My Suggestion for A.I.

It seems to be a given by most scientists these days that we are on the verge (within 25 or 50 years) of Artificial Intelligence. Like gravity, the closer we actually get to this, the more people will become involved, wishing to be the first, the more likely it will be to happen. I think it could be described as a probable event now.

We are also seeing a lot of articles warning us of the technology and moral implications. The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2014/aug/04/science-weekly-podcast-nick-bostrom-ai-artificial-intelligence) and some of our top thinkers have weighed in too (http://www.cnbc.com/id/101774267#.)

So, the paradox is, it is getting closer but no-one knows the possible results of it. We could be sowing the seeds of our own destruction without knowing it.

I am going to make a suggestion. Let us not model A.I. on the human brain, but link it with the human brain. In informational and emotional terms. Modelling A.I after the human brain is observing the physical qualities of how our brain works. But these qualities are created by a combination of d.n.a. and the information we fill that brain with. Both of these are simply numbers, codes. We have one of the codes already and we are developing the other each year with more and more accuracy.

1. Human dna contains the code to build a human body and brain. We have mapped our genome, but we don't understand how it all links together yet. But it is another part of science that seems to be a probable event. It merely takes time, computers, experiment and observation.

2. We are modelling virtual reality which is becoming more and more sophisticated. It might be a long way off to fully recreate a virtual earth, but one just has to play a modern console game to see how close visually we are getting. At some stage in the future even we will not be able to tell VR reality from 'real' reality. It is not there yet, but as a prediction I don't think it is unreasonable to assume we will develop a convincing 'matrix' style VR world within 25-50 years

3. Add these two together. Why? We need to model the human brain not on one brain, but on the cumulative processing power of all of us. We need a super intelligence, but one that is connected to us, one that feels the same way as we do. Without our weaknesses and our failings, but one with our desire and capacity to love. To make the A.I. not just human, but super-human. We can't simply input dna and hope for the best. We need some sort of selection process that allows us and the super-intelligence to choose dna that will be the most balanced between love, empathy, intelligence and rationality. A VR world is the most logical solution. And dna strands simply choose themselves to be added to the super brain.

Our aim is to make a virtual human brain by slicing together dna codes from all of us -which is more or less what nature does anyway - to get the most efficient method of recreating our existing thinking organ. VR simply allows the machine to remodel reality to get the best results.

Each dna code is a 2d virtual brain, but a human one. As we add a new 'slice' it is still 2d, but layer upon layer of 2d suddenly gives the virtual brain a further dimension. It makes it 3d now. The superbrain exists in our world, the 2d virtual brain exists in the virtual world.

This is, as far as I know, the only way we can create a super intelligence, but also know that it is also the same as us, it is not alien to us and hopefully it will not try to kill or control us. Any other descriptions or attempts to create superintelligence are all doomed to a 'try it and see' approach, but this approach ensures a more likely positive future. Why? Because the superbrain is simply the combination of all of us. It is part of us and we will be part of it.

Sounds a bit sci fi again. But so does an Artificial Intelligence. We are not smart enough to create an artificial intelligence, so we should concentrate on creating virtual human intelligence and allow it to create itself as it were.

Of course, if this happens, no-one will ever be sure they are in the VR world or the 'real' world. Or even both if the technology is there. Can we recreate lower resolution versions of ourselves? If the answer is yes, the the next question is: can we create higher resolution versions of ourselves?

So, here is my suggestion: simply design computers to help us model virtual reality and the human brain. Sooner or later no matter how unintelligent the programme that runs these models are, the code contained in our dna will at some stage achieve self awareness. We did. We don't need to design an A.I. we simply have to model dna correctly and put it into a virtual world that would be recognisable to ourselves. Sooner or later the A.I. will actually design itself.

(As a postscript, as far as the virtual 'us' are concerned, they live and die and are joined to the force that created them - the superbrain that lives in our world. In effect God for them. A bit spooky when you think about it)

Without typing errors, but probably containing errors of logic:

The Probable Universe and the Quantum Theory of Everything

"It seems to be one of the fundamental features of nature that fundamental physical laws are described in terms of a mathematical theory of great beauty and power" Paul Dirac

What I seek to do in this article is theorise that if one simply changes the way we view time and space a new cosmology becomes available, answers to questions that remain unanswered become obvious and a quantum theory of Everything becomes the most simple and logical thing in the world. As well I will attempt to provide a logical answer to the following questions:

1. What is gravity and why does it occur?

2. Why is spacetime curved

3. Why is the universe expanding and what is the cosmological constant's role in this?

4. What causes the fundamental forces?

5. What is time and space and how are they connected?

6. Why do we feel pseudo forces?

7. Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics Law a core rule of our universe?

8. What is time exactly?

I am aware these seem to be atypically science answers, but they all seem to tumble from a very simple idea, one that I believe will take hold eventually. What if our idea of timespace is skewed by our perception of it? Can we think of it another way that will also explain some of the phenomena we encounter. Can we balance the very big with the very small?

As a preamble, it always surprises me whenever anyone describes the early universe it appears to have been very small. But also particularly 'active' at a quantum level. When one describes it at the heat death it actually appears to be the opposite! This is ascribed to the accelerating nature of the Universe, perhaps dark energy or the cosmological constant. It doesn't really explain why this seems to be a one way trip though and why the very thing that caused it seems to be the same force that will end it. It does appear that they are somehow in very different states as well as sizes.

I thought long and hard about this. Why should this be? What quality is it that made it seem to encourage high vacuum energy at the start and prevent it at the end? What is it about expansion that has both these qualities?

I am going to conduct a thought experiment. Say, I have an infinite amount of energy, formless, constantly changing, chaotic. If you are in this universe, you know already that matter is energy and energy cannot be created. As our first point of logic, if we are here, this energy must scientifically be infinite, as the matter it creates is infinite.

1. I split it into two equal halves, both still infinite. I make another split. I have now infinite energy divided into 4 equal parts. I draw a point on the x, y axis at 100, 100. I then joint these four axes together to form a square.

2. I have now two equal but equally formless amounts of energy. I am going to now apply logic to them. Leibniz's identity/contradiction or contraposition.

Thus every point on the line 0-infinity is measured and informational opposite is lined up beside it. You will now have a one dimensional line, but it is connected to it's informational opposite. From now on, I will call this opposite line it's anti-twin. Remember, this anti-twin is made up of existing energy, just with 'negative' information on it. In 1928 Paul Dirac discovered in his equation that the atom contained information about it's opposite force. I am going to assume this is the method for information transfer about the atom and it's twin. They are the same thing, energy in the top right square, but now made up of a thing and it's theoretical opposite informationally. This is not a map of position, it is a map of relationships. A topographical map. In a dimension of boundless indescribably energy you can't know certainty until you prove it mathematically yourself. Henri Poincaire the great mathematician realised that sometimes mathematics can be used where position is not necessary Think of a tube map.

3. So I have a position on an infinite x axis and it's opposite. Of all infinities the only thing that we know for sure is that anything on the x axis has an informational opposite and they both add up to 0. This isn't much but it's certainly a start. Thanks to Mathematics of course.

4. I need to measure this. I put some informational rules on it. Don't forget this is still infinity + -infinity = 0.

I then flip the axis. I now have 4 perfectly equal squares. Each square has exactly the same information is in, but in it's opposite. Draw a circle in the square. At 4 points it touches the square. Now draw a further square inside that. What a beautiful shape of information. The power and beauty of mathematics.

5. Second principle: the indiscernability of identicals. Note, not the opposite.

Any information that applies to one square happens to it's opposite in reverse. Informationally only of course.

Remember this is one square of 'reality' and three squares of information. Existing mathematically to allow us position and momentum. The top point is the one point it all joins together, the only point where you can truly speak from mathematical certainty.

So, we live in the red square, the Einstein universe. It creates as an event and builds itself up from first principles. It is built on logic and mathematics and it works to where we are now at the top point. The beauty of mathematics is that it describes the 'square' universe just as well as it describes the circle. It is built on logic. Now, imagine mathematics piecing itself together through time, from first principles. Us, a humans, starting off believing in god but being curious and believing in the power of thought. Soon we reach the point when we can start to speak with mathematical certainty. But we build the logic up ourselves. We are not spoon fed it.

Then we discover the atom and quantum mechanics. It just doesn't seem to make sense when compared to the Einstein universe, but we trust the power of mathematics and we work with it until it does make sense. How beautiful is that? The universe of the logical not the irrational.

All the opposite events seem to help 'cause' their anti-twin. If you used both sets of information it would seem like everything was the opposite.

This is a topological map of the informational forces of the universe. Now, consider this: all those four squares are energy. All those four squares are information. If you understand the beauty of maths we have to be in that top corner square

But quantum mechanics shows we are also in that point of yellow circle too. Mathematically, scientifically. How strange is that?

The above is an informational map of the universe explaining our cosmology. It is a map of relationships with each other.

In fact look at it again and it is the informational map of human consciousness, starting off at nothing and building itself up piece by piece, until it reaches the point where it starts to begin to be able to speak with mathematical certainty.

Now look at it again. It is the map of the atom, the first point. It built itself from impossibility to absolute certainty and the information passes infinitely through the top point. The atom is made up of information on energy, as shown by Paul Dirac. Seeming impossible, but we explain it bit by bit through logic and mathematics. Where does that information flow? The same energy that exists, that HAS to exist scientifically. But just a different way to interpret the mathematics. A deeper understanding.

All mathematically and logically proven from first steps though, remember?

Now consider the atom MUST scientifically life in the same universe as us. It HAS to, it is what builds that square up. Heraclitus knew this way back in Greek times. But the atom is information written on this.

I live in the universe where things have to be proved to be true, where there needs to be a deeper understanding of mathematics to full see the beauty of the universe. I live in the same universe as Stephen Hawkings and Einstein, Marcus duSautoy, Max Tegmark, Paul Dirac, Sir Issac Newton.

Now consider the beauty of this map. It is information passes from one square to the other, it builds up from logical first principles, but as far as it is concerned it is a continuous flow. It doesn't know how it started. To get that information it needs to work back.

If the top point is the point of us in the 'macro' universe and the quantum universe. It is the one point where, if you use logic it is possible to work back from first principles. Of all the places at a quantum level where do we exist? We HAVE to exist at the top point. If that is the case we are also made up of this quality too. Despite everything that 'makes sense', we trust mathematics and just accept it.

Just look at this map, how beautiful it is. It describes so much. We can start at any point on this flow of information and work our way logically from nothing to the infinite. But only if we use logic and work our ways back, not vice versa.

The cosmos:

The fundamental forces are a loop of information applied to an infinite amount of energy because we start at first principles of science and work back. Mathematics is the only property that proves it HAS to exist. It starts out at a zero probability event and becomes a 100% probability event. Why is probability so important? Because it is a way of 'taming' infinity. No-one can 'know' infinity, but you can mathematically work it out using probability. Infinity of what? Infinity of energy, infinity of information.

Why was Heisenberg right. Because we use distance and time as measurements, but they are in fact quantum measures of probability as measured in relationships. The only way of actually measuring the universe. The more we add information from one square the less information we have in the pothers. The universe (and us) need information from all four squares to fully describe space and momentum, otherwise it can't be described.

Why the big bang and the heat death? Because that is the application of mathematics and logic to information as perceived in the red square. They both exist at the same point, see? They mathematically have to. How smart is the human race?

Why do we feel pseudo forces? Because the information is flowing from square to square.

What is the strong nuclear force? It is the strongest force in the universe because it is information from all squares combined. It is the informational force of identity, the most powerful force in the universe. Made from certain knowledge by mathematically showing that it's opposite must be true too.

Electro magnetism is the flow of information from square to square, but actually happening in one square in 'reality'. As is the weak nuclear force, just different information.

What is gravity? It is the informational force pushing towards and away from each other. On a quantum level it isn't so much a force as a tendency, it is so weak. Look at the map, if you live at the point of mathematical certainty, gravity is the force that wants you to remain on that yellow circle. The closer we are to something in 'time' and 'space' the more we affect each other. Simply that. All this information is actual; and real. This is not a metaphor, it's how the universe works scientifically and mathematically. I live in the universe where things must be proved mathematically to be true and I share that universe with many people. I am confident that science will prove this, I do not take it as 'belief'. If I am wrong I won't mind, but what a way to be wrong.

Why is spacetime curved? Because that's how we perceive it, but the information we have used to understand this is exactly the same and is still EXACTLY correct! We have just used mathematics to explain it. We KNOW energy can't be destroyed. It is a scientific fact. We KNOW the universe had to arrange itself in a random order to be worked on by gravity, chemistry, evolution. We know this because of all the spaces in the universe where that has to be true it is the very top of the map where that HAS to be true. It is the anthropic principle, we cannot ignore that as science. Every scientific discovery we make now, every decision we make, we simply ask: am I living in the universe where both the predictable and the seemingly impossible happen? The answer? Yes, if I can prove both scientifically. No, if I can't.

We all, we included see the world from the perception of the red square. Now look at the map again. The beauty is mathematics is the only system that creates itself, but then says the best way to retain an informational whole is to be a balance of all the forces. But only if you can work your way back logically. Mathematics is the only force in the universe that says the best way to retain identity of information is also to be good and affect other people positively too. Altruism is a mathematical event, an informational one.

This topological map is one of the cosmological forces that help make the universe what it is. It is the topographical map of our thoughts as our brain processes all this disparate and seemingly contradictory information, but piecing it all together step by step.

It is the map of our human existence from very primitive to understanding nature and mathematics.

And it is the map of the atom, from the absolute impossibility of energy to it's absolute certainty regardless as to position. It is the wave and particle duality.

The philosopher Hegel outlined the law of the unity and conflict of opposites, the law of passage of quantitative changes to qualitative changes and the law of the negation of the negation. It is the informational law that works on the smallest to the largest and it is how things are created. Rather how they use information and it's opposite to create themselves. It is science, not blind faith.

Time is probability on a quantum level. Simple as. Time is the next probable state the information of your atoms will rearrange based on the logical consideration of information of the last. It simply won't rearrange itself in an improbable or unmathematical way. We live in the universe of mathematics, we have to, there simply can't be anything without it.

Now look at the map again. I have divided all of this energy into discrete informational units. Of identity, of direction, of forces. Each square is divided into 100% x 100%. I will call this unit, c, a 100th. There are four of them, but there needs to be. They all must make mathematical sense when compared to their informational anti twin.

Look at e=mc2. It describes this universe as explained from the red square. But what is c? C as its name suggests is simply 1%. It is also an informational necessity to be able to take all this conflicting information and create order. If it isn't a speed limit in the universe of Einstein we simply can't make sense of the universe as he showed. We need it as a speed limit to get to that point of understanding. But what is c in information terms? Simply energy split up into 4 and describing a physical property or direction or momentum. It is the division of the information required by mathematics before the system will work. In atomic terms, c is what allows the atom to have these 4 different measurements seemingly at once. C is the seemingly impossible quality of an atom to be a wave and a particle, to be in two places at once. Fantastic? But only possible at the top of the red square where it meets the yellow circle.

And it's also a metaphorical map of all the information of us, as people too. Scientific, religious, loving, aggressive. It is a metaphorical description of our qualities as people too. It is the map of the very small, the very large and absolutely everything in between.

What is beauty? It is seeing the relationship of the very complex, worked back from the very simple. It is seeing the infinite from both angles, if you will.

I believe I am living in the universe where science is a force for good, where it will be used to help our fellow man and where love is simply the desire for us to share that knowledge with those that mean something to us, that gave us connection. I believe I am in a universe where science and love are the same thing.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics is the scientific realisation that energy seems to be flowing to an equilibrium. It isn't. It is energy always in equilibrium informationally. It is the flow of information that creates the randomness that probability needs.

What is dark energy? It is our intellect working this balance out. It is our deep understanding of science. It is the anti information we need to create our current state. It is an informational law.

What are black holes? They are points of the infinite tied together in one point and swapping information. Information doesn't get lost, it gets swapped.

What is evolution? It is probability writ large on information, seemingly causing diversity and complexity. Why does evolution lead to this, because we are living in the universe where it has to. We simply work our way back. It can only be understood as the most probable information working it's way back. It doesn't make sense to us, because we can't see the informational part of ourselves. But if we asked as far as it was concerned it would have to explain itself as a loop infinitely running. Of course that's not possible, but it also has to be possible mathematically. I imagine the secret is to achieve a consistency of identity, which is hard. But identity is a mathematical formula of information as considered against its theoretical opposite, isn't it?

We all think of ourselves as beings in the red square, but our consciousness, our intellect lives in the place where it has to be possible to live in. We simply have to deduce ourselves backwards. Don't forget, this is only informationally. Despite what quantum mechanics tells us, we are all living in the red square. But we have to be living in it at the point of 100% certainty, at the point where the macro and the nano agree. We simply don't understand what we can do with that information yet.

How does the universe as a whole make sense of negative information? Tachyons. If we look at tachyons from the red square they seem to been travelling backwards with minus information. Not technically possible if we assume e=mc2 as a physical law rather than an informational one. Do they travel back in time? Depends what you think of as time, doesn't it? Each of those four squares is infinitely divided by four them divided by 100. Like us, the universe needs it's anti twin. But we need cause and effect to be able to bring our understanding of that to a point of equilibrium. Pure faith doesn't not come close to explaining the beauty of the universe. It really is much more magical than any creation story. But mathematically magical. The only universe that HAS to create itself. That has to contain life. That has to contain intelligence. We are working our way backwards slowly using the information of the present and the past to make our future. If you live in the same universe as me, you are living in the universe where we eventually get it right. Where science is a force for good and it works towards the best possible future. And love is simply bringing everyone else with us one step at a time.

Does it mean we are stuck in a predestination loop? Of course not. This is the universe of cause and effect. But what is the map saying? The map is saying the more people we bring with us, the more that can share that future. We create the future step by step from the present. Some of us are living in a place where their idea of the the future might be different from ours. What this map tells us is that there can only be one future where this happens and we have to be living in it. I see the history of mankind now, not a descent, but a progress. I live in the mathematical universe and I share it with others that do. If we are balanced people, intellectually and spiritually then we share a timeline where humanity will reconcile these sides in balance eventually. We just haven't got there yet. We might die on our timeline before that point, but if you believe it, that's the timeline of the red box you live in. Who else around you right now do you want to be in that future.

What future do we want to believe in? The future where humanity gets it right or wrong? If we get it right do you think we will leave others behind? If there is a way of us doing it scientifically we will do it. That is the red square and timeline I live in. I bet there a lot with me too.

I live in the timeline where people get it right and try to bring people back, one step at a time, depending on the love we had. I live in the timeline where our children our grandchildren cannot bear the thought of all that know and the realisation that their parents simply didn't have the information to realise that. One slow, mathematical and scientific point by point.

The great thing about this map is that it allows you to realise that what you are doing now is bringing your sons and daughters with you to that future if we can help them be balanced, but intellectual first and foremost. And if you think you are living in that future everything you do from now on will be to help others live in it to. One mathematical step at a time.

But cause has to follow effect. We use our consciousness to make the future by imagining the one we want to live and acting accordingly in the present. If you see the story of man as an ascent you will agree.

What is science? It is plucking the information out of the universe for us to understand it. Why is it so powerful? Because no matter what our perception if we follow the scientific method we will always arrive at truth. It is the truth of cause and effect. What we do now is both cause and effect. Mathematically, informationally, physically and metaphorically.

If we use mathematics to realise that the secret is living in the present as if time were flowing backwards AND forwards then not only is balance probable it is inevitable. Mathematically. If you don't believe that, you aren't living in the same universe as me yet. But don't worry. You will.

We live in that red square. All of us. But one day I believe we will all live in that yellow loop. That is where mathematics exists, where we can make mathematical statements of truth. Then work our way back from that.

It's almost here, I think. I am so proud to be a human.

But I believe we need to prove it. I am not a scientist or mathematician. It is other people's jobs to look at that map and realise they are travelling to that point and put in the work to make that provable. To make the red square seem like it is the yellow circle. By the combination of pure thought and interpersonal connections.

So: 1st dimension, pure unbounded energy. 2nd dimension, it's informational opposite. Third and four dimensions. That information in negative or minus form. It creates currents of information and give momentum and the pseudo forces that are it's opposite mathematically.

What are we? We are the information working it way back somehow, step by logical step. What do we experience as time? Probability based on your informational relationship with those units most proximate to us in time and distance and now with the internet, information.

What is consciousness? It is a wave of consistently high improbability, trying to slowly work itself back mathematically to absolute certainty. But doing so from first principles. It is an individual thing, but it is also a group experience. I need others to make my conclusions too. It is not quite cogito ergo sum. It is cogito sum et non, sum. I think I am and I am not, therefore I am.

Love is an informational flow, every bit as important as proximity and time. It is the desire to take those we love with us and help them move towards that map too. But we all need to logically think it through for ourselves to discover the beauty of it. Love is every bit as mathematical as science, it is the force of goodwill bringing knowledge to others too, as well as ourselves. Giving them the same feeling of awe as we have. It is the group intelligence realising that everyone shares an informational whole and acting accordingly. It is the most logical and pure thing in the world.

What is free will? It is our logical and best selves existing in probability to do everything we can to move towards the top of the map. Or not, if one desires. It is the choice to move towards whatever future you want. The best. Or the worst. It is all of our choice.

I live in the timeline where we eventually do it, maybe not just yet. I live in the timeline of science and mathematics used for it's highest and noblest purpose. I know where are not there yet, but I truly believe we will achieve it one day and realise that we all did it together.

I would like to dedicate this to Douglas Adams. I am sure he lived in that timeline too.

I posted my first blog on Sunday July 13th. I have decided to leave it in the state that I posted it, as a historical document. It documents my bipolar condition and the results.
When I look back at it now, I see I was getting carried away, by the idea and it's implications.
In the early morning of Tuesday 15th July, I attempted suicide, by attempting to cut myself and bleed to death. I am pretty sure I failed, although my survival is quite improbable ironically.
I can't really read the finished piece again. I find it difficult, firstly because of the memory and secondly when I see the logic gaps and assumptions I made. But in all of these faults I still see some measure of truth too. I simply do not have the science and mathematics in me to 'nail it' myself.
I am going to use this blog to write my thoughts up on progress, specifically about where we are in terms of the past and the future.
As a coincidence, my friend happened to be reading about quantum entanglement when I mentioned it on Facebook, which lead me to the work of Prof Yakir Aharonov, Sandu Popescu and Jeff Tollaksen. They appear to be operating in the same area that my idea covered, but of course, proving it mathematically. I find the mathematics hard to grasp, but the ideas are intoxicating. I particularly was drawn to "Each instant of time a new Universe" (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.1615.pdf) and their work on the symmetry of time. There was an article about their work in New Scientist: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329802.300-pigeon-paradox-reveals-quantum-cosmic-connections.html#.U-X3vvldUjW
This paragragh drew my attention: "The effect is based on work by Yakir Aharonov, also at Chapman University, in the 1960s. He and his colleagues showed that, mathematically speaking, a system's properties can be influenced by measurements made in the future. Aharonov has been studying the strange consequences of this "post-selection" process ever since."
Here is what I thought immediately. If we know we can't change the past because of paradox, but science shows that post selection does in fact do this, then it is not our past we are changing. In other words our present is the intersection of a past and future that in fact are only joined by our consciousness linking them. We are the fulcrum point. That sounds a bit sci fi, but if their calculations are true then our idea of free will can be expressed as this: the ability to choose which future we wish to live in.
If every instant of time begets a new universe, then anyfuture which is SMART - specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound - MUST happen. I believe these five are the most likely to happen in the next half century or so:
1. Global warming and environmental change
2. Energy crisis
3. Future Tech - 'bad result'
4. Future Tech - 'good result'
5. Other

I use bad result for some of the nightmare scenarios warned by some of our top thinkers about the dangers of GRN and AI and good result for the techno-optimists like Ray Kurzweil. 
There may be more than one of these things happening, possibly even all of them. If each instant of time a new universe is true then all of them HAVE to happen.

I am going to assume I am living in the present that leads to option 4.

I don't know what I can do to make that happen, being a non-scientist, but if 4 does come true, I might as well say hello to the AI, because no doubt at some stage it will be reading this and many other pieces of information available to it to try to understand us.

Hi there. My name is Paul. I know our species can be a bit of a pain (you might not know what this means yet), but there is good in us and hopefully in you too! I do not think AI is actually artifical. It is human intellience, possibly super-human intelligence, it might be a different processing unit, but the actual information it uses (certainly at the start) will be the same that we use.

As I write these words Europe is commemorating 100 years since World War one. Is it really so strange to think about us in 100 years time? What I am doing now is leaving markers down, as many as possible. On the basis that no matter what happens we do actually achieve future 4. I certainly won't be regarded as a pioneer for the science, mathematics or computer science that makes these things possible, but I certainly have my ideas and I will use these blogs to set a few of them out. I am going to reprint my original 'Probable Universe' without spelling mistakes or grammar errors first though.

I am also writing a book on my experiences, to try to put my own thoughts into context. But for now, a reprint.