• [deleted]

Dear Georgina Woodward,

REALITY CANNOT POSSIBLY DEPEND ON HOW I ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT FINITE ABSTRACT MISINFORMATION. Nature must have devised the only VISIBLE construct of the real VISIBLE Universe obtainable, and it did so BEFORE you or I or Einstein, or Hawking ever appeared on the surface of the earth, and began senselessly guessing about where the universe might have came from.. We know that the earth has had a Visible surface for millions of years. We know that no matter in which direction any man, woman, child, or centipede looks, any creature's open eye will only ever see VISIBLE surface. It logically follows that there must only be one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Dear Georgina Woodward,

REALITY CANNOT POSSIBLY DEPEND ON HOW I ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT FINITE ABSTRACT MISINFORMATION. Nature must have devised the only VISIBLE construct of the real VISIBLE Universe obtainable, and it did so BEFORE you or I or Einstein, or Hawking ever appeared on the surface of the earth, and began senselessly guessing about where the universe might have came from.. We know that the earth has had a Visible surface for millions of years. We know that no matter in which direction any man, woman, child, or centipede looks, any creature's open eye will only ever see VISIBLE surface. It logically follows that there must only be one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Dear Trân Trần,

Finite time cannot exist in eternity. Each finite timepiece can be constructed of an infinite number of materials, and be of an infinite dimension. Each finite timepiece has a complete visible surface. If all of the timepieces were removed from the planet, it would not alter the fact that the real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Hi Georgina,

I said ....one way or another. I'm sure you could have written an essay describing that cigarette rolling machine or that multi-lens camera before knowing what purpose they serve. And I'm certain you didn't think that they could bite you, run away, speak to you, vanish into nothing, cause rain, etc. pp. My point was that our knowledge of the present is organised according to stringent principles so that there is no 'blue screen' - never! The literally infinite depth of human knowledge isn't stored in the brain, it is the effect of the negation of negations. The human brain/mind isn't sharing any commonality with a computer.

Hi Heinrich I'm not convinced that prior knowledge or experience is necessary for production of the sensory product (Image reality), which is the present from the point of view of the observer, only sensory input and functioning nervous system to process it. But prior knowledge or experience is necessary for correct perception or understanding of what is being experienced. In the case of the camera in the flower bed I did actually think it might bite me, as there was so little information available with which to perceive or understand the cause of the visual product. A shimmering like many eyes among the plants.

I agree we don't have a blue screen when there are errors with processing input or dealing with it. The brain can guess what is present and that is what is recognized or even seen. I have often mentioned at a quick glance seeing a cat, when it was actually a pile of laundry, on looking again. There aren't gaps but seen guesses or 'flagged' what is its. I don't know when the brain decides one approach or the other but suspect it depends on context. Such as whether there is time to be curious, whether there is a potential danger, whether the unknown is inconsequential background or periphery relative to other stimuli of interest.

Please could you explain more about what you mean by negation of negations?

5 days later

There is a saying that says: There are lots of Einstein, but only there was a Newton.

Einstein and those physicists are wrong regarding time.

Time is an evolution parameter. This is clearly seen in Newtonian mechanics or in quantum mechanics.

The Coulomb potential is a function phi(R(t)) with time-implicit dependence, but Maxwell and others replaced it with a time-explicit function phi(r,t). Most modern textbooks call "Coulomb potential" to the phi(r,t), when it is not. Not only the history is rewritten, but the mathematics and the physics are abused. Coulomb phi(R(t)) is a 6D function, Maxwell phi(r,t) is a 4D function. The first function describes direct-particle action physics; the second describes contact-action physics of field theory with all the well-known deficiencies.

Further discussion of the incompatibilities of phi(R(t)) with phi(r,t) and the confusion between time-implicit and time-explicit evolutions can be found here

https://journals.aps.org/pre/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevE.53.5373

but their dual-potential model is not really needed. There is no two interaction mechanisms, only one. Field theory and its 4D potentials phi(r,t) and A(r,t) can be derived from N particle theory using the correct concept of time as evolution parameter

http://www.juanrga.com/2017/07/renormalized-field-theory-from-particle.html

Minskowski and Einstein derived the spacetime concept (x,t) from Maxwellian 4D functions. Time is no longer an evolution parameter but a dimension in Einstein theories. This is wrong and the cause for many difficulties (including the well-known incompatibility with quantum mechanics).

This spacetime view of the Universe is also incompatible with both irreversibility and randomness. Reason why Einstein always wanted to maintain reversibility and determinism as fundamental, and try statistical (ignorance-based) explanations for the second law of thermodynamics and for quantum phenomena. It didn't work.

Some modern physicists try to reintroduce Newtonian concept of time into relativistic physics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_dynamics

They introduce two different concepts of times: A coordinate time "t" in the sense of Einstein and an invariant evolution parameter "tau" in the sense of Newton. In reality the theory introduces N+1 times, because there is a t_i per particle and a tau for the overall system.

The Coulomb potential phi(R(t)) is generalized to phi(rho(tau)) with rho a relativistic distance.

This novel approach is still incorrect, but at least those physicists understand that Newtonian concept of time is missing in Einstein theories.

The "evolving state" picture is fundamental; the "spacetime box" picture is only a local approximation.

    Juan,

    "The Coulomb potential is a function phi(R(t)) with time-implicit dependence, but Maxwell and others replaced it with a time-explicit function phi(r,t)."

    Let me see if I understand this. The time-implicit function meant that time was something real that exists in its own right. But physicists smelling some implied metaphysics (existence) decided to step back and declared Time as only a factual measurement. Without real (substantial) time, no further involvement of time in causality could be further explored.

    The universe has existed and evolved by itself for the past 13.8 billion years so, causality is built into property (ies) of its constituent dynamic process (substance).

    Marcel,

      Hi Georgina,

      think of the terminating rule of chess (checkmate) as a negation or prohibition. Checkmate is defined as that configuration when the king can make no legitimate move to escape the threat. There are multi-millions of checkmate configurations. That is, the checkmate rule is 'infinite' and hence entirely unanschaulich itself - just a negation. And yet will any chess player recognize any of these configurations - when they occur! The negation (violation) of the negation (the prohibition) is hence a determinate case.

      Another example is basic law, which consists of mostly prohibitions (thou shalt not kill, steal, etc.).

      Heinrich

      Dear Juan Ramón González Álvarez,

      Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a visible surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before Newton and Einstein ever appeared on that surface and began their unrealistic physics guesswork.

      It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

      The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

      Please start reconsidering your Grant Funding options.

      Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

      Dear Marcel-Marie LeBel,

      Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a visible surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before any mathematicians or timepiece manufacturers ever appeared on that surface.

      It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

      The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

      Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

      Dear Juan Ramón González Álvarez,

      Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a visible surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before Newton and Einstein ever appeared on that surface and began their unrealistic physics guesswork, and before any timepieces were ever manufactured..

      It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

      The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

      Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

      Dear amrit,

      Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a visible surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before any mathematicians or timepiece manufacturers ever appeared on that surface.

      It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

      The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

      Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

      Time is real and even some scientists claim time existed before the Big Bang. They formulate the born of our observable universe as some kind of phase transition from an unstable 'vacuum'.

      Besides confounding the physical concept of time as evolution parameter with a mathematical time as dimension, Einstein also introduced a confusion between the concept of a property and the operational definition of the property, when reduced time to "the reading of a clock".

      Dear Juan Ramón González Álvarez,

      Finite time am not real. Only humanly devised timepieces are real. Each real humanly devised timepiece, be it a sundial, a Timex wristwatch, or an atomic clock has a finite commencement and can be stopped and restarted AN INFINITE NUMBER OR TIMES.

      Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a visible surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before Newton and Einstein ever appeared on that surface and began their unrealistic physics guesswork, and before any timepieces were ever manufactured..

      It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

      The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

      Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

      5 days later
      • [deleted]

      Dear Amrit Srecko Sorli,

      Your posting appears to be about humanly devised finite calculation of an imaginary INVISIBLE variable energy that supposedly might affect the density of a finite amount of INVISIBLE space that might exist in the finite center of an INVISIBLE proton vortex.

      One single VISIBLE infinite surface occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated by finite non-surface light contains no INVISIBLE protons, croutons or crayons.

      Joe Fisher, Realist

      I suggest that the best pixilated space-time QG is that of J. Ambjorn, dynamically triangulated QG. He was able to determine it has a cosmology, but the key problem is to find the StdModel ground state = QC/ED algebraic group representation geometry.

      Well, dynamical triangulation of space-time is not at all like dynamical triangles, which have been quite easily demonstrated to replicate QC/ED - AND mass / energy, quite well.

      So I'm very confident that this grant will yield a few papers, but nothing useful from a TOE standpoint. Good thing that you've now got Sabine looking for observational methods to disprove this approach to QG. Better to just accept the background independent QG work out of Penn State.

        Dear Wayne R Lundberg,

        Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a visible surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years DEFORE any theoretical physicists WERE EVER BORN.

        It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

        The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

        My essay, REALITY AM NOT ROCKET SCIENCE, which was published online by the Foundational Questions Institute (FQXi.org) on January 10th, 2018 explains natural reality more fully. The essay is located at url: https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2992

        I applied for a Grant furnished by the Fetzer Franklin Fund to promote natural reality, but my application was denied without any explanation being given for the denial.

        Joe Fisher, Realist

        8 months later
        • [deleted]

        IN DEFENCE OF REALITY'S SPACETIME-BOX MODEL:

        PART A = A PERSPECTIVE ON THE BLOCK UNIVERSE'S EXISTENCE, PART B = A MECHANISM FOR ITS CONSTRUCTION

        PART A - HOW THE VECTORS, TENSOR CALCULUS AND SCALAR OBJECTS OF MATHEMATICS GEOMETRICALLY PRODUCE SPECIAL RELATIVITY'S BLOCK UNIVERSE

        Abstract

        Present understanding of the Higgs boson and Higgs field is a revolution that began in the 1960's. Understanding of universal expansion from the Big Bang is a revolution that started some 40 years prior to that. However, this short article shows how comprehension of both the Higgs and the Big Bang (as well as universal contraction, or cycling between Bangs and Big Crunches) can be modified by a geometric relationship between the vectors, tensor calculus and scalar objects of mathematics.

        Part A

        The Big Bad Bang has been stirring things up lately. First was astrophysicist Jeff Hester's article of the same name in Astronomy. (1) Then in "The Real Reality Show: Ancient Cosmology: Part 1" (2), Dave Eicher says the ancients didn't know that the universe began with the Big Bang. I suspect they knew more than modern science. I don't believe in science's creation myth, either - and this is why.

        Figure 1 - PARALLELOGRAM WITH DIAGONAL AND CENTRAL SCALAR POINT

        A vector is a quantity which possesses both magnitude and direction. Two such quantities acting on a point (represented by the red Scalar Higgs boson) may be represented by two adjoining sides of a parallelogram (e.g. CD and AD), so that the resultant diagonal^ (green line) also represents the vectors. The two sides and diagonal thus illustrate the graviton's spin 2 and the photon's spin 1. The resultant diagonal represents the interaction of the sides/vectors (1Г·2 = the spin ВЅ of every matter particle). Tensor calculus changes the coordinates of the sides and diagonal into the coordinates of a single point (the scalar) on the diagonal. This scalar point is associated with particles of spin 0. If the mass produced previously happens to be 125 GeV/c2, its union with spin 0 produces the Higgs boson - and relates the Higgs boson/field to the supposedly unrelated graviton/gravitational field (together with the latter's constant interaction with the photon/electromagnetic field).

        ^ The resultant diagonal of those two sides can be pictured as a boat being driven in, say, the vertical direction across a river while simultaneously being pushed horizontally by the river's fast-flowing current.

        The parallelogram can be converted into the shape of Earth's elliptical orbit, which means the vector / tensor / scalar relationship applies to this planet. One vector can be the magnitude and direction of the orbiting Earth itself. It and a second vector (Earth months later in its orbit - more about this at the paragraph's end) are represented by two sides of the parallelogram as well as by the resultant diagonal. Being represented by the diagonal, Earth is naturally also represented by the diagonal's central scalar point. Successful conversion of the parallelogram to an ellipse, followed by tensor analysis, means our planet is also a scalar object. This is equivalent to reducing the innumerable spins of particles composing the planet to an aggregate of a boson possessing spin 0. Such particles have no restriction on the number of them that occupy the same state. This state means Earth can possess magnitude occupying a literally infinite and eternal amount of space-time, thus having no need of direction and being capable of possessing the same state as any other material or immaterial body. Since they'd accommodate Earth's infinity, the material bodies would similarly reduce the innumerable spins of particles composing them to an aggregate of a boson possessing spin 0 (they'd only possess magnitude and would be scalar, infinite bodies). Occupying all time, vector-1 Earth must be united with vector-2 Earth (the one existing months later). Of course, accepting these things requires scientists to understand that maths and the mind are superior to our limited, easily deceived bodily senses in matters of science.

        This unified field - of all Earths being united with all others, and of everything in the universe being reduced to the equivalent of a spin 0 boson - may compose the "block universe" Einstein believed in: a multi-dimensional block of space-time containing all the past, and the entire future. So although we only see one Earth at one instant in time; it's within the realm of possibility that it, and everything else, is not finite but is infinite and superposed and actually existing in more than one place - even everywhere in spacetime. The condition of everything being infinite, superposed and existing everywhere/everywhen in space-time completely removes the need for any kind of universal contraction or expansion (and removes any need for the Big Bang, Inflation, or cyclic cosmology's oscillations between Big Bangs and Big Crunches). Such a unified field sounds very strange because every object and event anywhere in space or time would be entangled with and capable of affecting any other object/event. However, it might add some common sense to quantum mechanics which has been repeatedly verified by experiment but makes no sense at all if we cling to the notion of finite, separate objects and events.

        The greatest support for the big-bang model is the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) in 1964 by American radio astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. (3) Explanation of why this doesn't support the Big Bang can be summed up by this sentence - The entanglement of microwave photons with all of space-time means the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation fills the entire sky without being produced by the Big Bang as most scientists believe. Supporting the idea of spacetime-pervading entanglement is the following - "Physicists now believe that entanglement between particles exists everywhere, all the time, and have recently found shocking evidence that it affects the wider, 'macroscopic' world that we inhabit." (4) Though the effect is measured for distances in space, the inseparability of space and time means that moments of time can become entangled too. (5)

        References to Part A

        (1) Hester, Jeff - "The Big Bad Bang" - Astronomy, January 2019

        (2) Eicher, David - "The Real Reality Show: Ancient Cosmology: Part 1" - http://www.astronomy.com/videos/the-real-reality-show/2017/11/the-real-reality-show-ancient-cosmology-part-1?utm_source=Yesmail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=News_ASY_190104_00000

        (3) Penzias, A. A.; Wilson, R. W. [1965]. "A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature at 4080 Mc/s". The Astrophysical Journal. 142 [1]: 419-421

        (4) "The Weirdest Link": New Scientist, vol. 181, issue 2440-27 March 2004, page 32 - online at http://www.biophysica.com/QUANTUM.HTM

        (5) Caslav Brukner, Samuel Taylor, Sancho Cheung, Vlatko Vedral, "Quantum Entanglement in Time", http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0402127

        PART B - CREATION OF THE INFINITE, ETERNAL COSMOS USING ELECTRONIC BITS, PI AND IMAGINARY TIME (WITH EVOLUTION, VIRTUAL REALITY, AUGMENTED REALITY)

        Abstract

        In a science TV program (1), Dr. Graham Phillips reported that "the physicist and writer Paul Davies thinks the universe is indeed fine-tuned for minds like ours. And who fine-tuned it? Not God but minds from the future, perhaps even our distant descendants, that have reached back through time ... and selected the very laws of physics that allow for the existence of minds in the first place. Sounds bizarre, but quantum physics actually allows that kind of thing."

        Most scientists don't believe there can be a rational explanation for an infinite, eternal universe. They much prefer ideas like the Big Bang, the multiverse and random quantum fluctuations causing everything to pop into existence from nothing. Our concept of time as something that only goes from past to future makes the thought of creating an infinite, eternal cosmos unacceptable - a paradox which is seemingly absurd. But as 20th-century Danish physicist Niels Bohr said, "How wonderful that we have met with a paradox. Now we have some hope of making progress."

        Part B

        Imaginary time - which is as real to physicists and mathematicians as our familiar real time - obtained its name because it was originally a purely mathematical representation of time which appears in some approaches to the special relativity and quantum mechanics theories developed in the early decades of last century. We can picture imaginary time in the following way. One can think of ordinary, real, time as a horizontal line. On the left, there's the past - and on the right, the future. But there's another kind of time in the vertical direction. This is called imaginary time (it's described with imaginary numbers such as i which equals в€љ-1). Professor Paul Davies writes,

        'The name has stuck, even though today we accept imaginary numbers are just as real as real numbers.' (2)

        In the unification of a quantum gravity universe, the real and imaginary would be connected. Like the surface of the Earth, imaginary time has no boundaries (you can go around the world without falling over any edge) but, also like Earth, it is finite unless pi or another infinite number is incorporated into each and every part - numbers could be encoded into parts using the BITS (BInary digiTS, 1's and 0's) of electronics. Dr. Andrea Alberti of the Institute of Applied Physics of the University of Bonn says, 'Quantum mechanics allows superposition states of large, macroscopic objects. But these states are very fragile, even following (a) football with our eyes is enough to destroy the superposition and (make) it follow a definite trajectory.' (3)

        So although we only see one Earth; it's within the realm of possibility that it, and everything else, is not finite but is infinite and superposed and actually existing in more than one place - even everywhere in spacetime. The only way to get from the tiny Big Bang singularity to the infinite universe is - regardless of how space and time are manipulated, regardless of what is visible and what remains undetected - via expansion. And there never was, nor will be, cosmic expansion. So discovering more about pi and imaginary time is a wise pursuit. The condition of everything being infinite, superposed and existing everywhere/everywhen in space-time completely removes the need for any kind of expansion. It sounds very strange because every object and event anywhere in space or time would be entangled with and capable of affecting any other object/event. However, it might add some common sense to quantum mechanics which has been repeatedly verified by experiment but makes no sense at all if we cling to the notion of finite, separate objects and events.

        The existence of Earth and everything else in every spot and time is consistent with a never-ending number of Cosmic DVD's extending infinitely in every possible direction, and any object's position not being restricted to any one DVD. This condition would not be accessible to present-day humanity since consciousness is comparable to illumination by the player's laser, and people today have limited concepts of space-time compared to people living centuries from now. The above need not violate Pauli's exclusion principle which says that two similar particles of matter cannot have both the same position and the same velocity. If electrons on different Cosmic DVDs occupy the same position, they must have different velocities. This strange state could give rise to the false idea of a multiverse - other universes with different laws of physics existing alongside ours.

        A model of the cosmos might be built that uses pi and imaginary time, and resides in Virtual Reality (an artificial, computer-generated simulation or recreation of a real-life environment or situation). If all times co-exist, so do our perceived reality and the future virtual model. Entanglement in the simulation is unable to remain separate from the quantum-mechanical and macroscopic entanglement existing in our perceived reality because imaginary time removes all boundaries between the two universes. They naturally merge, influencing each other and becoming one Augmented Reality (a technology that layers computer-generated enhancements atop an existing reality in order to make it more meaningful through the ability to interact with it). The poorly-named imaginary time of physics and mathematics unites with pi (both are necessary to generate an infinite universe - alone, unbounded imaginary time is finite).

        As suggested by Elon Musk (founder of a number of high-profile companies, such as Tesla and Space X) -

        "If you assume any rate of improvement at all, then the games will become indistinguishable from reality, even if that rate of advancement drops by a thousand from what it is now. Then you just say, okay, let's imagine it's 10,000 years in the future, which is nothing on the evolutionary^ scale.

        So given that we're clearly on a trajectory to have games that are indistinguishable from reality, and those games could be played on any set-top box or on a PC or whatever, and there would probably be billions of such computers or set-top boxes, it would seem to follow that the odds that we're in base (non-simulated) reality is one in billions." (4)

        ^ Evolution (not only of the universe, but also of biology) doesn't 100% compute with this article. Evolution would always exist in the forms of adaptation and of modifications to anatomy/physiology, but it would not explain origins. Consider the future revolution of time travel combined with the unimaginable biotechnology and genetic engineering of centuries to come. Isn't it conceivable that plants, animals and even humans are the product of entirely natural intelligent design by humanity of the distant future? Making production a two-way process is the fact that humans of the distant future rely on the reproductive instincts of past and present men and women for their existence.

        Professor Stephen Hawking says that boundaries and singularities exist in real time but don't exist in imaginary time. (5) There really are boundaries in real time and it must hypothetically be possible to step outside the universe if only real time exists. But when so-called imaginary time also exists, it is not possible to step outside the universe because the boundaries simply aren't there and the universe has no end or start (neither in space nor in time). Only one universe can then exist, and there is no multiverse.

        References to Part B

        (1) "Custom Universe - Finetuned For Us?", Australian Broadcasting Corporation's "Catalyst" TV program, August 29 2013)

        (2) Paul Davies, 'The real gleam in the imaginary i' (20 Feb. 2017), https://cosmosmagazine.com/mathematics/the-gleam-in-the-i

        (3) University of Bonn, 'Atoms can be in two places at the same time', January 20, 2015, https://m.phys.org/news/2015-01-atoms.html

        (4) "Elon Musk says we're probably living in a computer simulation - here's the science": The Conversation - June 23, 2016 (https://theconversation.com/elon-musk-says-were-probably-living-in-a-computer-simulation-heres-the-science-60821)

        (5) Stephen Hawking, 1988, 'A Brief History of Time', p. 139 - Bantam Press