Midland School District Vice President Clint McCance in Arkansas has shocked the school district by responding to a campaign to end bullying of gay students with a hateful (if not gleeful) Facebook commentary on gay teen suicides. Using the terms “queer” and “fag,” McCance promised to disown his own children if they are gay and refused to mourn the death of “sinners.”
McCance appeared to relish “the fact that [gay people] often give each other AIDS and die.” His diatribe was in response to the “Spirit Day” campaign that recognizes the problem of bullying of gay students and encourages students to wear purple to remember young people who committed suicide because of such bullying. McCance would have nothing of it, writing “Seriously they want me to wear purple because five queers committed suicide. The only way im wearin it for them is if they all commit suicide. I cant believe the people of this world have gotten this stupid. We are honoring the fact that they sinned and killed therselves because of their sin. REALLY PEOPLE.”
He then later wrote this little loving note for his children: ““I would disown my kids they were gay. They will not be welcome at my home or in my vicinity. I will absolutely run them off. Of course my kids will know better. My kids will have solid christian beliefs. See it infects everyone.” Would not be welcomed “in his vicinity”? What does that mean? He actually does not have the authority to “run off” gay people from his vicinity.
Then he shared his personal celebration of the death of gay people:
No because being a fag doesnt give you the right to ruin the rest of our lives. If you get easily offended by being called a fag then dont tell anyone you are a fag. Keep that shit to yourself. I dont care how people decide to live their lives. They dont bother me if they keep it to thereselves. It pisses me off though that we make a special purple fag day for them. I like that fags cant procreate. I also enjoy the fact that they often give each other aids and die. If you arent against it, you might as well be for it.”
Of course, “enjoying” the fact that some people have a long suffering illness and die is an admission of mental illness. Of course, what is most striking is how McCance uses religion to justify such hate. His pride in his instilling his beliefs in his children is a chilling thought of prejudice being passed down as a prized family legacy.
Source: CNN
Jonathan Turley
Thanks anon nurse. I was also trying to get Doc to stray around.
J. Brian Harris, Ph.D., P.E.
Hey, Doc, you didn’t answer rafflaw’s question and he is sincere. I certainly do not mind your comments, but like others question, why is it relevant to this specific topic of the school official?
rafflaw wrote the following to JBH: “I understand that you (sic) autism makes it harder for you to write, but it still doesn’t explain what you are trying to say in comment to Prof. Turley’s article.
JBH wrote:: “There is a reason why many autistic people withdraw from society as much as they can. That reason is fear of terrifying abuse from others. Homophobia, in my observation set so far, is invariably some form of trauma response.”
Amateur Radio Operators, of which I am one, sometimes ragchew, and I sometimes enjoy a good ragchew. An amateur radio contact often ends with each operator giving a final transmission. Methinks this is my final for this comment sequence.
Am I for real? As much as anyone else is…
If you were autistic, in the sense of having a form of language delay, in the manner which Dr. Leo Kanner first described in the medical literature, what would you do if you had a real concern you thought someone might find helpful? If you had profound difficulty getting words to work such that other people could understand your intended meaning, and you thought it wise to learn whether you could use words poorly, if poorly is as good as it can yet be, what would you do?
The last “government” numbers I came upon had autism showing up in about one of one hundred ten children. If Feldman is right that being honest is at the root of the communication problems I, and other autistic people have, and if it is dishonesty, and not honesty, which causes real harm, is an autism epidemic (which I have a hunch is not actually happening) not plausibly something to welcome, even with the communication difficulties what I seem to have written so intensely manifests?
My limbic system has a simple approach to life. If it is hurtful, it is wrong. If it is helpful, it is right. It is helpful to learn what is hurtful. It is right to do what is hurtful because that is the only way to learn what is hurtful.
Thus, I actually live a life which is not divided against itself. It has taken me more than 70 years of struggle with how words work to even write this well (or to be able to write this poorly?). If it is worth doing, it is worth doing poorly. If it is worth doing, and it can be done well, that is good. To me, life is what it is, as it is…
73s
JBH,
Thanks for the semi response. I understand that you autism makes it harder for you to write, but it still doesn’t explain what you are trying to say in comment to Prof. Turley’s article. By the way, what ever happened to the Professor at UIC that you disagreed with?
Mespo, I concur. JBH was absent the day the lecture subject was “Less is more.”
Mark Twain said: “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”
He also said, “Noise proves nothing. Often a hen who has merely laid an egg cackles as if she laid an asteroid.”
Otteray Scribe:
“Whining about how much hateful rhetoric he and his family have endured as a result of his ill-considered rant.”
*******************
Hateful rhetoric? Let the heavens rejoice! Poetic justice has visited the tiny hamlet of Arkansas and crowed Irony as king.
I have problems understanding precisely what you mean. As I read what you’ve written, it seems as though you are arguing a philosophical perspective of destiny as fact because you have proven a linear existence. You further insinuate that short of actual time travel, your ‘findings’ can not be refuted…..
Ok! I’ll take that challenge.
http://discovermagazine.com/2010/apr/01-back-from-the-future
This is what you asked for. (i.e. for one actual (meaning achievable, another word I used with due diligence) example which, being actual, would be capable of refutation if false.)
Next question.
JBH:
Here’s a little helpful tip from a long-dead master of words to you:
“[Your comment], by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read.”
~Winston S. Churchill
rafflaw:
I am not getting paid at all for what I do as a bioengineer. And, being autistic, and not able to think in words or pictures makes writing difficult for me. At the same time, I am able to do the work which I do quite precisely because I can not think in words, but only in meanings. Perhaps something I have heard from some other people will help make sense of this. Sometimes, someone talking with me cannot find a suitable word to use, and I have heard this phenomenon called, “having a word on the tip of the tongue.” Until I clearly understand the meaning I seek to share, I have no clue about words; I suppose my life is always having a word not even on the tip of the tongue.
Yes, my dissertation is a ridiculous collection of typographical errors. The University of Illinois at Chicago gave me only about 7 months to write and defend the dissertation after it had been approved as a thesis topic the first of two times my committee met. What happened is a story for another time and place, when I was told that I would be receiving the Ph.D., I informed the University Chancellor that I deemed the way I had been treated as a serious example of academic fraud. I have meticulously saved the documentation of this. What is usual for people not autistic is often unusual for autistic people, so I have observed throughout my life.
As for the person about whose notions this sequence of comments is based on, I observe that people who act as this person did are people who have been terribly damaged by early aspects of socialization. Because I have nothing resembling a “theory of mind,” and therefore cannot infer other people’s intentions, my survival has depended upon my developing a formidable level of skill at psychoanalysis (non-Freudian), and I psychoanalyze people in order to find what their intentions are (for doing that, I need visual as well as word-form communication) because, otherwise, people sometimes become terribly upset in my presence, and I find I need to do everything I can do to keep myself and others decently safe while also living my life. There is a reason why many autistic people withdraw from society as much as they can. That reason is fear of terrifying abuse from others. Homophobia, in my observation set so far, is invariably some form of trauma response.
cullheath –
I also do not believe that the justice system is a lie, however, I find that it is partly based on what appears to me to be a mistake about the nature of mistakes which happened far back in human pre-recorded history, and no one now alive has even the slightest responsibility for the system and its present form. We all inherited it, from a time when no one had any way of knowing better.
There is a corollary to my understanding of the nature of mistakes and the nature of learning. It is this: At the moment of a decision, the decision made is the best actually-possible decision (and also the worst actually-possible decision) because either a given brain synapse post-synaptic membrane depolarized during the decision process or it did not depolarize, and every overt decision made by a human brain is the actionable sum of all the individual cell-level decisions made within the brain by the cells within the brain, and also a dendrite from a given cell body either does or does not get to a given synapse, and whether or not a dendrite has access to a synapse so as to affect the neurochemical state of the synaptic cleft is also an aspect of the brain’s decision process.
It appears very clear to me that the conscious awareness non-autistic people have of how their brains make decisions is a far cry from what actually happens within the brain during the process of a decision. I got “brain-wired” rather differently than most folks, according to the extensive brain scan work done while I was touring psychiatric facilities during the most difficult phases of my field work. I find that I have conscious access to the limbic system (sometimes called the reptilian brain) and to the cerebellum, and no words ever get those parts of my brain, according to my conscious experience. A simple result of this is, when words might make sense within my cerebrrum, but the meaning of the words make no sense to my limbic system and cerebellum, and my limbic system and cerebellum always outvote my cerebrum.
Does that seem absurd? It did to my psychiatrist until accurate brain scan work demonstrated to him that I had accurately been reporting how my brain works. My inner experience of reality seems, from talking with many other verbal autistic people, to be markedly different than most other autistic people and starkly different than non-autistic people.
When I hear a sequence of words, as in the form of a sentence, and the meanings I can assign to some of the words contradict the meanings I can assign to others of the words, what I have heard becomes utterly unintelligible. The effect of this is often to totally isolate me from words, words heard or words I might otherwise speak.
When this happened while I was a second grade student at Marshall School, in Eureka, California, the effect was often my teacher deciding that I was being consciously, willfully defiant (which was never true) and I was sent to the principal’s office for paddling. The principal decided that I had “learned my lesson” (not so) when I became agitated-catatonic out of utterly stark terror. My parents did everything they could find to do to get me into a different classroom, in another school, and finally manage to accomplish that about three-quarters of the way through second grade.
While I was in that classroom, to get to sleep at night, I would suck my thumb as any self-respecting autistic child would plausibly do in such a situation, and would lie on my back in bed and throw my head from side to side as hard and as fast as was physically possible, because, otherwise, I would be screaming in utter, unmitigated terror as I began to fall asleep. That pattern of getting to sleep never happened before I as in that classroom, and never happened after. I know how to live through shattering abuse and never retaliate and never resent the abuse, because my brain structure allows me to forgive anyone who treats me abusively instantly. I cannot harbor resentments, and I cannot collect resentments which would lead me to retaliate.
One consequence of traditional socialization, so I observe, is generating forms of “groupthink” (as, if everyone is doing it, its okay), and people who struggle to conform to groupthink can develop severe brain dysfunction as a consequence of such struggle. During my research activities, I have spoken with many homosexual people who, in a no-holds-barred effort to believe they were not homosexual, were atrociously and overtly homophobic. That is not true for every homophobic person I have encountered, though.
One more remark. Someone, earlier, commented that any children of mine would likely dislike my understanding of life. Not so. My wife and I have a daughter, who completed graduate school a while ago. When she was in high school, teachers often commented to her and us, to the effect that, if every student were like our daughter (not being resentful, not retaliating, and working conscientiously) high school teaching would be the most wonderful job in the whole world.
There are two very different definitions of punishment. One is traditional, retaliation for an action deemed wrong, and the other is scientific, doing what actually reduces the future likelihood of an undesirable activity. If doing what is hurtful is an undesirable activity, then traditional punishment for doing hurtful things amounts to reinforcing what is supposedly being punished, a mixed message if ever there was one. From the scientific view, if doing what is hurtful is what is to be punished, then the punishment imposed can never be hurtful. In the traditional punishment scheme, it is the person who is “punished,” and the track record of that method is, as I observe, dismal at best. On the other hand, the scientific method reduces what is deemed undesirable by punishing only the activity and not the person, since hurting a person is intrinsically undesirable, especially for the person being hurt.
I am thankful for all the responses to what I have written, all of them are helpful to me.
J. Brian Harris
Mr. Harris writes: “The next day, by post, came a letter from the attorney, telling me to never again contact him at work or at home.”
I must say, I am with that attorney–his position is understood clearly. Seldom have I seen such a massive amount of verbal diarrhea. And all of it completely off topic. And presented with such pomposity. I am in awe.
As for the sad case of the school board member who put his foot so far into his mouth he was teabagging himself; he was on Anderson Cooper’s CNN news program tonight. He says he is resigning. Not a moment too soon. Whining about how much hateful rhetoric he and his family have endured as a result of his ill-considered rant.
There is a reason why I mentioned using high-dimension-space complex-variable tensor calculus. Unlike folks well trained in radio frequency electronics design work, who tend to revel in the use of complex variables, almost all the physicists I have closely known tend to separate the imaginary and real components and use only real-number maths. When I was a physics major at Carleton College, I was already well-versed in complex variables through my study of electronics prior to going to college, and I had some serious difficulty with using complex variables because my physics professors thought them unnecessary. Alas, the Schrödinger’s cat thought experiment comes out very differently when one uses complex variables for the probabilities, so differently that the seeming paradox of the live-dead cat vanishes identically.
I have yet to read Brian Greene’s “The Elegant Universe,” but I am very familiar with the argument I find you mentioning, albeit from different sources. I am much familiar with the nature of quantum mechanics and its plausible meanings. What I did not overlook regarding two observers observing what is supposedly a single event whereby the two observers observe different outcomes is not a contradiction of my research, for a contradiction would require that one or both observers observe the event differently, not than the other observer did, but than the observer who made a particular observation not have made the observation which was made.
There is Bertrand Russell’s “Barber Paradox,” which, absent time-corrupted learning, is not at all paradoxical. A simple description of the paradox is, in my own words;
There is a town with one, and only one, barber, and the barber shaves every man in town who does not shave himself, and every man is shaved. Who shaves the barber? Ruling out the trivial solution that the barber is a woman who does not shave, it might seem that, if the barber shaves himself, he is shaved by the barber and does not shave himself. However, the word, “barber” is the name of a profession and not a person. The man who is the one and only town barber shaves himself when he is not engaged in his profession, because it is intrinsic to his profession that he only shaves men other than himself within his profession. Therefore, Russell’s “Barber Paradox” is an example of time-corrupted learning because, for it to be a paradox, the barber must always be engaged in his profession, which is physically absurd. The “Barber Paradox,” to be a paradox, contains a classification error by deeming barber to be the man who works as the barber, and so confuses the man with his work.
Another supposed self-reference paradox is, “This sentence is false.” Obviously, if “This sentence is false,” then, “This sentence is false,” is true, and vice versa. However, “This sentence is false” contains a mechanism or process, and is form of clocked flip-flop or binary divider in electronics lingo. Useful “This sentence is false” devices abound, such as a typical modern TV power switch, which, pushed and released one time, may turn the TV on and when pushed and released the next time, may turn the TV off. Two cycles of the power switch results in one cycle of the TV power.
The “parallel universes” model is an inextricable part of the mathematics of quantum mechanics. However, if one uses complex variables, it becomes manifestly obvious that there are an infinitude of imaginary universes and one which is actually real. What quantum mechanical function do the imaginary parallel universes serve? They allow change to happen in the real universe.
Somewhat more than a hundred years ago, Lord Kelvin announced that knowledge put in mathematical form is superior to other knowledge, and that notion led to regarding mathematical models as being more real than what the mathematics models. Given the later work of quantum-mechanical physicist, Walter Elsasser, on the ramifications of quantum mechanics for biology, Elsasser observed, accurately as I note, that actual biology is unfathomably, transcomputationally complex. A model of something is never the something modeled, else the law of non-contradiction would be violated. Nothing I have come upon in quantum mechanics ever violates the law of non-contradiction.
The arguments from cosmology and the physics of cosmology are ones I passed up as being based on the very error my work has seemingly identified, and as refutation of my work suffer from containing the fallacy of assuming the consequent.
Mathematical modeling can turn utterly absurd and still get into peer-reviewed scientific journals. Some years ago, an article was published in which it was stated that the speed of gravity had been measured, using occultations of stars by Jupiter. The math came out with the speed of gravity being the same as the speed of light, which was what the research was intended to prove. However, when I read the article, I immediately burst out, laughing, without intending to do so. What the researchers had actually measured was the speed of light at optical frequencies (or wavelengths) and at radio frequencies (or wavelengths). I decided to wait for a while before challenging the article, and, sure enough, within a week, what I had noticed had been noticed by others, and the article was thereupon refuted and effectively withdrawn from the properly peer-reviewed literature.
As for Schrödinger’s cat, if the real cat is dead, one or more of the infinite number of imaginary cats is alive, and if the real cat is alive, one or more of the infinite number of imaginary cats is dead. There is no paradox if one uses good enough maths.
My concern is not about imaginary universes to which we have no actual access. Imagination can imagine not only what is actually possible but also what is actually impossible. It may be useful to model existence as a singularity which, there being nothing outside the entire totality of existence because were there something existing outside existence, existence would expand to include it. For existence to exist, it has to create itself, there being nothing outside existence when existence expands to include all that exists that otherwise would be outside existence. Self-reference, again. In this model, what is experienced as time is actually the observation of the process of existence creating itself, which it does because there can be nothing outside existence to stop existence from creating itself, however existence evolves.
Those who have studied my work in formidable depth and detail, people decently acquainted with quantum mechanics, have recognized the time-corrupted aspects of socialization, and no one who has talked directly with me has been able to sustain the notion that the viewpoint(s) which you, JoshOnPC, have mentioned as being a refutation or even a slight challenge to the findings of my work.
How did I come to do this work? No matter who attempted to teach me the ways of time-corrupted learning, I have always found time-corrupted learning to be corrupted and corrupted by forms of deception and dishonesty of the sort that Robert Feldman commented autistic people may tend to reject.
Several years ago, I attended a talk by a person who had collected a bunch of graduate-school degrees, a person who was, in the formal sense, magnificently educated. During the talk, this person said, in effect, “As Einstein proved, everything is relative.” I waited until the whole talk was completed, and, when no one else was talking with the speaker, asked if the speaker had said that Einstein proved that everything is relative. After the speaker said, “Yes,” I asked, “Have you done the math?” The speaker replied, “No.” I answered, “Well, I have, and I find that Einstein’s Theories of Relativity, there are two of them, contain a very interesting collection of absolutes.” Anyone who can do the maths in Einstein’s “The Meaning of Relativity, Fourth Edition,” which said book I got in 1959, will surely find absolutes, such as in Einstein’s use of Maxwell’s equations.
Consider the following, from page 112 of “The Meaning of Relativity: Fourth Edition, “We observe by the systems of stars, as seen by us, are spaced with approximately the same density in all directions. Thereby we are moved to the assumption that the spatial [italics in the book -jbh] isotropy of the system would hold for all observers.” Observations in the field of astrophysics, using recent satellite observatories, have refuted the notion of spatial isotropy. I cite this as an example of an absolute in Einstein’s work which is rather well refuted, nonetheless, it was the assumption of an absolute for the sake of doing the maths.
Alas, I did not ask for merely theoretical examples of refutation, I asked for one actual (meaning achievable, another word I used with due diligence) example which, being actual, would be capable of refutation if false. Such is the the science of philosophy and the philosophy of science as I am able to fathom them.
What I am asking for is someone who did something and what happened as a result was not exactly, in every detail, precisely what was anticipated (including nothing having been anticipated) and being able to use what was learned during the doing of the something to actually go back and do it differently. Existence is, as I can mathematically model it, a superposition process, such that everything which has happened in the past happened in the past, and nothing that will only actually happen in the future has actually happened in the past. One needs to make accurate sense of the domain of definition of the Pauli Exclusion Principle.
Okay, I picked up a bunch of big words and fancy language. However, I am an ordinary, one-of-a-kind-in-forever person, not significantly different from anyone else who is also neither more nor less unique than I am. My work is not about ego or egotism. It is about that which observably hurts little children and what can actually be done to reduce the hurting of little children. Little children who have been badly hurt tend to develop into adults who, as parents, tend to hurt their children (for the children’s own good?) much as the parents were hurt.
During much of the field work, my home was in Oak Park, Illinois. One day, as I was working at writing, using a computer, I heard a terrible scream of anguish from outside the house. I scurried to a window and observed the Oak Park Police talking to a neighbor across the street, and the neighbor was still screaming in anguish, and the screams of anguish burned all the way to the ultimate depths of my being. The neighbor’s son had been murdered in a drive-by shooting about a mile away, in Chicago.
I seek only to do my part to stop whatever it is that happens to people which allows anyone to ever deliberately murder a child. Or allows people to build fake showers with Cyclon-B substituting for water. Or allows people to deliberately fly airplanes into tall buildings. Or allows people to engage in the defeating process of reciprocal retaliation (read the published work of Martin Cooperman).
Until one ordinary, run-of-the-mill person has actually lived a life without ever actually learning the deceptive and dishonest ways (See Robert Feldman, The Liar in Your Life) of society and has done so with a life which is decent and practical, there was no actual evidence that such a life could really ever be possible. Such a life is now manifestly possible, for I actually live it, and have actually lived it since before I was born.
It takes an actual life of an ordinary person, in which the person never retaliates regardless of how treated to demonstrate that such a life is actually possible. That demonstration now exists; I live it. After more than 70 years of living it, I now make an effort to accurately describe it, on the chance that the description will be helpful to someone else.
Ignoranti legis neminem excusat. That is, to me, a biologically testable hypothesis. One day, I set out to test it. I went to an appointment with an attorney, having said I would pay him his going rate for some legal help. I showed the attorney a collection of about a dozen 11×71 inch posters I made, the posters containing the core findings of my research. After the attorney read the posters, I summarized their meaning, as I understand their meaning, with, “I understand that ignorance of the law is an excuse.” The attorney responded with the legal maxim at the beginning of this paragraph, but translated into English, “No, Ignorance of the law is no excuse.”
Suspecting the attorney and I held differing views, I set out to test whether my view or the attorney’s view would stand up to scientific scrutiny.
Based on my notion that, were the attorney’s view the truth, I would need to be perfectly certain that I did not overlook any law or any part of a law, and through such overlooking, be ignorant of the law, and hence inexcusable, I asked the attorney, “How many laws are there?”
The attorney, “I don’t know.”
It next occurred to me that my question had come to me once before, and I had called the American Bar Association headquarters and had asked them how many laws there are, and th they could not tell me. I mentioned this fact to the attorney and then asked, “Is it reasonable to expect people to do what is impossible?”
The attorney, “I don’t know.”
I asked, “Is it decent to require people to do what is impossible and punish them for the inescapable faliure?”
The attorney, “I don’t know.”
I asked, “What is the law?”
The attorney, “I don’t know.”
As the attorney is known by me to be a member of a local church and as I am also a member of a local church, and, putting my understanding in words I thought might be meaningful to the attorney because of his church membership, I said to the attorney, “Well, I do know the law, and there is only one of them. We are to love the Lord, our God with all of heart, mind, soul, and strength, and, in so doing, learn properly to love neighbor as self, and in so doing, learn the truth, and in learning the truth, find ourselves being set free. Now you know the law. How much do I owe you?”
The attorney, “Nothing.”
The attorney promptly left the room.
The next day, by post, came a letter from the attorney, telling me to never again contact him at work or at home.
I excused the attorney for not knowing the law as I understand his church teaches the law, and I excused the attorney for being unable to inform me how, by willful, conscientious intent, I can live my life in full and complete conformity with the laws of the United States of America and the laws of any and every state in which I reside or travel within. If an attorney is incapable of knowing the law in such a way as to be able to accurately inform me as to how I can live my life without ever violating any law in any way, who can?
I find that I am always able to know, and to obey, the law as I understand the law. I find that the attorney was unable to know the law as he understood the law, and would not always be able to obey the law because of inescapable ignorance of the law as he understood the law.
Yes, from within the traditions of the legal profession, my conduct could plausibly be regarded as possibly illegal, being at risk of being deemed a form of harassment without legitimate purpose. Alas, as a bioengineer who is also a Registered Professional Engineer who abides by the Code of Ethics of the National Society of Professional Engineers, I find that what happened with that attorney was of deception and dishonesty.
And, yes, I have discussed aspects of my work with Arthur Schwartz, Esq, the General Counsel of the National Society of Professional Engineers to learn whether he could tell me of a lawful reason why my work would be unlawful or unethical or improper, and he could tell me of no such reason.
My purpose is simple, it is doing what I am able to do to make human society safer for life on earth.
Mr. Harris,
Are you getting paid by the word? Holy cow. Maybe I am just slow, but how does your dissertation relate to the issue of this disgusting homophobe school board member rejoicing over the death of gays?
I was also a little surprised that your dissertation had a lot of typos in it. Even in graduate work and law school papers, my professors refused to even complete a reading or review of the paper if there were spelling, grammatical or typographical errors. Time for completion was never an issue when they refused or accepted the finished product.
J. Brian Harris, Ph.D., P.E. :
I don’t think the justice system is a lie any more than I think a caked baked is a lie. They are deliberate constructs to achieve the best end possible while being aware that the limitations of prescience and the inability to remove all possibility of paradox from the use of logic to constrain and filter perceptions.
The equal haystacks mule does not starve. Probability waves collapse and stuff actually happens.
I like your vision.
J. Brian Harris, Ph.D., P.E.
I’z juss a ol’ countree boy, soes hep me out ‘sheer–is ya fur sure n’ fur sartin’ fur real?
@rcampbell
It is amazing how many people have distorted what Williams said, including yourself.
JoshOnPC,
“Think I could repost it as two posts?”
That’s what I’d do.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/manyworlds/original.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger‘s_cat
http://books.google.com/books?id=okv_O0Xhl9gC&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=physics+train+brian+greene&source=bl&ots=rgbJl2aHJv&sig=0ynlBHsk4bAFOA4kIZyz-aPz-1o&hl=en&ei=I9nJTKCiN4S0lQf28MDWAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false