Finding a study that seems to redefine reality is a rarity, and a provocative article by physics professor Vitaly Vanchurin of the University of Minnesota Duluth (USA), available in prepress, revaluates exactly our reality in an extremely peculiar way by indicating that we and everything in the universe “at its most fundamental level [is] a neural network.” For decades, researchers have been trying to reconcile general relativity with quantum mechanics without much success. In Einstein's relativity time is relative, but absolute in quantum mechanics. Vanchurin proposes that artificial neural networks exhibit behaviors similar to both theories of physics. He explains that quantum mechanics “is a remarkably successful paradigm for modeling physical phenomena on a wide range of scales” and that “it is widely believed that at the most fundamental level the entire universe is governed by the rules of quantum mechanics and even gravity should somehow emerge from it,” the researcher states.“We're not just saying that artificial neural networks can be useful for analyzing physical systems or for discovering physical laws, we're saying that's how the world around us actually works,” it states in the study. “In this regard, it can be considered a proposal for the theory of everything, and as such it should be easy to prove it wrong."In an interview for Futurism Vanchurin explained a little more about his peculiar idea. According to the physicist when a neural network has a very large number of neurons its behavior can be described very well by equations of classical quantum mechanics, which explains how the physical world works. In the article the physicist explores the possibility that the fundamental structure of everything that exists is a microscopic neural network from which everything emerges; both quantum mechanics (which explains the behavior of very small things), and general relativity (which explains how very large things behave). In a previous article on machine learning, the researcher tried to use statistical methods to understand how neural networks behave, but eventually discovered that, in certain aspects, they are many similar to the dynamics of quantum mechanics which led him to explore the idea that the physical world may be a neural network. According to the recent article The Theory can be proved incorrect and "all that is necessary [would be] to find a physical phenomenon that [cannot] be described by neural networks"” When asking the obligatory question, whether the theory of the universe as a neural network means that we live in a simulation the physicist replied that " no, we live in a neural network, but we may never know the difference."

Estando en el espacio exterior se pensara en un estilo de vida completamete distinto, los modelos actuales seran adecuados? O tendremos que adaptarnos a otros estilos de vida, incluso en lo monetario.

En el espacio cual sera el motor de la sociedad? Una de las opciones es la mineria espacial o de asteriodes que puedan abastecer una nacion.

O sera la venta de tecnologia.

Atomic. What is atomic. To start we will use a negative event, the atomic bomb. If we analyze it in a simple way then we have a light-flash, a shock-wave and an explosion. Ok, now lets look for these things in space. Light is everywhere in space, it is the electron shield material in a sense. Then we need shock-wave for creation, it is the reverse of destruction, it is... implosion. The most powerful sources for that are the implosion's of supernovae. And at last we need mass, these are the particles from the jets of black-holes. Ok, lets ignite a supernovae. It implodes and takes with it light and mass particles, they have a meltdown and are exploded afterwards. What do we see, right... gas everywhere. If we would take this a step further then we create gas-stars afterwards and they create star-dust. And now we have our basic material for building planets. So if you ever travel true space then put on the atomic song from Blondie and you will remember...

Grtz, Dirk.

Candidatos al Parlamento, ¿qué pueden hacer en cinco años para ayudar a Asgardia a trabajar en una estación espacial? ¿Cómo podemos planificar, investigar y presupuestar en el futuro cercano para establecer una base que nos permita crecer hacia un hábitat en órbita o en la luna?

Ante todo unificar fuerzas con los países que ya cuentan con los elementos adecuados para establecer una estación, contaremos con embajadores en cada uno de ellos que podrán acercarse y organizar el planteamiento. Recordemos que por los altos presupuestos EEI ha detenido sus esfuerzos a un mínimo ya que los inversores de la NASA están más interesados por ahora en vincularse a los trabajos para enviar personas a Marte y ya preparan a colegiales que están investigando y planificando los materiales que podrían utilizarse para dicha labor, jovenes adolescentes que en el año 2025 podrían contar con la estrategia adecuada para ello.

En tal sentido EEI podría vincularse a Asgardia y crear una nave modular alterna que nos brinde la infraestructura necesaria en una plataforma que ha sido habitada en sus últimos momentos por diversos astronautas de distintas nacionalidades y que ha contado con la ayuda de la Soyuz en un momento de su vida activa, precisamente cuando el transbordador dio por terminadas sus actividades por asuntos presupuestales; de esa forma un entorno ya establecido sería el ave fénix que renaciera con identidad multirracial y colaboración presupuestal de diversos organismos internacionales.

Poder crear una estación espacial en la luna es la catapulta idónea hacia la conquista del espacio profundo y no sólo eso es la respuesta a proveer las necesidades de los estrategas de distintos países que están planificando llegar a Marte, contar con una base donde proveerse de combustible y áreas de descanso y retroalimentación de sus actividades de investigación es un punto que nosotros podríamos ofrecer y lógicamente los costos que se realizarán en tales intercambios podrían proveernos de soles y lunas para abastecer las criptoarcas de soles y lunas asgardianas