More David Deutsch, please! It turns out he has a very unique view of the world!

Closer to truth is one of the best things on the internet! It is exercise for our brains

Thank you. David Deutsch is a personal hero of mine. An interview I saw with him, about 24 years ago, left me feeling vindicated about a debate with a college professor. The argument was about possible mechanisms for single photon interference, after I was first shown the experiment in summer of 1988. He believed the notion of photons interfering with parallel counterparts, in "virtual" universes, was ridiculous nonsense.

@lysanderofsparta3708

Жыл бұрын

Why would you feel vindicated about something that can never be proven? Your professor could very well be right.

fascinating discussion, and huge thank you for the questions you asked.

"I existed first and went down every path. I am the abundance of Light I am the remembrance of Fullness." - Apocryphon of John, 2nd Century A.D.

@projectmalus

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks! It sounds like he was describing cycloids and an awareness following a thread of intent, both using and being contained in the shapes.

@David.C.Velasquez

2 жыл бұрын

Very fitting.

Does making a choice produce energy, how much? What is the mechanism behind it? How much energy do you require to create a universe or to branch a new timeline?.

For those already initiated in QM I repeat here some comments previously made to similar videos. They may clarify several pending matters. The Schrödinger time dependent equation (STDE) when applied to a wave representing an initial state of, say, an electron bound to a proton and together forming a hydrogen atom, predicts and retrodicts all the future and previous states of the electron wave, in the same fashion than the evolution equations of classical mechanics predicts the movement of the Earth around the Sun. Note that the STDE is energy conservative, that is, the initial state as well as the predicted and retrodicted ones all have the same energy. As is well known the bound electron has a completely different conduct. Whatever the initial state and in absence of other interactions an excited electron will settle in a stationary state radiating energy (in the form of a photon) along the way. If the stationary state is the ground state the electron will stay there forever (in absence, as said before, of other interactions). Otherwise the stationary electron state is ephemeral and will be abandoned to radiate a photon and assume a new stationary state of even lower energy. This "down the staircase" process repeats until the ground state is reached. There is no manner to adapt the STDE to this physical process. This inconsistency was discovered by none other than Niels Bohr, as can be inferred from the report of Werner Heisenberg. See our note www.researchgate.net/publication/356193279_Deconstruction_of_Quantum_Wave_Mechanics After discovering the tremendous inconsistency between the equation and the atom it would have been natural to announce that the STDE contradicted physical facts, and ask for a correct equation. I assume as true, but only know from hearsay very long ago, that in Einstein's viewpoint the correct deterministic time dependent wave equation had to be non-linear in contrast with the linear STDE. References to this historical detail would be appreciated. It is hard to believe but, against reasonableness and common sense, Bohr decided to adopt the STDE as correct and that continuity, causality and determinism of physical processes were wrong because they contradicted the STDE. Apparently mathematical equations on paper were more relevant than the experience of the whole human race. Then a series of new and fanciful "quantum physical principles" were adopted. In my opinion the powerful quantum establishment dogmatically defends Quantism and strongly rejects any attempt to correct its misdeeds, even if the correct deterministic time dependent wave equation is available. With best regards to all Daniel Crespin

that explanation about solid state of matter is mind-blowing

@TheFlamingChips

2 жыл бұрын

I still don’t fully understand it though. Any help?

Out of 451k subscribers, only 13k watched this video in 2 days, and even sadder, only 538 people liked it. This is one of the very few top class KZread channels. I wonder what's happening to human intelligence and knowledge.

@EZ_Case

Ай бұрын

They’re all on tiktok watching people dance in public and debating gender.

If I had to guess, the "many worlds" do not exist until they amalgemate and the wave function collapses as far as I understand this would create a single reality out of all possible realities.

@Ascendlocal

2 жыл бұрын

It’s Sean Carroll who explains it best. More and more physicists are leaning towards Hugh Everett’s interpretation. The late John Wheeler was blown away. Sent him over seas to present to Neils Bohr

@projectmalus

2 жыл бұрын

perhaps a ground state with the butterfly of creativity emerging, and what I affectionately think of as the "Sh*t Bat" taking the butterfly down (to start anew from the ground base) and there's a balance point of a single world in there where the two meet, detached from the ground state yet an extension of it. The interaction extends a node of being.

@stormtrooper9404

2 жыл бұрын

@@Ascendlocal More and more physicist “believe” in it?!? Is there any proof, pool, research?! Or you just made it up? Last time I checked, MW was dead as much as String theory! 50 years of non-sense, anti-science were enough already! And Hughes Everret was a butt of a joke that Wheeler had set it up.

@Ascendlocal

2 жыл бұрын

@@stormtrooper9404 a lengthy coma can do that to persons. String theory is a construct alive and well as a working mathematical model for progress of Grand Unified Theory. Where have you been? Why don’t you ask Lennard Susskind, Ed Witten and cut down on watching reruns of Star Wars for your science and mathematics Where did I get my info? A survey within the last several years among peers at Quantum Physics conference. Look it up. But then maybe you’re an Observer who knows how to collapse the wave function. Let me know how that works for you.

Doesn't every child imagine this? If I am dancing in one reality forever, I am happy while I live in this one because I know one part of me is dancing. If I am exploring nature in another reality, ditto. And each life is interacting with me in this and vice versa and so I grow from it and increase my understanding. Sometimes we see this in dreams and daydreams, visions, and experiences that we can describe as otherworld. Life in one reality is far too short for our imaginative lives to conceive of it's limitations without creating in another. How many are there? How many cells there in our bodies, and how many times do they renew themselves? It is limitless. Life is wonderful

With yesterday's interview as a point of reference - "How Does Beauty Color the Universe" - this episode is its flip side. There is little about *any* of the multiverse interpretations that provides clarity, demonstrating neither symmetry nor simplicity. Worst of all, given their enthusiasm, you would expect a multiverse interpretation to provide some account of the entropy problem, but it does no such thing. The entropy problem still lurks in the background, still demanding to be taken seriously.

Ah now we're getting "closer to truth". I completely agree with David's theory. I've always felt there is so much more going on around us in our everyday lives than we can even begin to imagine.

@chuckosborne4403

2 жыл бұрын

@@ReverendDr.Thomas Proven facts pertaining to any given subject.

@chuckosborne4403

2 жыл бұрын

@@ReverendDr.Thomas Truth is, that’s just one perspective.

David's flailing arms helped tremendously

The Many Worlds had always seemed like the most intuitive interpretation; however I'm only an "armchair physicist". When I first learned of the double slit experiment--and the resulting interference pattern--it seems obvious that it would require something very "real" to have interference. It's puzzling how someone could expect a photon to interact with a "possibility".

@David.C.Velasquez

2 жыл бұрын

Maybe, from our point of view, as entities with mass, "trapped" in time, they appear as possibilities, but to a massless and timeless photon they are very real.

@troyhiscock4407

2 жыл бұрын

​@@David.C.Velasquez Could be. In another video, Markus Arndt challenged DD with, "perhaps it's just the same photon in folded space/higher dimensions." David replied, (to paraphrase), True but now we're just dealing with semantics. His point being that the other photon is real nonetheless. But being outside our experience, it's in another "world".

@David.C.Velasquez

2 жыл бұрын

@@troyhiscock4407 Yes, very interesting. In the case of single photon interference, the photon is interacting with it's parallel counterparts, in many other "histories" that appear virtual from our limited, time bound perspective... possibly.

If I understand what he is saying, there are other realities that interact with us concurrently without our noticing their existence. This to me is evidently true. For example, before the advent of radio communication, people hardly knew that there is radio wave within nearly everything. Another example is the suspected "dark energy." In the future, we may discover other things or phenomenal that we do not at present think exist. Whether that will be in the quantum field, we wait to see. As for calling it multiverse, that is a choice of words.

@shanezanath2092

2 жыл бұрын

Dark energy is not "suspected". It is indeed the vacuum energy; the lambda in Einstein's GR equation. We have observed it, so it is not suspected. We can measure its influence relative to gravity. We just don't know how it works (is it a property of space itself, is it constant, etc.).

@peweegangloku6428

2 жыл бұрын

@@shanezanath2092 The fact that a whole lot is still unknown about dark energy, the word "suspected" is actually not misplaced.

@shanezanath2092

2 жыл бұрын

@@peweegangloku6428 Suspected (verb): have an idea or impression of the existence, presence, or truth of (something) without certain proof. It is the job of theoretical physicists to propose conjectures upon suspected evidence. Dark energy is quite literally the opposite. We already have the suspected evidence. But this is a case where we need a good explanation of what is going on. There is no suspecting to be done (proof to be gathered)! Only explaining what is happening.

@peweegangloku6428

2 жыл бұрын

@@shanezanath2092 Okay let's not get bogged down with words. Underlying concept is what matters. If you understand that I don't mean that dark energy does not exist, we can move on from there.

@shanezanath2092

2 жыл бұрын

@@peweegangloku6428 Fair enough 🙂 But if you want an explanation of it, the words do matter.

Iv read his works on physics he's amazing and very brilliant

I was thinking about this very subject the other day, and came up with a similar theory, and come to the conclusion that every millionth or less of a second we are splitting off in different universes, and always have.

@matsumoribear

Жыл бұрын

And I think that idea of potentialities would have to apply to every moment in the past & then as well, the future. It thus begs the question: do future events influence the past? Or, the present? The implications are staggering.

@iatfestival2900

Жыл бұрын

I believe if you go back and listen again, you'll find that this idea of universes "splitting off" is described as having been abandoned. What Deutsch is saying (when the interviewer asks) is that the vast number of available universes have been there, existing simultaneously, since the time of the Big Bang.

What causes branching of many worlds? Does the cause of branching of quantum wave function give an an indication of what started quantum wave function?

I tend to agree with everything he's saying. A brilliant mind, he has.

More David Deutsch!

Could the many worlds just be future possibilities within our three dimensional Universe with many reference frames? All we need is a probabilistic future unfolding photon by photon with an Arrow of Time in each reference frame.

IMO it highly depends on the shape of the multiverse. It's very dangerous to make assumptions here. See ep-circles to ellipses, to orbits to relativity. Each one lead to the other, but the structure and shape of the "space" was very different.

I am an amateur interested in the computer simulation of quantum mechanics making use of a random number generator. I would like to give up my day job and buy a flashy new computer so I can work full time on it. If MWI is true, then there is a world where I win the National Lottery every week. Any assistance in locating it would be appreciated.

👍Wow. More on this, please.

So either there are trillions of new universes exponentially created every single moment as all living things make minor decisions in their daily lives and so on in each of the newly created universes ad infinitum, OR there is an error in the arithmetic. Is that the situation?

@drland642

2 жыл бұрын

As I understand it, the something missing would be an unidentified missing term in the Schrodinger Equation. Penrose suggests it is the presence of gravity fields that prevents many worlds from promulgating. Of course many worlds has a huge 'missing' problem too: missing energy, missing mechanisms, missing experiments.

Closer to infinity would be a type of or all the multiverse that can exist, probably do. To me the number is infinity’s upon infinities with like a black area of impossibilities that would go against physics of a local system but not irrational thought lol

I think that inflation theory can be understanded as a relativistic way to describe the multiverse. If we think of those bubble universe as a one unique bubble universe in superposition being in all possible states. In that way, those universes with different laws and properties are the other possibilities of the universe after the big bang, were the universe was taking form.

Very interesting

David Deutsch is absolutely brilliant, and I agree with him in suspecting the Everett interpretation is correct but I disagree with the need for the universes to be existing in parallel rather than say be emerging timeline branches. It may seem to only be a semantical difference (different universes vs different timelines) but they have different ramifications and taken intuitively I don't think differentiating universes work as well. The key to understanding why is considering the universal wave function, which is the totality of all possible superpositions futures and histories. To the everettian that is what the true actual universe is at the scale of everything, the universal wavefunction. It progresses deterministically in accordance with the schrodinger equation. The same equation that charts all possible paths for a photon (or any other subatomic particle) to take during a double slit experiment applies to everything in existence. It appears to just be a quality of matter itself to take all possible paths, it is just that usually we can't notice this behavior outside of subatomic scales even though that is what is actually happening. However realizing that this applies for all matter in general the idea of a universal wave function is an inevitable conclusion. So it isn't like there are multiple "universes" that combine to create the universal wave function because each of those "universes" would still need to have matter progress in the same way, taking all possible paths. You could try to explain the multiple different paths as being an infinite amount of universes differentiating but it is easier to say that there was one initial state that is progressing to all possible paths which we would view as different timelines. Though some might argue there really is no difference between the two versions of this, the timeline view does not need an infinity of universes at the beginning, it only needs 1 state of which progresses as quantum physics suggests it would which results in multiple timelines. However considering that B theory of time may be the case (as supported by the ramifications of special relativity) perhaps it makes no difference anyway. What time itself could be is an illusion on our end with every possible moment already existing, meaning alternate futures and multiple outcomes of time already exist and would in fact be "differentiating" so to speak. Ah whatever. Still works better.

@David.C.Velasquez

2 жыл бұрын

By Jove, I think you've got it.

Max Tagmark has the most comprehensive book on understanding the multiverse(s)…not one, rather four (4) levels. 1) Our infinite pocket universe from the inside, 2) then Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum super positions, (the cat is both dead and alive when we open the box and observe because the universe branches where we exist in both outcomes and move forward in time), 3) the Multiverse of eternal inflation, 10 to the 500 manifolds, each an infinite number of times and finally, Level 4. It’s mathematics that underlies everything. As Stephen Hawking, asked, “What breaths the fire into the equations”? David understands these and mostly agrees. BTW, 1 and 2 are allowed with no issue with conservation of energy do to Hilbert Space.

@francesco5581

2 жыл бұрын

why not 6 levels ? or 12 ? Everyone can make wild theories based on nothing. Mathematics can support everything ....

@Ascendlocal

2 жыл бұрын

@@francesco5581 well, certainly don’t refer to me, but why not refer to Max Tagmark at MIT, Lennard Susskind at Stanford, one of the founders of string theory, the holographic principal, Sean Carroll, Cal Tech. Perhaps the smartest person in the world, Ed Witten, ‘t Hooft, Lawrence Krauss, Alan Guth, Andre Linde, Paul Steinhart, Harvard, Frank Wilczek…many of these, Nobel Laureates. It’s not the BS you suggest and perhaps you will find the answer to your question, “why not 6, 7 or whatever” BTW, no one said there is a Unified Field Theory as yet.

@TreeBreezeL

2 жыл бұрын

@@francesco5581 He stops at 4 because Max's view is that the entirety of reality is a mathematical object. The fourth multiverse level is every conceivable mathematical structure, each with the many worlds of their version of quantum mechanics (level 3), each with eternal inflation causing every combination of possible laws of physics within the mathematical structure to exist (level 2), each of which is a flat infinite space in which anything that can exist with the given laws of physics does exist (level 1). So Max Tegmark basically says that if something can exist, it does. But this is why he stops at 4 and does not stop at 6 or 12, his view does not require anything further beyond level 4 as he argues that this contains every possible thing that could ever exist

@Ascendlocal

2 жыл бұрын

@@TreeBreezeL well stated. Spot on! It ends with math.

@francesco5581

2 жыл бұрын

@@TreeBreezeL Are theories thrown there just for the pleasure to do so, without any kind of proof every math professor can make his mathematical models and fit any kind of theory to sell a book .

I agree with the argument that the Multiverse theory can not be tested at the existing level of technology and knowledge. But intuition and common sense tell me that Multiverse is quite possible or even probable. If something can happen once, it can happen again. If something can happen at one place, it can happen elsewhere. Actually it does happen. If there is one electron, there are many electrons. That holds true for stars, planets, galaxies and everything that exists. There is nothing which is single piece in it's category. That also should hold good for big bang and universe also. If there is one big bang and one universe, there should be many big bangs and universes.

What was new for me, was I thought the multi-verses didn't interact. He says it does. Question: after one makes a measurement, and the multi-verses split off, are they forever non-interactive? Or can the branches still interact later on? As for the question of how many multi-verses, RLK presses for a number. DD gives the example of a cubic meter of air. The answer seems to be a combinatorial answer. But how about something simpler? One electron. I'd like to see what is meant by "multi-verse", from the simplest case.

@nahCmeR

2 жыл бұрын

I could see it both ways. 1. Once one interacts with another that essentially creates another copy universe that splits off from the first 2 that interacted. 2. They are able to continually interact at some level (quantum in this case) but not in larger forms (matter, physical objects larger then photons). So at the quantum level, there can be interaction but once it reaches a specific level larger then quantum the interaction is imperceptible. For all we know all of the parallel / multi-verses are always all around us, doing their own thing in the background. When walking down the street you might actually walk into/ through another object in another universe but it's completely imperceptible to us. Like all the universes are stacked inside one another, taking up the same space all at the same or different time. One could even have been the cause of the big bang. I've always liked the idea that the big bang was actually like a theoretical "white hole" or counter of a Black hole caused by the creation or evaporation of a black hole in another universe. What if this universe is just the inside of a black hole created from another universe?

@AdamHarveyMusic

2 жыл бұрын

I don’t think there are branches as such - I think he says in the interview that’s what people used to think but now the view has matured. The multiverse would be a set of all possible quantum configurations in my understanding. Think of a computer game - there is a maximum number of possible states for that game to be in. If you moved every possible movable thing in that game to every possible place it could be based on the laws and limitations of that game, that would be the multiverse. This would be an enormous number of possibilities - not infinite but imagine how many characters, objects, camera perspectives etc there are. Deutsch is suggesting, as far as I can tell. That the multiverse in some sense a sum of all those states. It doesn’t branch as such, it is an object of an immense number of possible states and we as humans, essentially, are on a journey through a narrow set of those states. We aren’t branching off, we’re simply experiencing in play through of the computer game, so to speak. But the multiverse itself is the sum of all possible states of all possible things. It’s a mind-boggling idea but I think it has a lot of merit. Max Tegmark has a related though different idea with his “mathematical universe” idea. That the universe is the sum of all possible mathematical states.

@nahCmeR

2 жыл бұрын

@@AdamHarveyMusic Why couldn't the Multi-verse also contain all the non-possible states that wouldn't be allowed in this universe/line of possibilities? Seems if all the possibilities are considered this should be included, just not "Allowed" by this line/universe. It's all essentially theoretical anyways. Sure not all possible states imaginable would work in our current universe, but what's to say it couldn't in another? Doesn't even have to run parallel or in sync with ours, it could be one before or after ours just with different starting conditions allowing for different possibilities to emerge.

@AdamHarveyMusic

2 жыл бұрын

@@nahCmeR no that’s a good point. I believe David Deutsch is saying that ultimately the multiverse could be a combination of all possible states of all possible states. But if you think about it, our universe can only comprise of the rules and limits of our universe. Anything outside the “game” can’t interact with something inside the game. Think of two computer games being played side by side (assume they have no connection through the internet). They can’t interact with each other. The rules of one game are different to another, and they are separate bubbles. They do not “exist” together, even though they are next to each other. But, they are both in the same room. So in that sense the occupy the same space. The room could be though of as a multiverse. It’s not a perfect analogy but it’s a way to think about it - you could have a room filled with every possible computer game in every possible state. None of them can directly communicate with each other, but they exist in the same realm. Each computer game could be in a huge number of different states, so each universe is a combination of every possible state. And the multiverse is a combination of every possible state of every possible game.

Awesome

Does quantum multi-verses only apply to our cosmic multi-verse or all of them?

@David.C.Velasquez

2 жыл бұрын

Logically all.

I am pretty sure I saw this interview in another world.

There’s nothing to do with the beliefs, we can not play the games with the science , and physics, you should, find you own understandings, from the space and universe’s, and explain that

Thought-provoking, if Deutsch is right that the quantum experiments can only be interpreted by positing the existence of multiple universes. The experiments themselves, with lasers and slits and electrons and photons, etc., do not seem particularly complex. But I have yet to find a clear explanation of their implications for the nature of physical reality.

What's crazy about many worlds is there's probably infinite numbers of Elon Musks who sit on the couch all day with no job, and 80IQ, and potato chips on their face, and there's probably a version of me that's solving space x and getting us on Mars.

How does the multiple universe theory work with the parallel universe? I heard that the parallel universe is scientifically proven but very little known or understood.

@Ascendlocal

2 жыл бұрын

Depends on what level of multiverse you refer. In our own universe the belief is that it is infinite and where the constants can change, so that we exist an infinite amount of times. (You never reach a horizon from the inside) The the many words interpretation of quantum wave function, where the entire universe branches from the wave function and each of us branches off (allowed by Hilbert space). Third. Eternal Inflation theory, where there are 10 to the 500 manifold dimensions, including ours and each exists an infinite number of times. Source - Max Tagmark

A multiverse is just reality minus time. The photon expresses itself as a wave in the double slit because when you remove time we are everywhere and everything. Also David looks like the white Snoop Dogg

Just imagine an intelligence running many different programmes all at once. Even my laptop can do that.

@georgeliverpudlio1258

2 жыл бұрын

This guy is like the crank played by Mark Rylance in the film Don't Look Up. I've read both of his highly over rated books. There are about four chapters which are really interesting. But the majority of both books are arrogant, pedantic and utter rubbish.

There's other dimensions and some us can see them.

@georgeliverpudlio1258

2 жыл бұрын

Drugs are bad.

@DoesThisWork888

2 жыл бұрын

It's puff puff pass, not puff puff hold, where are your manners

@fieldandstream9362

2 жыл бұрын

@@DoesThisWork888 it doesn't require drugs to see into other dimensions...ever heard of remote viewing?

@DoesThisWork888

2 жыл бұрын

@@fieldandstream9362 I didn't leave that comment, someone from another dimension is trying to set me up!

@mashabkhan8364

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed man. Sometimes we feel that and predict the change. I think that time (4 dimension) some time we predict the act/reality with the same outcome within certain time.

At what point did you have any evidence of this theory?

The cosmological consist is why scientists created the multiverse because its mathematically impossible to have happen by chance but what they must not have understood is by invoking infinity they have made a Creator a certainty among other things.

@JackLWalsh

8 ай бұрын

You literally have no idea what you’re talking about 😂😂 Invoking a supernatural imaginary entity is not a solution, especially when the mathematics and all empirical clearly demonstrates that there is no such thing as a creator-entity or a god like being. Humans invented superstitious nonsense. Keep this crap out of actual science. Keep your delusions to yourself. We’re trying to do real work is here

Unusual sound good way of explaining the odd and situation. I look at my table and I see a solid table. The atom in side my table seems solid but science say the atomic partly number move in side and make up of my table. I can provide it's solid enough to put my phone on

Sounds like we are getting closer to the truth

The universe is like a particle in a wave.🥳😎🥳

@J.M_Sterken

2 жыл бұрын

I'm sure about that.

@temporoboto

2 жыл бұрын

I think of it as a particle and a wave, everything we witness is the interaction between the two. Infinite with no beginning.

Sure It can be "on the table" of speculation but, there really ought to be some empirical evidence before you start believing something. Nothingness & infinity are perhaps the 2 biggest paradoxes of existence/mind.

Don't even get me started.

Highly recommended for anyone about to go see the new Doctor Strange movie😂😂

@S3RAVA3LM

2 жыл бұрын

The first was very good.

david deutsch cameo on doctor strange multiverse of madness pls!!!

If every point in space experiences quantum fluctuations, which are the progenitors of infinite branched realities, then why wouldn't every point in space have infinitely dense energy.

@TehNetherlands

2 жыл бұрын

I think that is because the potentially infinite energy density is not actualized, or because it's all about relative energy. In other words, a temporary fluctuation is a smaller infinity compared to its surroundings, forcing a collapse of sorts. So the infinity could be thought of as a boolean value (existence vs non-existence), but there would still be an actual real numerical difference between individual fluctuations. I'd assume the magnitude of these fluctuations would be decided by a stochastic process, and the fluctuations would on average approach some nominal value. It's all speculation really. Edit: perhaps some evolutionary principle could be at work.

I wonder if America Chavez has ever met the version of me that had a happy ending.

Only the universe, which is stationary and quantum entangled, exists. This history is a virtual reality for the observer(you).

explaining dreams it seems

All World, all times says my three legged chicken.

Pure Consciousness.

@S3RAVA3LM

2 жыл бұрын

What's consciousness?

@georgeliverpudlio1258

2 жыл бұрын

Pure bullshit.

@girodiboanottetempo5931

2 жыл бұрын

Consciousness is the awareness that a choice has been made and it led to a singular result which cannot be changed, undone. You can only make an other choice to get a new outcome in order to fix the previous mistake or to enhance the previous result. Consciousness is the mind focused on one choice and witnessing its result. It the opposite of "bullshit". It's the essence of Reality, the one thing that allows us to experience Matter.

@georgeliverpudlio1258

2 жыл бұрын

@@girodiboanottetempo5931 You are very boring.

@girodiboanottetempo5931

2 жыл бұрын

@@georgeliverpudlio1258I take it as a compliment. By the way: "you are boring" is a conscious statement? If yes, consciousness is not bullshit. If not, I am replying to a Nothing.

He is a new Max Plank

I don't believe a word he is saying. The multiverse in my opinion is a scientific cop-out: it is not a theory, but a flaw of the human mind to come to terms with the implications of QM, which is by no means a finished theory (as seems to have been also Dirac's opinion). In spite of its success, there are many gaps in QM (both mathematical as well as physical) and we are well advised to fill those gaps first, before fancying an almost pseudo-religious interpretation of an incomplete theory.

*శుభోదయం* ------------------- 🌻 *మహానీయుని మాట*🍁 ------------------------- "శత్రువుని జయించిన వాని కన్నా శత్రుత్వాన్ని జయించిన వాడే నిజమైన విజేత." -------------------------- 🌹 *నేటీ మంచి మాట* 🌼 --------------------------- "ఆకాశం ఎంత విశాలంగా వున్నా నక్షత్రాలకే విలువెక్కువ. అలాగే మనిషి ఎంతటి శ్రీమంతుడైనా గుణానికి వ్యక్తిత్వానికే విలువ ఎక్కువ." 🌻🌻🌻🌻🌻🌻🌻🌻🌻🌻🌻

My bones seems solid but science tells me I vibration like a phone or the universe

28

Who would like an interview to Bernardo Kastrup please like this message !!! I think Kuhn would be surprised how rational, logic and well grounded Kastrup is (much more than Hoffman in my opinion)

Dan Winter plasma consciousness

We need to recognize the entire probability sphere for photon (mostly…being probabilistic) and cloud for electrons AS THE PARTICLE. A photon can very sensibly be modeled as a spherical ripple which propagates from point of origin outward at c. A ripple caused by the implosion collapse of an electron orbital. The speed at which the collapse occurs determines the wavelength , the thickness so to speak of this propagating spherical process. Space is a superfluid which is why the wave equation works without dissipation as in material process. The only additional modification to integrate gravity is a third or fourth root modification of the density of the metric ( c= 1/root Eo Uo ) according to local energy density. This will make space more dense in gravitational field turning gravitational lensing into refraction through more dense medium. Mass units become spheres of total internal reflection because of that refraction. With Planck size because Eo Uo.

🤔

David, you are checking the comments to see how you did. I am currently forcing my way into your consciousness. Why do I write these things you ask? Because I have a dog. You will ponder this comment, it will stay with you. Think; The universe realizing potential. 17.

Jesus said, yes Jesus, In my Father's house there are many rooms I will go and make a place for you. 👍

So good discussion. Subtle intelligence's view. THE MIND WHICH IS TRAPPED IN ITS SUBJECTIVE REALITY CAN ONLY WANDER INSIDE OF A WRAPPED PAPER AS IT IS COMPOSED OF TWO DIMENSIONAL LINES ITSELF. THIS IS THE PRESENT, STANDSTILL CASE OF UNDERSTANDING OF OUR HUMANITY. YOU MAY IMAGINE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF MULTIVERSES, BUT STILL, YOU'VE BEEN DOING THIS IN A SINGLE UNIVERSE.

let me stop you right there. Science is based on observation, not concepts.

Has anybody noticed that David Deutsch looks like Isaac Newton?

Don't think he's right but who knows

Keep the friggin camera still.

I agree but I also see multiverses of higher dimensions as well. Multiple timelines and parallel timelines can appear in pictures and videos

In reality, there isn't even one universe.

Back in the day before microscopes, people were certain that an angry god existed that was punishing humans by inflicting diseases on them for having sinned. What they could not see with their eyes, they imagined. In this era there are still many who want to imply that anything they don't understand, rather than being natural, just has to be ... supernatural. If you had the ability to create the universe, would you choose to deprive your creatures of your own wisdom, and then punish them for not knowing what you know? “We are all hallucinating all the time, including right now. It’s just that when we agree about our hallucinations, we call that reality.” Anil Seth … neuroscientist.

@junevandermark952

2 жыл бұрын

@@omarnewton lol To those who believe in a god, all things are supernatural. For instance ... they believe that they receive miracles, while the same god ignores the prayers of others who also expect, but don't receive ... miracles. Religion is based on ego. Praise of the self, as in "I am saved or enlightened, while you are lost, and still in spiritual darkness," (or belittlement of the self, as in the attitude of, "I am too evil as a wretched sinner to be loved by the all-mighty") ... and these hallucinations are all given UP to the "supernatural."

@junevandermark952

2 жыл бұрын

@@omarnewton Science is the study of all things natural. Those in religion are the only ones that mention that word "supernatural."

@fortynine3225

2 жыл бұрын

@@junevandermark952 There is the natural world. Maybe there is something beyond the natural world. That would also be part of a natural world but referred to as being supernatural . For instance first cause of everything...it is very unlikely that the world created itself something from the outside likely interfered which would be supernatural related. ''Supernatural describes anything that pertains to or is caused by something that can't be explained by the laws of nature''. so claiming it is totaly religion related is just not true.

@junevandermark952

2 жыл бұрын

@@fortynine3225 People in religion are the only ones that should believe that a creator is the first cause of everything, because that is religious mythology. It is not science. su·per·nat·u·ral [ˌso͞opərˈnaCH(ə)rəl] ADJECTIVE (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature: "a supernatural being" synonyms: paranormal · psychic · magic · magical · occult · mystic · mystical · [more] NOUN (the supernatural) manifestations or events considered to be of supernatural origin, such as ghosts: "a frightening manifestation of the supernatural"

Our dreams are other dimensions.and so is our daydreaming.

At a certain point, you have to question the theory itself. 'Multiverse' sounds suspiciously like 'epicycle' in the history of science. In other words, it is at least possible there is in reality, a simpler, yet overlooked, solution. Occam's Razor

@David.C.Velasquez

2 жыл бұрын

Multiverse is the simplest solution. IMHO

@alwaysgreatusa223

2 жыл бұрын

@@David.C.Velasquez You could only make that claim if you knew all the possible solutions. But such a claim is NOT science, it is merely ARROGANCE !

@alwaysgreatusa223

2 жыл бұрын

@@David.C.Velasquez It is very likely that Ptolemy believed his own theory of epicycles was the simplest solution for describing the planetary motions.

@David.C.Velasquez

2 жыл бұрын

@@alwaysgreatusa223 Obviously, I agree that an unknown solution may exist, and was speaking in terms of current theories, but you seem to be offended by the notion of a multiverse. There are too many possible mechanisms that lead to a bulk multiverse to deny outright, and doing so makes you sound like a flat-earther or geocentrist. All science begins with conjecture.

@alwaysgreatusa223

2 жыл бұрын

@@David.C.Velasquez First of all, there is no being offended in science nor reasoning.

100 % proof is this i think not , opinions opinions

More foolishness from the geniuses! It's one universe with a multitude of realms! Most of which we are unaware of.

Make it louder fs

Realities can't exist where every possible thing you can think of has to exist because if you can think of no (other) reality then that becomes the stopping point. Ergo: though math takes the many worlds a long way it still ultimately ends up in the trash bin of thoughts.

Who got what he was refering to 😂?

DD doesn't even know what he thinks he knows lol

huh? 😂

THE BOSOM BE ABLE PASS IN EARTH

The consequences of this theory are so outrageous, that it simply must be erroneous. There has GOT to be a more simple way to deal with these quantum phenomena messing with our minds..

the many worlds it's total nonsense.

@firstaidsack

2 жыл бұрын

Many-Worlds is taking the Schrödinger equation or the path integral formulation of Quantum Physics at face value.

This guy is your classic egg head

QUITE INTERESTING.

This gentlemen posits this interpretation with arrogance, insisting that it's his way or the highway. This presentation only exacerbates the difficulty of affording it even a modicum of credibility.

Sean Carroll was right when he said the cuurent state of physics is embarassing.

@kos-mos1127

2 жыл бұрын

Sean Carrol said that because physicist ignore the fundamentals and do not question what their theory means.

Sorry, no.

This guy has no idea of what he is talking about. He does not understand what the double stir experiment is about, and certainly it has nothing to do with many worlds notion or multi-verse. Nature cannot create a single universe, it creates many universes and anti-universes at once (about ten to the power of seventy). This all happens inside a black hole at its two poles. There are infinite number of black holes and hence realities which all constitutes The All. Not a theory, just the way it is.

Waste of time.

I don’t know what Many Worlds is but I know it isn’t science.

I can't believe he still believes this

Enough of this "multiverse" nonsense. An Elemental particle is simply a "physical" FUNCTION constantly moving or vibrating at or near light speed and at sub atomic distances. Throw a vibrating ball ... and viola ... you have a wavefunction ... but the ball is still just a ball ... but it behaved like a wave when propelled ... and ... occupied many different positions within a time period due to vibrating. There are no multiple paths or existences because elemental particles exist in a Universe with space, Laws of Physics ... and time only moving forward. Measurement ... is simply a snap shot at that precise time ..... of a "vibrating" particle moving at or near light speeds. If you could watch the "vibrating" particle in extreme slow motion you will see there is only one path ... where the particle is a different position every moment of time. A particle ... only "appears" to be everywhere at once. It is not. There is no multiverse nor multi-paths. And every elemental particle functions in a fixed space and continuous time that only moves forward.

@firstaidsack

2 жыл бұрын

What is the Schrödinger equation? Why does it describe the evolution of a wave?

@abelincoln8885

2 жыл бұрын

@@firstaidsack Again. throw a vibrating ball ... and you will get a wave function behavior. There is only one ball & one path ... and at each moment in time, the ball will be at a different position. Every elemental particle is either rotating in all directions or are constantly following a imperceptible minute closed path causing a "vibration." Time is always moving forward and the so too is a particle .. but at light speed & sub atomic distances. It only appears the a particle is everywhere. And a particle behaves like a wave when it is propelled because it is vibrating/moving PARTICLE.

@firstaidsack

2 жыл бұрын

@@abelincoln8885 Things can vibrate differently. How do particles vibrate? Such that they obey the Schrödinger equation?

@abelincoln8885

2 жыл бұрын

@@firstaidsack They vibrant according to design ... by an intelligence. Only an intelligence ... makes Laws ( of Nature) and things ( like an elemental particle) with clear form, FUNCTION, purpose & design. Sir Issac Newt was correct with his Watchmaker Analogy over 300 years ago. The Universe is a Function composed entirely of Functions, requiring a Function maker to exist & to Function. Everything in the Universe ... is either an abstract ( space, time, Laws) or physical ( matter, energy) Function. There is no multiverse .. but only one Universe ... made by an intelligence ... for an intelligence ... for a reason. And the reason is very simple ... because an intelligence has free will to think, believer, say & do as he/she wants ... and ... an intelligence makes Law for an intelligence ... to maintain order, structure, boundaries, direction ... and must enforce the Law if broken ... by an intelligence.

This all is in the Bible. Please read the New Revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ

@AshAlhashim

4 ай бұрын

Which part exactly?

@veryflow1156

4 ай бұрын

Nope it's actually Bhagwat Geeta

@wmpx34

2 ай бұрын

@@AshAlhashimI believe John the Baptist was partial to pilot-wave theory