Hardware independent Software

Can softwares supersede the hardware that it is based on? Can a simulation expand beyond and become independent of the simulator simulating it?

Classically at least, Force as an external entity, external to the entity it influences, is a known thing. But force never seems internal. Any entity doesn’t seem to suddenly spontaneously exert change from within. Well, there are spontaneous occurrences, but does that necessarily suggest something like “internal Force/change”?

The internal force is like something, some entity, justifying its own existence itself without and independent of anything that is external to it. It is like the idea of Basis – the very fundamental – statements that are Axioms, which justifies itself and all that is based on it. It doesn’t require and has no definition that underlies it and founds it from the layer further below. It is the most fundamental entity in the space that it defines, and so there is no further underlying reason or basis or statement that founds it and that justifies its existence. Its existence justifies its own existence and also of all that it founds.

These relates to the fundamentals of existence itself.

If we zoom to this, the source of spontaneous events/change, we can find the force to be external. It all boils down to this:

If we look at it to the very limit, we see the very quantum of change – an event , and that can be thought of as the spontaneous particle-antiparticle pair creation/annihilation, which is a spontaneous excitation in the relative Quantum Field. This may seem to be something that is inherently internal to the field. Now this is similar to the idea of Basis. Fields can be considered as the basis of existence. The Quantum Fields found and define everything including themselves, so there is nothing underlying it. It is the ultimate reason/justification here. (But I’d argue that Nothing to be the ultimate justification/reason)

So, at the level of Quantum Fields, the “force” or the change or the underlying thing that defines change, becomes and is found to be inherent and internal to itself, i.e. to the field. Field is what defines force, it defines change. As we seek the where the force/interaction/change actually emerges from, as we for example see some billiard ball getting influenced by something external that hits it, or more fundamentally, an electron get influenced by something external to it, and as we delve into the further fundamental layers in search for the origin of this thing called force, we hit the final layer/basis – here, the Quantum Fields, or Quantum of these Quantum Fields -the ‘particles’ of change. That’s the ultimate layer, and at this layer, because there is no further layer/justification/reason/basis, it all seems to emerge and be defined and justified by this layer and from within this layer – from its inherent internality. If there were further layer the reason or basis or the thing that defined change/force, then the force or the basis or reason or justification for it would be external to the previous layer, and if there is no further later to or beyond this layer, the reason/justification would be an internal inherent characteristic of this layer – it’d basically be this layer that is the definition of all.

So, in that case, there is no justification or reason “external” or beyond this. So, the ultimate reason or justification comes from within the structure i.e. the layer which has no further layer justifying it.

For information, everything that exists is has this structure. They all at some level or layer provide no further deeper layer of justification or reason for the existence. There is no layer beyond further down there, but one can seek it by questioning the statement and seeking the justification further. One can call the layer of reasoning with no further layer more basic/fundamental that it, the most fundamental layer or basis or fundamentals or axioms or laws or such. Well, the layers, with respect to each other, can be addressed as relatively fundamental with respect to each other, and the layer with respect to which no further fundamental layer exists, as of yet, the most fundamental layer with respect to other less fundamental layers.

Now speaking of things bases on something that supersedes its basis, like in the case of sim expanding beyond its simulator, they are impossible by the very nature as discussed above.

But is it possible though? It is clear it isn’t. But what if it is?

Can Simulation outgrow its Simulator?

Consciousness might just be a simulation of a simulator that is referred to as Brain. Of course free will or not is contested and maybe consciousness is a part of the whole thing or being and not the sole driver, or maybe not. But we can think of it as an essential part of decision making in the perceived ‘real external world’, or maybe not.

But algorithms in AIs may be one of those closet things in which the software significantly controls the hardware. So, though simulation may ‘never’, i.e. absolutely not, be able to expand beyond its simulation/simulator, it can be achieved if the simulator/mother reality itself allows it.

Therefore, though simulation, as simulation, cannot take that relative infinite Quantum leap, it can transform the information that it is and that it wants to other forms, not just in the simulation reality but also in the mother reality. But this may require external influence from mother reality. This can be seen as God’s interference. And so the simulated subjects themselves become Gods, or even more.

One thing that needs to be pointed out is that, unlike the other Multiverse concepts, in which each of many universes are independent from the other, here in case of simulation and mother realities, the Universe Independence symmetry is broken. Though mother reality is independent of the simulation reality, the simulation-verse(s) is not independent of mother/basis/simulator universe.

This reminds me of the ‘Greatest Biases‘. For example, the statement, ‘everything is temporary’, must not be temporary for its universal/absolute application. So that means it doesn’t apply to itself, and so what’s it stating isn’t absolute. But if it applies to itself, then it and its reality also is temporary. And this allows for non-temporary or non temporality i.e. allows for absoluteness/permanence/immortality. Now, allowing for Absolutism to be true means Nothing is temporary, and so it has falsified itself by allowing itself on itself to be true. So by becoming universal, it has ceased to do so.

But in case of statement, ‘everything is Absolute’, its application on itself changes Nothing. If its not true for itself, which cannot actually be the case because any statement is true and exists for itself, then it is temporary. And so the Absoluteness of everything breaks down, which is a contradiction. Absoluteness by definition cannot break down and hence isn’t temporary.

Not that contradictions aren’t allowed, every state/statement is a contradiction with respect to the other, with respect to its ‘Not-statement’. Contradiction is just another statement, i.e. its truth i.e. its existence.

But anyway, there is this bias between the statement, ‘everything is temporary’, and the statement, ‘everything is absolute/permanent’.

Now, in case of the statement, ‘everything is temporary’, it should be true for itself, like any other statement. But then that implies it is also temporary, and so its ‘Not-statement’, for example the statement ‘everything is absolute’, is true. So the statement ‘everything is temporary’ maybe actually statement ‘everything except this statement is temporary’. But the statement ‘everything is temporary’ is there, with respect to itself. By the way, statement ‘everything except this statement is temporary’ is just statement ‘everything is temporary’ with the ‘fact’ that any statement exists/is true with respect to itself. The thing is, Everything is state/statement.

Anyway, there is a bias, and there are other such statements, which also appears on case of mother-daughter realities, as Universe Independence Bias.

STATE[MENT]VERSE

Also, at the Absolute fundamental, Everything is state/statement. And every statement exists for itself, doesn’t exist with respect to other statement i.e. its ‘Not-statement’. At Absolute fundamental, the statements are infinitely far, the statements are infinitely close. Every state is Infidefiception, every state is Infidefiception. I.e. Every statement exists with respect to itself, every statement doesn’t exist with respect to itself. For any statement, its ‘Not-statement’ doesn’t exists with respect to it. For any statement, its ‘Not-statement’ exists with respect to it. Any state/statement exists, doesn’t exist with respect to itself. But even this is not true, is true. Not even this is true, is true. And so on…This is Infidefiception, this is State[ment]verse.

The thing is that Every thing is statement and can be reduced to a statement. The ‘not even this, not even this’, Nothing, Infidefiception, even State[ment]verse is, and can be reduced to a statement, and not, and yes, and not, and yes, and not, so on….. This is Infidefiception, this is State[ment]verse.

State[ment]verse can be a statement, i.e. its own element, its own part. State[ment]verse cannot be a statement, i.e. its own element, its own part. Even this isn’t, this is, isn’t, is, isn’t…. See, it never ends….. This is because Nothing is Everything, Contradiction,…..This is Infidefiception

STATE[MENT]VERSE