Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

NASA Physicist Thomas Campbell explains the proof that we live in a Simulation 100% - “We Live in a Simulation – And I Can Prove It With Physics” “In a virtual reality, the highest speed you can go contiguously — not teleporting, but actually moving — is one pixel... of distance for one pixel of time. That’s the Planck length over Planck time. That’s why nothing can go faster than light. Entanglement isn’t two separate particles magically talking to each other. It’s one system. Think of a two-by-four a million miles long. When you flip one end, the other end flips at the same instant because it’s the same thing. This reality only renders what’s being observed. That’s why the double-slit experiment works the way it does — until something interacts with it, it stays as probability.”show more

Defiant Ghost

108,713 subscribers

363,979 görüntüleme • 15 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

Bilim & Teknoloji Eğitim Haberler & Politika

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

🚨 The double slit experiment keeps resurfacing for a reason particles behave like waves until they’re observed, then suddenly “choose” a state. Reality doesn’t just exist… it responds. If observation changes outcome, then consciousness isn’t just a passive observer ,it’s part of the system itself. That’s where simulation theory starts creeping in: a universe that only fully “renders” when measured. The deeper question isn’t whether this proves we’re in a simulation… it’s why reality behaves like it’s waiting to be seen.

🚨 The double slit experiment keeps resurfacing for a reason particles behave like waves until they’re observed, then suddenly “choose” a state. Reality doesn’t just exist… it responds. If observation changes outcome, then consciousness isn’t just a passive observer ,it’s part of the system itself. That’s where simulation theory starts creeping in: a universe that only fully “renders” when measured. The deeper question isn’t whether this proves we’re in a simulation… it’s why reality behaves like it’s waiting to be seen.

T R U T H P O L E

12,865 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Rob Reiner on the comparisons between "The Sure Thing" (1985) & "It Happened One Night" (1934): "A lot of people have said 'The Sure Thing' (1985) was like a teenage version of 'It Happened One Night' (1934). It’s hard to believe but at that point I’d never seen that movie. I’ve subsequently seen it and the only thing that’s comparable to me is that it’s on the road and the two people who don’t particularly like each other fall in love. The only thing that I ever shoot for is to try to be as good as I can be at the time. You may look back on something you’ve done ten, twelve years ago and say, “Well, that’s not as good as I can do now.” And it’s really irrelevant. The only thing you can go by is whether this as good as you can do at the time you’re doing it. And I felt when I finished 'The Sure Thing', it was as good as I could do at that time." ("The Directors - Take Two", Robert J. Emery, 2002)

Rob Reiner on the comparisons between "The Sure Thing" (1985) & "It Happened One Night" (1934): "A lot of people have said 'The Sure Thing' (1985) was like a teenage version of 'It Happened One Night' (1934). It’s hard to believe but at that point I’d never seen that movie. I’ve subsequently seen it and the only thing that’s comparable to me is that it’s on the road and the two people who don’t particularly like each other fall in love. The only thing that I ever shoot for is to try to be as good as I can be at the time. You may look back on something you’ve done ten, twelve years ago and say, “Well, that’s not as good as I can do now.” And it’s really irrelevant. The only thing you can go by is whether this as good as you can do at the time you’re doing it. And I felt when I finished 'The Sure Thing', it was as good as I could do at that time." ("The Directors - Take Two", Robert J. Emery, 2002)

DepressedBergman

91,700 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

What if science keeps circling the truth but refuses to say one word? God. Every few years, the simulation question resurfaces. Not because it’s trendy but because reality keeps behaving like an information system. Physics tells us the universe has a data limit That’s the Bekenstein Bound a maximum amount of information per region of space. A cosmos with a memory cap doesn’t look accidental. It looks engineered. Zoom into quantum mechanics. Particles don’t resolve into reality until they’re observed. The universe doesn’t calculate details until they’re needed. That’s not mystical language. That’s how optimized rendering systems work. Entanglement? Instant synchronization across any distance. Physics calls it non-local. Engineers call it linked registers. And spacetime itself? At the Planck scale, it isn’t smooth it’s pixelated. Reality runs on resolution. So science calls this a simulation hypothesis. But here’s the part it can’t explain: Consciousness. If awareness is just a survival tool, why are humans the only species burdened with self-reflection, morality, creativity, and existential dread? Animals survive perfectly without questioning reality. Humans question everything. And more strangely we override survival instincts constantly. We self-sabotage. We chase meaning over safety. We destroy ourselves in the pursuit of truth. That’s not a survival upgrade. That’s something else entirely. Ancient texts noticed this first. Before Eden’s fall, humans weren’t self-aware. No shame. No existential fear. No moral struggle. Then something activated. Eyes opened. Choice emerged. Consequences became real. Consciousness wasn’t evolved. It was awakened. And maybe that’s the connection science keeps missing. What if reality is engineered not by machines but by a mind What if consciousness isn’t an accidental glitch in the system but the interface Christians already believe this. A designed cosmos. Fine-tuned laws. A Creator outside time seeing beginning and end at once. Call it a simulation. Call it a construct. Call it a divine framework. But the truth doesn’t change: Reality behaves like it was designed because it was. And consciousness isn’t here to help us survive it’s here to help us see. Science doesn’t reject God because the evidence isn’t there. It hesitates because accepting Him means something deeper: Responsibility. Meaning. Purpose. If reality is programmable then someone wrote the code. And if consciousness can interact with that code then maybe faith isn’t ignorance. Maybe it’s recognition.

What if science keeps circling the truth but refuses to say one word? God. Every few years, the simulation question resurfaces. Not because it’s trendy but because reality keeps behaving like an information system. Physics tells us the universe has a data limit That’s the Bekenstein Bound a maximum amount of information per region of space. A cosmos with a memory cap doesn’t look accidental. It looks engineered. Zoom into quantum mechanics. Particles don’t resolve into reality until they’re observed. The universe doesn’t calculate details until they’re needed. That’s not mystical language. That’s how optimized rendering systems work. Entanglement? Instant synchronization across any distance. Physics calls it non-local. Engineers call it linked registers. And spacetime itself? At the Planck scale, it isn’t smooth it’s pixelated. Reality runs on resolution. So science calls this a simulation hypothesis. But here’s the part it can’t explain: Consciousness. If awareness is just a survival tool, why are humans the only species burdened with self-reflection, morality, creativity, and existential dread? Animals survive perfectly without questioning reality. Humans question everything. And more strangely we override survival instincts constantly. We self-sabotage. We chase meaning over safety. We destroy ourselves in the pursuit of truth. That’s not a survival upgrade. That’s something else entirely. Ancient texts noticed this first. Before Eden’s fall, humans weren’t self-aware. No shame. No existential fear. No moral struggle. Then something activated. Eyes opened. Choice emerged. Consequences became real. Consciousness wasn’t evolved. It was awakened. And maybe that’s the connection science keeps missing. What if reality is engineered not by machines but by a mind What if consciousness isn’t an accidental glitch in the system but the interface Christians already believe this. A designed cosmos. Fine-tuned laws. A Creator outside time seeing beginning and end at once. Call it a simulation. Call it a construct. Call it a divine framework. But the truth doesn’t change: Reality behaves like it was designed because it was. And consciousness isn’t here to help us survive it’s here to help us see. Science doesn’t reject God because the evidence isn’t there. It hesitates because accepting Him means something deeper: Responsibility. Meaning. Purpose. If reality is programmable then someone wrote the code. And if consciousness can interact with that code then maybe faith isn’t ignorance. Maybe it’s recognition.

Philip

42,394 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

🚨 Simulation Theory: The Double Slit Experiment proves particles act like waves until observed then they snap into particles. What if our reality only "renders" when we're looking, just like a video game optimizing resources? Check out this episode from The Why Files breaking it down, tying it to Simulation Theory. Are we in a sim? This could be the key to unlocking the true nature of existence! The Why Files video did a great job on explaining the Double Slit Experiment & Simulation Theory What do YOU think—real or rendered? Drop your thoughts below!

🚨 Simulation Theory: The Double Slit Experiment proves particles act like waves until observed then they snap into particles. What if our reality only "renders" when we're looking, just like a video game optimizing resources? Check out this episode from The Why Files breaking it down, tying it to Simulation Theory. Are we in a sim? This could be the key to unlocking the true nature of existence! The Why Files video did a great job on explaining the Double Slit Experiment & Simulation Theory What do YOU think—real or rendered? Drop your thoughts below!

Interstellar

48,439,814 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

We were all lied to about our reality, it is not fixed. We live in a simulation and we are the projectors. Our beliefs and knowing creates our reality. This is a subject that I have deeply researched because I love physics. Everything is energy and nothing is solid. I could go on and on with proofs. Look up the double slit experiment and Donald Hoffman simulation on YouTube!

We were all lied to about our reality, it is not fixed. We live in a simulation and we are the projectors. Our beliefs and knowing creates our reality. This is a subject that I have deeply researched because I love physics. Everything is energy and nothing is solid. I could go on and on with proofs. Look up the double slit experiment and Donald Hoffman simulation on YouTube!

Diana ❤️🇺🇸🙏🐸

40,483 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

🚨 Mind-blowing stuff: The Double Slit Experiment proves particles act like waves until observed—then they snap into particles. 🤯 What if our reality only "renders" when we're looking, just like a video game optimizing resources? Check out this episode from The Why Files breaking it down, tying it to Simulation Theory. Are we in a sim? This could be the key to unlocking the true nature of existence! The Why Files video did a great job on explaining the Double Slit Experiment & Simulation Theory What do YOU think—real or rendered? Drop your thoughts below!

🚨 Mind-blowing stuff: The Double Slit Experiment proves particles act like waves until observed—then they snap into particles. 🤯 What if our reality only "renders" when we're looking, just like a video game optimizing resources? Check out this episode from The Why Files breaking it down, tying it to Simulation Theory. Are we in a sim? This could be the key to unlocking the true nature of existence! The Why Files video did a great job on explaining the Double Slit Experiment & Simulation Theory What do YOU think—real or rendered? Drop your thoughts below!

Interstellar

120,272 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Elon Musk just handed you the most unsettling thought experiment in human history. Musk: “These games will be indistinguishable from reality. You will not be able to tell the difference. Either that or civilization will end. Those are the two options.” Two options. That’s it. Forty years ago, Pong. Two rectangles and a square. Today, photorealistic worlds. Real time. Millions inside them simultaneously. If that curve holds. And it always has. Simulated reality becomes indistinguishable from base reality. Not metaphorically. Literally. Your senses won’t catch it. Your instruments won’t. Nothing will. Musk isn’t making a tech prediction. He’s describing a filter. If advanced civilizations inevitably build simulations indistinguishable from reality, and each of those simulations spawns billions of nested realities for every one base reality… Statistically, you are almost certainly not in the original. That’s the simulation argument. Nobody touches the second half. “Or civilization will end.” That isn’t a caveat. That’s the escape clause. The only proof we’d ever have of being in base reality is never making it far enough to build our own. Civilization ends. No simulation. No record. No signal. The original timeline, extinguished. Fermi’s paradox stops feeling like a mystery. The universe isn’t silent because nothing is out there. It’s silent because every civilization eventually faced this exact binary. And most of them didn’t cross it. We’re somewhere on that curve right now. Moving faster than any civilization before us. Either we cross the threshold and confirm we were never in the original. Or we don’t. And the universe gets a little quieter.

Elon Musk just handed you the most unsettling thought experiment in human history. Musk: “These games will be indistinguishable from reality. You will not be able to tell the difference. Either that or civilization will end. Those are the two options.” Two options. That’s it. Forty years ago, Pong. Two rectangles and a square. Today, photorealistic worlds. Real time. Millions inside them simultaneously. If that curve holds. And it always has. Simulated reality becomes indistinguishable from base reality. Not metaphorically. Literally. Your senses won’t catch it. Your instruments won’t. Nothing will. Musk isn’t making a tech prediction. He’s describing a filter. If advanced civilizations inevitably build simulations indistinguishable from reality, and each of those simulations spawns billions of nested realities for every one base reality… Statistically, you are almost certainly not in the original. That’s the simulation argument. Nobody touches the second half. “Or civilization will end.” That isn’t a caveat. That’s the escape clause. The only proof we’d ever have of being in base reality is never making it far enough to build our own. Civilization ends. No simulation. No record. No signal. The original timeline, extinguished. Fermi’s paradox stops feeling like a mystery. The universe isn’t silent because nothing is out there. It’s silent because every civilization eventually faced this exact binary. And most of them didn’t cross it. We’re somewhere on that curve right now. Moving faster than any civilization before us. Either we cross the threshold and confirm we were never in the original. Or we don’t. And the universe gets a little quieter.

Dustin

12,397 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

ELON: TIME TRAVEL AND TELEPORTATION WOULD BREAK REALITY, UNLESS WE’RE IN A SIMULATION “Actually, those things are almost the same thing in that you can’t break the speed of light without breaking reality, and you know, so if you could teleport somewhere instantly, if you’re talking about teleportation faster than the speed of light, presumably would be, then that would break our reality, as would time travel. Unless, those are a very important conditional here, unless we’re a simulation. Time travel does not break a simulation.” Source: Alina St. John

ELON: TIME TRAVEL AND TELEPORTATION WOULD BREAK REALITY, UNLESS WE’RE IN A SIMULATION “Actually, those things are almost the same thing in that you can’t break the speed of light without breaking reality, and you know, so if you could teleport somewhere instantly, if you’re talking about teleportation faster than the speed of light, presumably would be, then that would break our reality, as would time travel. Unless, those are a very important conditional here, unless we’re a simulation. Time travel does not break a simulation.” Source: Alina St. John

Mario Nawfal

431,749 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

YouTuber AlphaPhoenix pulled off something that sounds impossible. He recorded a laser moving across a room at 2 billion frames per second. That is fast enough to watch light itself travel, something the human eye can never perceive in real time. The camera he used was not a normal high speed camera. It recorded only one pixel at a time. To build a full video, he fired the laser again and again, each time recording a single pixel from a slightly different point. After thousands of captures, he stitched the pixels together into a full frame sequence that reveals the light wave moving through space. It is a mind bending mix of physics and creativity. The end result lets us watch one of the fastest phenomena in the universe at a speed we can finally understand.

YouTuber AlphaPhoenix pulled off something that sounds impossible. He recorded a laser moving across a room at 2 billion frames per second. That is fast enough to watch light itself travel, something the human eye can never perceive in real time. The camera he used was not a normal high speed camera. It recorded only one pixel at a time. To build a full video, he fired the laser again and again, each time recording a single pixel from a slightly different point. After thousands of captures, he stitched the pixels together into a full frame sequence that reveals the light wave moving through space. It is a mind bending mix of physics and creativity. The end result lets us watch one of the fastest phenomena in the universe at a speed we can finally understand.

Kekius Maximus

697,154 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

my two favorite people saying the same thing “just give it a try” 🥹 🦌: the most important thing is to just give it a try. i think the idea of taking that first step is one of the most important things in life 🦮: moments when we have to make big decisions can be scary, and i think that's completely normal. but the fact that something feels scary also means it’s a very important opportunity. that’s why i think it’s important to really think about what you want and then just give it a try. because if you don’t try, you’ll definitely regret it later on

my two favorite people saying the same thing “just give it a try” 🥹 🦌: the most important thing is to just give it a try. i think the idea of taking that first step is one of the most important things in life 🦮: moments when we have to make big decisions can be scary, and i think that's completely normal. but the fact that something feels scary also means it’s a very important opportunity. that’s why i think it’s important to really think about what you want and then just give it a try. because if you don’t try, you’ll definitely regret it later on

ev.

34,733 görüntüleme • 20 gün önce

InkField started as a study of digital ink and brush behavior. Over time it turned into something else, a system that can reconstruct a drawing from the memory of its stroke paths. But that’s the strange thing about the time we live in. Somewhere along the way I realized I had also opened a window for robots. Let’s see what we might end up creating together.

InkField started as a study of digital ink and brush behavior. Over time it turned into something else, a system that can reconstruct a drawing from the memory of its stroke paths. But that’s the strange thing about the time we live in. Somewhere along the way I realized I had also opened a window for robots. Let’s see what we might end up creating together.

AluanWang

26,778 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Thomas Young's double-slit experiment, performed in 1801, is one of the most important demonstrations in physics. It provided strong evidence that light behaves as a wave by producing interference patterns. In the experiment, coherent light is directed at an opaque barrier with two closely spaced slits. The light waves passing through these slits interfere with one another, creating a pattern of bright and dark fringes on a screen positioned behind the slits. The spacing and location of these fringes depend on the light's wavelength, the distance between the two slits, and the distance to the screen. This experiment established the wave nature of light. The modern understanding of wave-particle duality, where light can also behave like particles (photons), developed in the early 20th century with quantum mechanics, and is beautifully illustrated by modern versions of the double-slit experiment performed with individual photons.

Thomas Young's double-slit experiment, performed in 1801, is one of the most important demonstrations in physics. It provided strong evidence that light behaves as a wave by producing interference patterns. In the experiment, coherent light is directed at an opaque barrier with two closely spaced slits. The light waves passing through these slits interfere with one another, creating a pattern of bright and dark fringes on a screen positioned behind the slits. The spacing and location of these fringes depend on the light's wavelength, the distance between the two slits, and the distance to the screen. This experiment established the wave nature of light. The modern understanding of wave-particle duality, where light can also behave like particles (photons), developed in the early 20th century with quantum mechanics, and is beautifully illustrated by modern versions of the double-slit experiment performed with individual photons.

The Math Flow

13,424 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

#DunkFSRICHwithDUNK #JoongFSLUCKYwithJOONG : i’m writing a JoongDunk fanfic. in the story only one of you can survivein the end. if you had to chooses would you want yourself to survive or the other person? why? 🌞i want to die … i want to be someone die … it must be drama … if someone survives someone dies… if that’s how it … i will be someone die : why? 🌞cause i don’t want him to die ….. 🌻: it’s okay we can survive both because one survive the other one can help each other if you can each other —— : if you could change one thing about the ending of this story what would you want to change the most? 🌞: die too ( die 2 both die) 🌻: both happy ending

#DunkFSRICHwithDUNK #JoongFSLUCKYwithJOONG : i’m writing a JoongDunk fanfic. in the story only one of you can survivein the end. if you had to chooses would you want yourself to survive or the other person? why? 🌞i want to die … i want to be someone die … it must be drama … if someone survives someone dies… if that’s how it … i will be someone die : why? 🌞cause i don’t want him to die ….. 🌻: it’s okay we can survive both because one survive the other one can help each other if you can each other —— : if you could change one thing about the ending of this story what would you want to change the most? 🌞: die too ( die 2 both die) 🌻: both happy ending

🇻🇳Jaidee’s aunt Bamnie🐣

24,757 görüntüleme • 17 gün önce

Daniel Cormier says being around Jon Jones is not as nasty as it used to be 🤝😅 "Being around Jon Jones is different because we had such a bad history, but the reality is I’m done fighting now and that part of it’s gone. So it’s not nearly as nasty, but I think we have done a good job of being professional as much as we can. Obviously, we argue a lot, but that’s just the status of our relationship. But I think that we’ve gotten to a point in our lives where we can be in the same area without trying to fight each other."

Daniel Cormier says being around Jon Jones is not as nasty as it used to be 🤝😅 "Being around Jon Jones is different because we had such a bad history, but the reality is I’m done fighting now and that part of it’s gone. So it’s not nearly as nasty, but I think we have done a good job of being professional as much as we can. Obviously, we argue a lot, but that’s just the status of our relationship. But I think that we’ve gotten to a point in our lives where we can be in the same area without trying to fight each other."

Red Corner MMA

675,797 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

“ADHD is not a disorder of not knowing what to do. It’s a disorder of not doing what you already know.” Dr. Russell Barkley just delivered one of the clearest explanations of ADHD I’ve ever heard. He says the brain can be split in two: the back part acquires knowledge, the front part (the executive system) uses it. ADHD acts like a meat cleaver that severs the two. You already have the skills and information other people your age have. You just can’t apply them when it counts. That’s why life becomes an endless series of last-minute crises. You’re time-blind — you can only deal with what’s right in front of you. The further away a goal or deadline is, the less real it feels. The solution isn’t teaching more skills. It’s changing the environment at the exact point where the problem occurs — the “point of performance.” It’s a game-changing way to understand why traditional approaches often fail.

“ADHD is not a disorder of not knowing what to do. It’s a disorder of not doing what you already know.” Dr. Russell Barkley just delivered one of the clearest explanations of ADHD I’ve ever heard. He says the brain can be split in two: the back part acquires knowledge, the front part (the executive system) uses it. ADHD acts like a meat cleaver that severs the two. You already have the skills and information other people your age have. You just can’t apply them when it counts. That’s why life becomes an endless series of last-minute crises. You’re time-blind — you can only deal with what’s right in front of you. The further away a goal or deadline is, the less real it feels. The solution isn’t teaching more skills. It’s changing the environment at the exact point where the problem occurs — the “point of performance.” It’s a game-changing way to understand why traditional approaches often fail.

Camus

1,560,168 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

“ADHD is not a disorder of not knowing what to do. It’s a disorder of not doing what you already know.” Dr. Russell Barkley just delivered one of the clearest explanations of ADHD I’ve ever heard. He says the brain can be split in two: the back part acquires knowledge, the front part (the executive system) uses it. ADHD acts like a meat cleaver that severs the two. You already have the skills and information other people your age have. You just can’t apply them when it counts. That’s why life becomes an endless series of last-minute crises. You’re time-blind — you can only deal with what’s right in front of you. The further away a goal or deadline is, the less real it feels. The solution isn’t teaching more skills. It’s changing the environment at the exact point where the problem occurs — the “point of performance.” It’s a game-changing way to understand why traditional approaches often fail.

“ADHD is not a disorder of not knowing what to do. It’s a disorder of not doing what you already know.” Dr. Russell Barkley just delivered one of the clearest explanations of ADHD I’ve ever heard. He says the brain can be split in two: the back part acquires knowledge, the front part (the executive system) uses it. ADHD acts like a meat cleaver that severs the two. You already have the skills and information other people your age have. You just can’t apply them when it counts. That’s why life becomes an endless series of last-minute crises. You’re time-blind — you can only deal with what’s right in front of you. The further away a goal or deadline is, the less real it feels. The solution isn’t teaching more skills. It’s changing the environment at the exact point where the problem occurs — the “point of performance.” It’s a game-changing way to understand why traditional approaches often fail.

Teddy - PolyBackTest.com

169,957 görüntüleme • 15 gün önce

Dr. Eric Haseltine, former NSA Director: “NASA has funded warp drive propulsion research.” 🛸 "This is why the study of UFO's is so important" He told Jesse Michels - “We know that space time can move at faster than the speed of light. Imagine a surfer who’s on a wave, and is stationary with respect to the wave. But the wave is moving.” If you’re in a bubble of space time that’s moving faster than the speed of light, “You’re not gonna experience any acceleration or deceleration because you’re not moving in that frame.” This is the Alcubierre drive - positive energy in front, negative energy behind, creating a spacetime wave. What do you think? Is faster-than-light travel closer than we realize? Would you sign up for a warp drive mission to the stars?

Dr. Eric Haseltine, former NSA Director: “NASA has funded warp drive propulsion research.” 🛸 "This is why the study of UFO's is so important" He told Jesse Michels - “We know that space time can move at faster than the speed of light. Imagine a surfer who’s on a wave, and is stationary with respect to the wave. But the wave is moving.” If you’re in a bubble of space time that’s moving faster than the speed of light, “You’re not gonna experience any acceleration or deceleration because you’re not moving in that frame.” This is the Alcubierre drive - positive energy in front, negative energy behind, creating a spacetime wave. What do you think? Is faster-than-light travel closer than we realize? Would you sign up for a warp drive mission to the stars?

Interstellar

35,569 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

One of Quentin Tarantino’s biggest influences on Reservoir Dogs was actually John Carpenter’s The Thing. Not in terms of plot, but in the feeling of claustrophobia and paranoia created by trapping a group of men together who cannot trust one another. Tarantino explains: “The film that actually is a big influence on the film is John Carpenter’s remake of The Thing. It’s very similar, alright. I didn’t take anything from it, but I wanted to capture that same feeling of The Thing. In The Thing, you have all these guys trapped in this room, alright, and no one can trust anybody else. They can’t go anywhere else, and they just have to deal with each other, which is exactly the exact same situation in Reservoir Dogs. What I wanted to achieve is what I felt that film achieved when I first saw it at the theaters, the tension of those guys in that situation was so great, and there was no release of it because it was so claustrophobic, that the only place that tension could go was right into the audience. That’s how I felt when I was looking at The Thing, and that’s what I wanted to achieve in my movie.”

One of Quentin Tarantino’s biggest influences on Reservoir Dogs was actually John Carpenter’s The Thing. Not in terms of plot, but in the feeling of claustrophobia and paranoia created by trapping a group of men together who cannot trust one another. Tarantino explains: “The film that actually is a big influence on the film is John Carpenter’s remake of The Thing. It’s very similar, alright. I didn’t take anything from it, but I wanted to capture that same feeling of The Thing. In The Thing, you have all these guys trapped in this room, alright, and no one can trust anybody else. They can’t go anywhere else, and they just have to deal with each other, which is exactly the exact same situation in Reservoir Dogs. What I wanted to achieve is what I felt that film achieved when I first saw it at the theaters, the tension of those guys in that situation was so great, and there was no release of it because it was so claustrophobic, that the only place that tension could go was right into the audience. That’s how I felt when I was looking at The Thing, and that’s what I wanted to achieve in my movie.”

Gangster Cinema Central

23,960 görüntüleme • 12 gün önce

Reality isn’t what happens — It’s how you see what happens. In this clip, the shape doesn’t change… But depending on the angle of observation, it appears completely different. Each view is true. Each one is real. But they all tell a different story. This is exactly how life works. Two people can experience the same event — One sees pain. The other sees growth. One feels victimized. The other feels awakened. Your perspective is the lens that determines the version of reality you live in. The event is neutral. It’s the observer who decides the outcome. Just like in quantum physics: The observer collapses the wave into matter. Your vibration, your belief, your perception — They all shape the reality you experience. Shift your perspective. Shift your vibration. Shift your reality. What’s one moment in your life Where a shift in perspective changed everything? 👁️✨

Reality isn’t what happens — It’s how you see what happens. In this clip, the shape doesn’t change… But depending on the angle of observation, it appears completely different. Each view is true. Each one is real. But they all tell a different story. This is exactly how life works. Two people can experience the same event — One sees pain. The other sees growth. One feels victimized. The other feels awakened. Your perspective is the lens that determines the version of reality you live in. The event is neutral. It’s the observer who decides the outcome. Just like in quantum physics: The observer collapses the wave into matter. Your vibration, your belief, your perception — They all shape the reality you experience. Shift your perspective. Shift your vibration. Shift your reality. What’s one moment in your life Where a shift in perspective changed everything? 👁️✨

vegastar

18,336 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce