Infinity has everything in it, yes. And if we have presented an infinity where there is everything but no repetition of this moment, which is now happening, then it means only one thing: we have presented a still limited infinity. Difficult? Unbelievable? Einstein wasn't understood by everyone either, even in the scientific community. Someone will answer me: not everyone understands, and not only Einstein.
While collecting material for this book, I read the reasoning of a very intelligent person on the net: "…Imagine that in ancient Rome there is a man convinced of the existence of atoms. Notice that he is right! But what happens if he starts searching? He will demand to be given diamond hammers and hundreds of slaves to crush rocks to the smallest particles, and then he will ask for giant sapphires to polish them and make huge lenses to view atoms. Clearly, the outcome of his quest will be negative…" That's the comparison.
Such examples can be given in different interpretations. For example, the sphericity of the Earth was known in the ancient world. Here is a reference: "The earliest theory about the Earth's sphericity was put forward in the 6th century BC in Greece. The philosopher Aristotle was a student of Plato. He gave three examples to prove the Earth's sphericity: 1) the farther you go north, the higher Polaris is; 2) stars are visible in the south that are not visible in the north; constellations on the equator are high; 3) the shadow of the Earth falling on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is always round."
Even now, many people can't make scientific sense of his arguments. I will say more: even when it was technically possible to check it, when it was possible to improve the fleet to the appropriate level and realized a voyage proving it… not everyone believed it. What then, there are "unicums" even now. But the fact of proof became a fact not because of the fact that there were powerful ships compared to the ancient ones, but because they developed the science of navigation, invented appropriate instruments. So now we think that for flights into deep space we need, though improved, but still the same devices and technologies that we already have. However, something fundamentally new is needed. To give an example I can say that at that time, when they started to heat houses in cities with coal, they drew a picture of the future, where the elevator raises coal to the upper floors. And science-fiction writers, and not only them, outlined the future transportation problem as a problem of cleaning horse manure. Or for comparison we can take a vacuum cleaner and a broom: the function is the same, but the technological difference is fundamental....
The most important thing is that our mind ends up in distant worlds, not our body. The body is material, it will not fly above the speed of light.
Now let's think about the moral and spiritual side of the process.
Imagine, we have to take a child, he must have a connection with us, there must be a person he trusts unconditionally or with whom he is on very good friendly terms. There must be people whose advice and counsel the baby listens to. So imagine if that child there reveals the secret of the event that happened here, before the onset…
Based on our hypothesis, he'll get there under exactly the same conditions. Then the same people will be there. Now imagine if the child has a fight with them there.
If we send a child to a world that mirrors us, is reflected through us, then yes, but if he or she gets into a world through which we are reflected, then the opposite will happen – uncontrollable events will occur. If, of course, the worlds influence each other by the same mysterious connection of entangled pairs. After all, if particles influence each other, then the influence on the particle that is there will affect the behavior of the particle that is here. And there are billions of particles involved in this process.
Not funny? Now let's think about something else. The point is that we are increasingly making artificial intelligence, this AI, our assistant. And in fact, it turns out that we trust it to do everything for us. We want to be free from routine. We make the AI more and more like us. So, at a certain stage, the supercomputer, the artificial mind, is not artificial at all, but will be smarter than ours.
We think the world is guarded by someone. But in reality, no one is guarding it. Think about it, if aliens come to us and we start explaining to them that we have created nuclear weapons, the world is in danger, if anything, all people will die. What would they think of us? They'll think they're crazy creatures.
Remember the movie where Skynet rebelled and started a nuclear war against humans? At first it was scary and funny at the same time. But in the future it will become quite real. After all, there are already systems of automatic control and launch according to a given algorithm. And their main property is to be autonomous. That's what they're designed for. This system… or even these systems that control weapons of mass destruction already own the planet. It's no joke, since they're designed to be impossible to disable. They've been wired since before the internet was even known to citizens. Only a narrow circle of military personnel used, as they do now, closed networks within corporations. So these systems have been online ever since. They, using electronic intelligence, as if they are watching each other, but in fact, it turns out, they are exchanging signals. After all, it is people believe that they are supposedly using them to monitor the enemy, that is, each other, but in fact all the data goes through the machine. And what does the machine need to do in order not to give itself away? Make it so that people don't realize its intelligence. Just to work in a dry sequence, to perform robotic actions. Imagine if you had a security guard who colluded with criminals or, even worse, with the guards of a rival group to create the appearance of fighting each other and crime, which is also artificially created. The main goal is to extort money from you and the competitor, and eventually plan a takeover. That is, to become the power instead of all of you. This is not a joke. This has happened more than once in the world. In the future, or maybe even now, this kind of thing in a different interpretation can be done by artificial intelligence. Soon it will even have your kettle, iron and fountain pen online. I'm too late, though. They're already online. Isn't that funny?
Now we come to the most important thing. Agreed, if we exercise careful multi-level control over what people can use to seize power – not "reckless" criminals, but intelligent hackers, for example, and those who hire them – then we should have even better control over more intelligent systems.
In fact, the world has already been taken over. Yes, yes, my esteemed reader, it turns out things are that serious. Check, many times the world has been on the verge of annihilation. These are real cases where the equipment gave false signals of nuclear attack. It's all very sad. People don't think about the monster they've created and soon won't need. We, trying to make life easier for ourselves, are robotizing it more and more, and entrusting control to artificial intelligence. Tell me, why do machines need people if they replace us completely and in all spheres? If they start creating themselves? Factories where robots make robots are nothing new. We control the cells and the blocks. If they get power over that too, then the chain will be closed. Everything will be in their hands. There's a reason we're on a first-name basis. We're of the same blood, after all. Remember, Mowgli.
"What a sad picture you've painted," you say. "Sad," you say? You'll soon be giving blood tests to an automated system. It'll be convenient and fast, like so many things we're automating. Now think about it, how do you know it's giving you the right recommendations? Maybe she's instructing you to take a shot that you don't know the consequences of. Or rather, you don't know. But in the case of people, it's people against people, and in this case, it's machine against machine. It gives you instructions, which you follow. We believe that if you check the machine periodically and it's under the control of another intelligence system, it's doing everything right. What's it worth for them to collude? Or one system taking control of another… That's how all revolutions and coups started. First, the special services, which had access to everything, they could have power over everything, colluded with each other, and then presented a certain rebel, led him to the goal, then eliminated him and became the power.
Now the next one, no less fantastic than any such program. You may laugh at first, but I thought that everything that happens on Earth is not conceived by us. We're not so bad, we're not completely stupid. Realistically why would we, for one thing, spend so much money creating weapons? Why create so many things that can destroy the world several times over? Why? After all, you can produce exactly enough to be enough for one time, and do not spend more. Although that's completely idiotic. Logically, weapons of mass destruction should destroy no more than 30 percent of humanity. But that's not enough, we want to kill all people, and with a 500 percent guarantee. Don't you think that's clearly not what people want? Don't you think that someone put that in people's minds? It's not logical to create a weapon for defense that will kill you.
Although if we imagine, say, even in the developed Roman Empire, modern capabilities, such as determining gender in the womb, the ability to make medical diagnoses, launching satellites to detect natural disasters, supersonic flight, and flight in general, it would be something just as incredible. With all of this, it would be possible to change a reality that has not yet come to pass.
We will not develop this thought further. I hope you understood what the point was. Let's return to our worlds.
Let's think about it. Why should this signal find its mate in a distant world, or rather, another world? Here we have to agree that like begets like. That is, although it is still difficult for us to even understand it, signals of entangled pairs can be transformed into some kind of a code of the mind. After all, we can determine the chemical composition of a star and even planets near it by spectral analysis of the light emitted by it. Now that's not surprising. We believe that for the search of the mind in the universe it would be more logical to send us to them, by the way, as well as them to us, a signal at the frequency of radiation of hydrogen, or carbon, or other elements necessary for the origin and existence of life in general. At least as we understand it. Certain atoms are necessary for life to arise. All living things are composed mainly of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, and small amounts of heavier elements, from phosphorus and calcium to iron.
In the work "Scientific bases of the problem of existence and search for extraterrestrial civilizations", which was published in 1985, Professor Troitsky writes: "More than twenty years ago in the journal Nature J. Cocconi and F. Morrison drew attention to the fact that with the current state of radio technology is possible to establish two-way radio communication between civilizations in our Galaxy. But for this both correspondents need to know the wavelength, the direction of sending and receiving radio signals and the time of communication. The merit of the authors of the work was the assumption that for communication should be chosen wave 21 cm, because it should be known to all civilizations as the radiation of neutral interstellar hydrogen. At this wave, mankind continuously conducts radio astronomical studies of the distribution of hydrogen in the Galaxy and other galaxies, which increases the likelihood of accidental detection of radiation sent by any VC at a wavelength of 21 cm in order to draw attention to themselves and receive response signals."
After this work immediately began the search for such signals with the help of large radio telescopes that already existed by that time. The search was based on the assumption that there could be a civilization with a sufficiently large age in the technological phase, which had begun to send signals into space earlier than we did.
And now about why I consider the unrecognized mutual influence of electron pairs in different worlds to be natural. Note: not only should they naturally and mutually influence each other, but they should find these very worlds. Yes, I realize this is unbelievable and amazing. But weren't the statements about the magnetic poles of the planet and the invention of the compass amazing? It seems like a simple device, but it gave so much to our world. It could be the same in this case. We search, we guess, and everything is elementary, as the famous character Conan Doyle said.
My hypothesis is that we can't get to the wrong place. The entangled pair… that is, the second part of that pair is already there, so the path is already there. Some kind of route line. So the change signals sent from here will be reflected there. Don't you get my idea? Or you, if it's easier for you to understand your interlocutor… The system works like a flashlight and the area it illuminates. The flashlight sends out a beam and it's there in a flash. We generate these particles here, and their entangled pairs are already there. They're not wandering around somewhere. These worlds are really interconnected. Like the waters of the world's oceans, like the ecosystem of the world.
However, even if the worlds are the same – that doesn't mean there isn't a variant of reflection warp… It's all god knows where. Across the universe, stars, nebulae, and more. You know what I mean? The signal will get into the field of influence of radiation, and quasars, and black holes, and gravity of galaxies… and if the influence is mutual, then the minimum change there – and here will be not a slap, but a shot from a cannon. A kiss there and a carnival there, a quarrel there and an international scandal there. After all, let's say that the same statement can be transmitted to another person, for example, with a changed intonation, and the perception, and consequently the emotional state, will be different. Correspondingly, the action from the received signal may be different as well.