements is just a waste of time, thought, and effort.

UFOs go to the top of our list of mysteries but do not replace more important issues, such as man’s inhumanity to man, or is God truly dead?



The pursuit of UFOs is, after all, only a hobby of sorts……

How Should We Really Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence? by Dr. Colin Ridyard,

An interesting, intelligent paper, with analyses of some UFO sightings.

Click here for the PDF

Who or What?

Underlying the whole discussion about UFOs lies the question of who or what promulgates the phenomenon.

A premise needs to be established, and a paper entitled Who or What Built the Universe? provides a premise that leads, or could, to a premise that should be created to address the UFO phenomenon.

Click here for a WORD document of the paper

Click here for a web-page version of the paper

A Rand Paper from 1968, reviewing the UFO status

This paper, released in 2000 for DTIC staffers, is a RAND report from 1968 reviewing the UFO phenomenon to that date [1968].

It's an overview of what was going on inside government agencies about UFO sightings.

Click here for the PDF

Those Mysterious Airships of the 1890s

A wonderful article about the phantom airships of the 1890s by Rudolph Umland appeared in The Prairie Schooner [Winter 1966/1967, Page 302 ff.]

You can access a WORD document of the article by clicking HERE

Or you can access the article as a web-page (using any browser) by clicking HERE

UFO Abductions: The Explanations

Gerald Eberlein's paper on the UFO abduction phenomenon presents an academic take on alleged "kidnappings" by extraterrestrials.

Click here for the PDF

UFOs & Aliens: Is There Anybody Out There?

This book, edited by Michael Pye and Kirsten Dalley, from New Page Books [A Division of The Career Press, NJ], didn’t inspire me to read it when I saw it advertised at the Anomalist web-site.

But I’m sure glad I did get a copy. It’s full of pleasant surprises, about UFOs, Roswell, and other UFO episodes.

Some of ufology’s BIG names appear in the contents: Stanton Friedman, Nick Pope, Erich von Daniken, Micah Hanks, Don Schmitt, and Nick Redfern among them.

I’d usually skip over Stan Friedman’s ruminations on UFOs – he’s too ET oriented for my taste in UFOs – and essays in this book are about the U.S. government’s UFO secrecy, A Cosmic Watergate, as you know, but he also addresses Star Travel [Page 157 ff.], for which the epithet “expert” applies. Friedman presents an overview of stellar travel, which is insightful.

Don Schmitt’s essay, Roswell in Perspective: The Human Response to an Extraordinary Event, will spook skeptics, if they only note Roswell in the essay’s title, but Mr. Schmitt’s overview is full of intriguing detail, even for Roswell cognoscenti, and one element made a point with me: that residents of Corona and Roswell kept caches of Brazel’s debris, hidden in all kinds of nooks and crannies. (I still think, that if there’s some truth to the Roswell story, someone must have kept photos or pieces of tangible artifacts secreted away. Someone must have had the presence of mind to squirrel away things that the military was allegedly gathering to maintain its cover-up, if there was a cover-up. Mr. Schmitt touches on the idea.)

Nick Redfern provides an essay on the Kingman crash, which has been resurrected lately in the UFO discussion arena. But Nick, as is his wont, provides an interesting element involving a contactee, Truman Bethurum. And Nick also gives a précis of the story that contains material that most UFO aficionados don’t know.

John White presents The UFO Problem: Toward a Theory of Everything, which is a cogent categorization of what UFOs may or may not be.

Nick Pope does his X-Files metaphor, while Kathleen Marden touches on Alien Abduction.

Micah Hanks deals with UFOs and Invisibility, and others write about doubt [Gordon Chism] , alien intervention [Jim Moroney], the military’s effort to kill the Roswell story [Tom Carey], and what UFOs might be, other than ET craft [Marie Jones and Larry Flaxman]. Erich von Daniken does his ancient alien thing with a nod to hybridization. (I’m a von Daniken fan.)

The book turned out to be enlightening to me, and will to you also, even if you think you’re a well-read UFO maven.

The book can be bought at booksellers, like Amazon, Powells, Anomalist, and at these web-sites too: careerpress.com and newpagebooks,com

Get a copy for your UFO library. You’ll not be disappointed, even if you’re a hardened skeptic.

RR

A book you must find, buy, and read!

This book is so full of important, interesting material, mostly from the period of 1947-1950, that it is essential for the serious UFO researcher.

Click here for the back cover, which recounts what's inside the book

The photos, news-clippings, and some hitherto unknown flying saucer information make this an exemplary source for UFO aficionados who want to establish a premise for UFO sightings today.

We recommend the book highly. (It's from our collection and not a review-sent copy.)

Nick Redfern's The REAL Men in Black: A Paranoiac's Handbook

Nick Redfern’s latest effort is one of his best; he never fails to satisfy or enlighten, and
he doesn’t this time either.

The RMIB, as I’ll call it, takes readers through the mystery commonly known among UFO aficionados and paranomalists as “the men in black” – a term derived from weird circumstances involving a UFO “researcher” – Albert Bender – and a cohort of his, Gray Barker in the 1950s.

Mr. Redfern provides exquisite details about the Bender/Barker “affair” which is a textbook case about paranoia and madness more than anything else.

But Mr. Redfern doesn’t stop there. He presents a host of other MIB episodes, which also, to this reader, showcase mental aberrations of various kinds, all psychotic in nature.

Chapters 4 through 12 provide a litany MIB cases or related events that psychiatry would have a field day with:

“It was a blistering hot day when Jane’s attention was drawn to three tall, golden-skinned, bearded men. They were dressed in black suits, black hats, black shoes, and very heavy, woolen full-length coats that…were also black in color…

A few weeks later…Jane was listening to a radio talk show…when one particular caller related her own…UFO experience…The caller’s encounter was followed by a visit from three men dressed completely in black clothing…This story gave Jane a jolt…[and she] wondered if she hadn’t been ‘marked or implanted’ by the aliens and if she was being followed.” [Pages 113-114]

Then in Part II of the book, Mr. Redfern gives readers all, and I mean all, the theories that have been proffered for the MIB phenomenon, including hallucinations, hoaxes, archetypal “tricksters,” G-men, and time-travelers among others.

The deep mental disfigurations are implied by Mr. Redfern, but he refrains from going so far as to say that MIB experiencers are nuts.

Mr. Redfern, if I’m reading him correctly, leans towards the “paranormal” aspect of MIB visitations, which makes sense even to those, like me, who think MIB events are products of the ill-mind.

Paranormality can account for some MIB instances, since a few persons visited by the black-clad personages have a semblance of sanity about themselves.

What always surprises me about Mr. Redfern’s forays into the unknown is his encapsulating accounts of demons and devils, since he is non-believer in things with a religious patina. (And I don’t think he believes in God.)

Mr. Redfern, in The Real Men in Black, gives readers, as is his wont in all his writings, between-the-lines insights and details, not minutiae necessarily, that can take readers to other areas of paranormality, which are touched on, and subliminally relevant to the whole panoply of the fringe reality.

So, if you’re a seeker of truth, and want a manual about one element in the weird world of UFOs and the paranormal, get Mr. Redfern’s book.

You will not be disappointed.

The book is published, nicely, by New Page Books, a Division of Career Press, and can be found at Amazon, among other booksellers, and can be had via NewPageBooks.com I surmise.

RR

Life, death, life and UFOs: The witness failure(s)

The book, Consciousness Beyond Life: The Science of the Near-Death Experience by Pim van Lommel, M.D. provides extensive data and information about the so-called near death phenomenon or the NDE (near-death experience).

The author covers virtually everything about NDEs, including an extensive account of Quantum Mechanics in relation to the experience.



Most of you have read or heard the accounts of persons who died and “came back.”

What I want to zero in on are a few of the descriptions that the dying or dead witnesses provide; namely, the beautiful music and beautiful flowers they experience, and how this relates to UFO reports, as they has been presented by persons who’ve experienced that phenomenon, also.

Every NDE account that Dr. Lommel provides from the literature and his own accumulated reports, from his practice or that of colleagues, tells of the dead/dying person’s hearing “beautiful music” [sic] and seeing “beautiful flowers” [sic] on their way to a blissful landscape after transitioning that tunnel with a light at the end of it.

But no one, and I mean no one, has reported exactly what kind of music or what kind of flowers they experienced.

Were the flowers gladiolas, petunias, roses, dandelions?



Was the music classical, operatic, chorale, jazz, rock, even hip-hop?



No one has ever provided a definitive account or identification of the music or flowers.

Did no musicologist, opera buff, composer, or musician have a NDE?

Did no horticulturist, avid gardener, or flower enthusiast ever have a NDE?

That is, why does no one provide an exact, precise descriptive of the music or flowers, if the experience is a real one and not a metaphor of the mind?

Now, this also applies to those who witness UFOs, in the sky or up close and personal.

Has ever an aeronautical engineer seen a UFO and can provide a description of the design that corresponds to his or her expertise as an engineer of aircraft?

Has ever a chemical engineer or metallurgist provided a description of the smell or patina of a UFO that has appeared near them?

Has a pilot ever – really – provided an actual account of what a UFO did in the context of its flight; that is, has anyone with flying acumen given an account that explains or shows the proclivities of flight by a UFO, in ways that indicate they actually took in the experience in a way that was or is real – Kenneth Arnold, Gorman, or Lt. Coyne, notwithstanding?



No UFO report by a witness of a UFO has ever provided a forensic description of what was seen or experienced; the details come after the fact by UFO investigators and/or “researchers.”

No UFO report has ever been definitive, in portraying what a UFO or flying saucer was constructed of in essence.

Yes, Scully gives details that resonate in his account of the Aztec crashed flying disks, but that’s second or third-hand information, and concocted as most UFO mavens think.

But no UFO witness, with credentials that count – engineering, chemical, aeronautical – has given a report that provides actuality – no one.

This means, on the face of it, that either NDE’s and UFOs are chimeras, or that witnesses to either are incompetent or without credentials that allow them to be professional in their reportage.

UFO Review

Esteemed British publisher Stuart Miller produced some of the finest compilations of UFO material found anywhere.

His UFO Review was a fount of interesting, insightful takes on the UFO phenomenon and its mavens.

While Mr. Miller has gone subliminal since the failure of his exemplary Alien Worlds magazine, we still think of him fondly.

Click here for a PDF of a UFO Review issue with items by and about Nick Redfern (Saucer Spies), The Scully/Aztec "hoax" (we believe the story), and a plethora of other things that you'll find worth your browsing time (cartoons, UFO people, and other fascinating stories.

Enjoy....

The Flying Saucer from Mars and CDA

Back in the day I thought that this book by “Cedric Allingham” corroborated the Adamski alien contacts and story:



Here are the Adamski-like photos that Allingham purportedly took of a flying saucer that allegedly came fro Mars:





But the story was a hoax, concocted, for some bizarre reason, by respected and credentialed British astronomer, Patrick Moore:



And who was the journalist who unmasked the hoaxer and the exposed the hoax? Our favorite skeptical thinker, Christopher Allen, known here and in the UFO community as CDA.

Click here for the story

CDA has cachet with us and with those who like clear thought, gentlemanly argumentation, and skepticism in its revered and best sense.

So when you read his comments here and elsewhere, take a moment to appreciate his bent of mind and research acumen.

Bruce Duensing!

Bruce Duensing is a brilliant man.

His blog -- Intangible Materiality -- is flush with incandescent insights and highly intellectual ruminations.

Click here for access to his blog -- and scroll down for edifications of a unique kind.

A Socorro-like Sighting (in the same time-frame/locale)

Artist's (wrong) rendition of the La Madera sighting

26 April 1964 12:30 La Madera, New Mexico, USA

A bright, metallic, egg-shaped object was seen on the ground.

At 12:30 p.m. Orlando Gallegos observed a bright, metallic, egg-shaped object about 70 meters away, on the ground, north of La Madera, New Mexico . Blue flames appeared to circle the base of the machine, which was silent and about the length of a telephone pole. Scorch marks and four imprints were found, according to Police Capt. Martin Vigil.

Also on the same day, a thirty-foot wide silver, inverted bathtup-shaped UFO was sighted near Truth of Consequences, New Mexico by a Mr. Mitropolis. It was seen a quarter of a mile to the east, flew up over a mountain, then down out of sight near the Caballo Reservoir. Orlando Gallegos observed a bright, metallic, egg-shaped object about 70 meters away, on the ground, north of La Madera. Blue flames appeared to circle the base of the machine, which was silent and about the length of a telephone pole.

Scorch marks and four imprints were found, according to Police Capt. Martin Vigil. An object was observed. Occupants of the craft were seen. Ground traces were found. Animal reactions to the object were reported.

One blue-metallic ball, about 20 feet across, around 300 feet away, was observed by one male 35-year-old witness at a ranch for over one minute (Gallegos). No sound was heard.

Source

N.B. This sighting either confirms the lunar-landing hypothesis -- the lander being tested in other New Mexico locales (a bit far-fetched) or Zamora's craft made other appearances or landings, indicating something more than a lander was involved.

Socorro Recap

A site that most of you may be familiar with but should re-visit is the Dave Thomas site, which provides a recap of the explanations for Lonnie Zamora's Socorro UFO sighting of 1964.

Mr. Thomas writes that Zamora saw a lunar-landing test. (We agree)

But check out Dave Thomas' reasoning by clicking HERE

For us, the Socorro insignia/symbol that Zamora drew, which has been flummoxed by Stanford's intrusion into the episode, is the "smoking gun" which will explain who or what is responsible for the Socorro sighting.

Confining our blogs....

Today, Wednesday, May 25th, 2011, comments to this blog were not automatically sent to us for moderation. I had to go into our e-mail service and retrieve them, which allowed me to scrutinize responses more judiciously than usual, and without them being sampled by other here.

I continue to be distressed by the slovenly thought-processes that are exampled by what purports to be critical thinking about our postings.

In dialogue with other bloggers and friends, I’ve decided that we shall confine comments here to those that reflect intellectual, open-minded rumination, and not knee-jerk response to things written by us and others, which torment an ingrained belief-system or narrow-minded, non-objective cogitation.

There are several (many, actually) commenters we look forward to hearing from but a few that irk us with their bigoted, snotty, unthinking commentary.

From this point on, more so than our usual fascistic deletion of comments that we don’t like, we’ll not be approving comments from some who visit here.

We have a respect for some of you -- your intellectual proclivities, your open-minded objectivity, even-handed skepticism, and your genteel approach to our oblique and beleaguered postings, some of which I agree are over the top.

Your comments will continue to be registered here.

But if you send us a comment that doesn’t appear, and it’s not the fault of our blogging service, you know where you stand with us.

So don’t go away angry…just go away…..



RR