A small observation: both the feature film "What the Bleep Do We Know?" and a recent article in New Scientist called "Mr. Hawking's Flexiverse" make reference to "the observer." This is a key element in centralizing the perception of the universe not from within the universe itself, but from within the individual. One's perception of reality is really all there is.
As a quantum mechanical example, the New Scientist article references a test where a light beam is shot through a piece of paper with two slits in it, on to a piece of photographic paper which records the results. (This will all be part of my play, by the way). When the beam of light passes through these slits, it produces two slits of light on the photographic paper that gradate out and "interfere" with each other. You can imagine that, I'd think. If you shine a flashlight through a sheet with holes in it and aim it at a wall, you'll get two bright spots that sort of bleed into each other and fade into the darkness. Now, if you fire a single photon at the same two-slitted piece of paper, one would assume that it'll choose one of the slits and form one bright spot on the other side. But it doesn't. It produces the same effect as the whole beam. Hawking believes this is because the photon takes every possible path. What's interesting, is that if you "snap a picture" of this event, you only see one path. It's the way one sees the path that makes it so. All other paths cancel each other out.
I probably have taken huge liberties with the text, but it doesn't matter, really (which is in the spirit of the text, ironically). I read what I wanted to read. I interpreted it how I thought it should be interpreted. And if you can see that the path is clear depending on how YOU perceive it, why worry? You make it happen.