»The things you see in the matrix are not what they represent«

Confused. A computer does not work at all like a human brain. The electrical signals are very different. There has to be a translation of the matrix data in order for it to be perceived as being a real place. This perceiving only happens in the mind. The matrix is, in reality, a bunch of interacting data.

For a "multiplayer" interactive world to work, there has to be one computer governing all the data.

If all people connected to the matrix was to run an program, inside their brain telling them how the world looks, there would be an absolute chaos.. One brain telling the matrix how he is seeing the world, and another having an entierly diffrent view.. there would be no way to get those views to fit together

hey you asked what my theory was!

I know I said not to go off topic but I just had to check. Have either of you NOT heard of homstarunner.com?

If you haven't heard of it then check this animation out and then go to the Strongbad emails. It is the most brilliant funny site on the web:

yes that site is pretty big here. i actually met one of the guys who runs it

....Exellent!

A friend of my brother's had the Strongbad's song about the Cheat stuck in his head for a week. I've gotten caught playing the Trogodor the Burninator game at work before, too. I'm planning on making Homestar Runner references in my fanfic that fans of that site will catch. Inside jokes, if you will.

the fanfic i gave you the idea for? thats cool.

Fatpie42 wrote:

1) That Smith's mind is outside the matrix like a human mind.

What I meant was that although Smith's 'mind' is in matrix and his programm is run by matrix, some part of him is outside - it is a SOURCE code of him/his programm that is outside. However, if you want to change the SOURCE code, the program should be terminated first, avatar (representation of the programm for a human mind) must either leave the matrix (go to the SOURCE, which is outside the matrix - can't we agree on this?) or be killed.

Fatpie42 wrote:

2) That the matrix all exists, as we see it, all the time.

Yeah, that's what I think - the data, the structure exist all the time, because there are all the time people that would like to see the matrix (that are awake, so to speak). However the matrix exist only as a code - and it is translated into the picture (and smell, taste ...) only if someone is looking at it. That's a good point you mentioned. I think the comparison to the game is good here, because the actual game space (or at least a part of it) exist in the computer memory, even if your avatar isn't looking at it - it saves computing capacity to render on a screen just what you (your avatar) are looking at.

Fatpie42 wrote:

3) Because the matrix exists all the time there needs to be an avatar and information linking to that avatar as seperate things.

And what's wrong with this? Avatar is an object within a matrix and obviously, there should be an information (connetion) to the rest of the matrix - to the other objects and to the rules that may be applied to such objects. Besided that, avatar is also connected to its user - to the person the avatar represents, a person that says the avatat what to do, person who moves him.

The hard thing to get is the way you (the user) moves the avatar and get the feedback. There is no screen with buttons you are looking at and mouse you hold and move. Your screen is the avatar, screen are avatar's eye and speakers are avatar's ears, mouse are avatar's hands, legs - whole body - and so on ...

Actually, that's why the connection is in the backbone - because in backbone are all the nerves that are governing your body. The signals are collected, translated into digitally understandable form and send as commands for the avatar into him. Then the avatar moves himselv within the matrix - the avatar object interacts with other objects following the rules of the matrix ... and what avatar sees is coming back to its user, but this time to replace the signals that goes to nerves from eyes, ears and skin (translated, of course)

Fatpie42 wrote:

So as you can see. The avatar theory only works if avatars are the translation of the data in the matrix which is found in your mind.

Of course, your mind is the most important thing - everything is done for your mind ... to be comfortable and do not have to be bothered with a code. When you write your post, you are also uninterested about the code it has, while carried through the network ...

Fatpie42 wrote:

Wrong. I think that it is not only Smith's "avatar" that is copied (whatever that could mean) but Smith as a whole. When Smith copies to Bane, Bane recieves Smith's whole personality. Every person who "becomes" Smith is a seperate person with the same personality. Naturally the Smiths seem to be able to interact (they are programs after all) and they all work together sharing a common goal - like a bee hive. But with the Bane problem in mind it makes more sense for me to say that each Smith works independantly of the others.

Yes, there are more Smiths and all the plugged people are probably having a nightmare

Remember, Smith is a digital virus ... and if human brain consist of certain signals, he may corrupt them too, change their form and subsequently take over the whole brain. If human mind IS in electromagnetical signals, and these are changed, personality is either changed, or dead and replaced.

Look let's get this straight. An avatar can't go to the source. An avatar doesn't GO anywhere.

If I have a projector and I am projecting onto a screen. Let's say, for this example's sake, that I am projecting an image of a bunny. This bunny can be seen on the screen, until I turn the light off. When I turn the light off, where has the bunny gone? Well, it hasn't GONE anywhere. It's still where it always was. The thing is that it was never actually on the screen. That was only a projection of it. The actual bunny is really a slide in the projector.

This example might be slightly misleading because the image of the bunny is still an image of a bunny even if you are just looking at the slide. However, I could just as easily be projecting from a DVD player, in which case what is actually being displayed is really no more than data on a disc.

However, the thing to say that the image projected is different from what is on the disc is not true either. They are not different things. They are intrinsically linked. Without one you could never have the other. You cannot experience Smith as an image or a feeling (like him punching you) unless he is actually in the matrix as code. One cannot exist without the other.




One thing I really don't get about your view is, if Smith is supposed to be code in the matrix why would he need to be somewhere else too? What the hell is source code?

Quote:

One thing I really don't get about your view is, if Smith is supposed to be code in the matrix why would he need to be somewhere else too? What the hell is source code?

Those are excellent questions....what IS source code?

I am using the analogy with computers, as far as i am able to understand them ...

I did never really get what the people on this forum means by talking abou the source ... to me, it was just like a mantra everyone repeats in its own way, but I didn't get it. So, I make my theory, based on computers.

What is the source of a program? It is a file with a code that tells the program what to do and how. Before computer is able to run it, it must be compiled into the language understandable not to the programmers but to the computers operation system.

So, is my point of view on matrix. The Source is the source code of every program, even of matrix (and it is so complicated, that no one can really undestand it, but it is based on rules, that can be separatelly understandable), even of AI. In a similar way as DNA is the source of humans. It is deep in the structure and it is governing the structure somehow - it sets the rules of behaviour and form of appearance, more or less strictly.

But the code - I mean the source code - cannot be changed while the program is running, because it got developed somehow, even far beyond the expectation that could be deduced from the source code (so the source code should be open - providing space for a change - as a measure of adaptation to the conditions) - while the program is running, it is not on the hard drive, it is also in RAM, in CPU and the buffers along the way and I don't know wherever ... so, before you want to change the code, you should terminate the program, remove it from all the mentioned part and it should be done in convenient way (not by reset or shutting off the power), otherwise it would possibly harm the system or even the hardware.

Looking at your post Fatpie, I would say source code is the slide. It is far away from the actual *intrinsic* relation between source code and program but it is the best I can put it into your analogy.

About avatars, I am not saying avatar is going anywhere - he moves only in the virtual space of matrix - that is, interacts with other avatars and with matrix and with whatever other is in matrix.

Read my post carefully, I hope I am clear enough (but never sure) and before doing that, please remove from your mind any other ideas about avatars, because they are probably misleading from my conception.

I know, I want a lot, I also didn't read all your previous posts, but you have made so many of them ... I am sorry, I am doing my best.

The thing about the source is that its so small compared to what it made. its crazy to think about isnt it. its like a pyrimid. he starts on top and it multiplies and multiplies. craziness.

titek wrote:

What is the source of a program? It is a file with a code that tells the program what to do and how. Before computer is able to run it, it must be compiled into the language understandable not to the programmers but to the computers operation system... ...In a similar way as DNA is the source of humans. It is deep in the structure and it is governing the structure somehow - it sets the rules of behaviour and form of appearance, more or less strictly... ...But the source code - cannot be changed while the program is running,

That's pretty much it.

marl64 wrote:

The source is the source, no-one lives there, it is in effect the pattern from which the matrix is created. Programs that go to the source, don't come back to tell about it.

In Human programming terms;

Source code is the programmer friendly version of the program. It's a load of text containing an outline of what the program is intended to do

Source code is converted to Object code by a compiler. The compiler converts the Source (Human Friendly) into the Object (Machine Friendly) versions of the program.

Object code is a whole load of numbers usually viewed in hexadecimal (base 16) which are converted by the processor into a series of switching instructions. These instructions toggle millions of little electrical gates (and this is where the binary part comes in).

For a running program to be converted back to the source it must be reverse-compiled (dunno if there's a better term) back into a format the programmer can understand.

Now when it comes to the idea of a program writing a program, well that's a whole different thing. Since the programmer program would not need a "human friendly" version and so that's a whole 'nother can of worms.

Incidentally, there is a type of program that has no source. An interactive way to program.

The system constantly runs the program and changes are made live while it is running. Programming is done at a much lower level and changes are immediately visible.

It's not as common now as it used to be due to the advancing complexities of processors.

I still don't get it. What is the difference between data and source code. They are the same thing! It is simply the data before it is translated into programming language.

As for this "virtual space" there IS no virtual space. If the virtual space is to be described as anything it should be described as an illusion. The perception people jacked in have of the matrix is a representation of the code as something it is not. This does not exist in any kind of 'space' it is simply a sensation directed straight into the nervous system. Where is this virtual space? It is nowhere outside of the mind.

its kinda like there is no spoon huh?

Fatpie42 wrote:

I still don't get it. What is the difference between data and source code. They are the same thing! It is simply the data before it is translated into programming language.

Yeah, both are data but they are different kinds, I guess. Some data - source - tells another data what to do, they set the rules - the structure, so to speak. It is like a difference between Word processor and piece of text. The data, the word processor is made of, have certain structure and they are able to operate with differently coded pieces of text, not the other way round.

So, I think the source code is what in a way determine another data - it sets the structure of them. It is like a system built on another system, in a way, and every higher level allows for greater possibilities. The source code determines what the program can do and what eventually should do (its purpose, if can say it like this) but if the source code is complicated, there is a high chance of some bugs - outcomes unpredicted in initial programming but still possible.

Fatpie42 wrote:

As for this "virtual space" there IS no virtual space. If the virtual space is to be described as anything it should be described as an illusion. The perception people jacked in have of the matrix is a representation of the code as something it is not. This does not exist in any kind of 'space' it is simply a sensation directed straight into the nervous system. Where is this virtual space? It is nowhere outside of the mind.

That's why is it virtual, not real space. About internet, I think it is also possible to say it is a virtual space - it is not real space, but it has certain structure and you can (virtually) move in it - from web page to web page, from one location to another, from data at one computer to another data on another computer. Doesn't it resemble space? Although only thing that actually moves are electrons in wires. They do not move randomly - their movement have certain structure (pattern) and computer decodes it as data and construct from it eventually picture on the screen (as your brain constructs the vision of space from fotons that reach your eyes).

So, space is just construct in your mind (based also on hearing and touch, of course) and matrix would be another construct, very similar to it in appearance but different in source data, from which it is constructed.

marl64 wrote:

Now when it comes to the idea of a program writing a program, well that's a whole different thing. Since the programmer program would not need a "human friendly" version and so that's a whole 'nother can of worms.

But still, I think it needs a version that is understandable for the programmer-program, which may be a way different from the version for the environment (operating system) that actually runs the program.

marl64 wrote:

Incidentally, there is a type of program that has no source. An interactive way to program. The system constantly runs the program and changes are made live while it is running. Programming is done at a much lower level and changes are immediately visible. It's not as common now as it used to be due to the advancing complexities of processors.

I am not a programmer though my idea about it is a bit vague ... but isn't that the interactive programming consist of compiling the source in real time - you do not write the code, but only say another program what to do and this programming-program then writes the code and compile it in the same procedure?

huh, you guys know alot about that type of stuff.