As the Interference experiments show, you project a single photon thru a plaque with two slits and it interferes with a ghost particle, a particle from a parallel universe. You can say, well it's due to the dual particle-wave quality of any subatomic particle, but when an interferometer that uses opaque mirrors it's used, this is the only and simplest explanation. What I wrote above it's quoted from : The Fabric of Reality, author: David Deutsch, printed by Allen Lane ISBN 0 7139 9061 9.
Now that Stephen Hawking is sick (in the Ghafla forum) someone mentioned having watched a documentary where physicists declared that Hawking is famous because of his wheelchair, it's not exactly that, he discovered that Black Holes radiate thermal energy and eventually evaporate, but there are physicists that have contributed more to the understanding of the Multiverse than Hawking, for instance Alan Guth, Inflationary Model, and this scientist David Deutsch has created an explanation of reality structured around: quantum theory, epistemology, evolution and computing science. And his theory explains that there is a Multiverse. I highly recommend reading this book, it's difficult to read, this explains the bad reviews given to it by ocassional readers on Amazon, but IMO he should be as important as Stephen Hawking.
loremaster wrote:My personal favourite from Frank was that "Logic may be fine for pyramid chess, but it's often too slow in real situations" (paraphrased from CH:D)
Also, to humour chigger and try to postulate about future computational ability and the current limits of technology, does anyone know about this idea of quantum computing? It's a sort of thought experiment whereby utilising quantum phenomena we could have computers which render redundant many of todays security and computing features. An example would be a padlock, with any length code, and any number of potential symbols per place, STILL has a definite number of combinations. Quantum computing is supposed to be able to bypass this sort of thing.
But i cant really explain it, its not my specialist subject.
Also, on that note, has anyone read about this before:
You want to know where skynet begins? it's in a lab in london. It's kinda tangential but the fact it models the evolution of "fitter" units by random alterations from less fit predecessors suggests that computers could "consciously" evolve simply by introducing random changes to themselves over many generations. However, given the length of time to produce and test any one unit, a robotic "generation" could be hours, not years.