>Doug Bailey:
>We won't know the difference until we can begin to grasp the concepts the SI
>is thinking about, unless of course we could somehow determine the existence
>of knowledge that is forever beyond our grasp (highly improbable).
>
Presuming that our brains won't become augmented (unlikely) almost any
really complicated mathematical operation or proof is a counterexample
here. The lengthy and cumbersome kinds of strings used when creating true
but unprovable statements per Godel's Theorem is one example. Another more
humble example is truly visualizing the operations of Windows 95 as I write
this message. Then there's really modeling the economy....
O--------------------------------O | Hara Ra <harara@shamanics.com> | | Box 8334 Santa Cruz, CA 95061 | | | | Man, Debug Thyself | | - Graffiti at People's | | Computer Company - 1976 | O--------------------------------O