And these little things may not seem like much but after a while they take you off on a direction where you may be a long way off from what other people have been thinking about.
Some years ago, I wrote a book called the Emperor's New Mind and that book was describing a point of view I had about consciousness and why it was not something that comes about from complicated calculations.
So I think that the issue of how consciousness relates to the physical world is all tied up with morality but we have a lot to learn on that one.
So what I'm saying is why don't we think about changing Schrodinger's equation at some level when masses become too big at the level that you might have to worry about Einstein's general relativity.
Well, I don't know if I can comment on Kant or Hegel because I'm no real philosopher in the sense of knowing what these people have said in any detail so let me not comment on that too much.
The idea is if you use those two shapes and try to colour the plane with them so the colours match, then the only way that you can do this is to produce a pattern which never repeats itself.
But I think it is a serious issue to wonder about the other platonic absolutes of say beauty and morality.
The basic theory in twistor theory is not to add extra dimensions.
I was indeed very slow as a youngster.
In the book, I make the point that here we have string theory and here we have twistor theory and we don't know if either one of them is the right approach to nature.
Well, gauge theory is very fundamental to our understanding of physical forces these days. But they are also dependent on a mathematical idea, which has been around for longer than gauge theory has.
As you say, the way string theory requires all these extra dimensions and this comes from certain consistency requirements about how string should behave and so on.
My own way of thinking is to ponder long and I hope deeply on problems and for a long time which I keep away for years and years and I never really let them go.
Ordinary photons do have spin, they have a notion of helicity so they spin around their direction on motion.
As for morality, well that's all tied up with the question of consciousness.
Entire lights rays - you see if you made space, each of whose points represented an entire light ray, you'd find that space had five dimensions.
If you didn't have any conscious beings in the world, there really wouldn't be morality but with consciousness that you have it.
Well I didn't actually see the Matrix but I've seen other movies where with similar sorts of themes.
People think of these eureka moments and my feeling is that they tend to be little things, a little realisation and then a little realisation built on that.
I'm pretty tenacious when it comes to problems.
I like science fiction movies, but I think they are useful for giving us ideas and I think science fiction is very good at giving ideas.
This book is about physics and its about physics and its relationship with mathematics and how they seem to be intimately related and to what extent can you explore this relationship and trust it.