It's both painful and entertaining to watch people fumbling around with this question.

@caricue

Жыл бұрын

They accept without question the metaphysical conjecture that it determinism. If you combine that with an almost religious devotion to reductionism and the unwarranted assumption that life is "just chemistry" and you have a perfect storm of confusion.

@jasonjames6870

Жыл бұрын

@@caricue beautifully articulated.

@S3RAVA3LM

Жыл бұрын

@@caricue listen, metaphysics is about Reason, and logic -- not conjecture. Name the books you've read and study then? Exactly, you don't know what you're talking about. You believe particles and atoms explains everything. You think light is a particle because professor twiddle dee and tweddle dum said so.

@caricue

Жыл бұрын

@@S3RAVA3LM That was the most misapplied response I've ever gotten. I didn't even say that metaphysics was conjecture, only that determinism was conjecture about metaphysics. It's determinism that believes that particles control reality. I'm completely opposite of that. And just for the record, I never claimed that I knew "what I was talking about." Since when has that been a requirement for commenting on YT?

@Hm-dz3yk

Жыл бұрын

What I think the guest was saying is that human free will exists and it is not deterministic. As to "where does it (free will) come from" - it is a fundamental part of our existence.. You might as well ask where does space come from, where does time come, where do the laws of physics come from?

"That which is known can never be an object of its own knowledge."-Adi Shankaracharya

@shridhrag

Жыл бұрын

That is the most profound quote I have heard on nonduality. Could you cite the original Sanskrit text? Most people fail to understand that availability of "which path information knowledge" determines whether a photon behaves like a wave or a particle in the double-slit experiment and the knowledge requires a knower. There is nothing physical about it.

Personally i think the universe is consciousness. I can’t prove it but it feels good.

@anteodedi8937

Жыл бұрын

Sounds like Idealism but it doesn't work. Idealism falls either into solipsism or incoherence.

@NewComments

Жыл бұрын

@@anteodedi8937 Check out Analytical Idealism. I can’t convince myself that it isn’t coherent.

@anteodedi8937

Жыл бұрын

@@NewComments Kastrup? It isn't coherent. It is just a copy-paste of Schopenhauer's idealism (the world as will and representation) where the will is objective and subjective at the same time (incoherent).

@NewComments

Жыл бұрын

@@anteodedi8937 “We find that the two are one and the same, for every object always and eternally presupposes a subject, and thus remains representation. We then recognise also that being-object belongs to the most universal form of the representation, which is precisely the division into object and subject.” Analytical Idealism is definitely not entirely fleshed out, but it is way more coherent than the magic jump of materialism.

@anteodedi8937

Жыл бұрын

@@NewComments Regurgitating it doesn't make it coherent. Sorry! And I am sure you don't understand materialism, realism and its varieties.

All of the intelligent people having this discussion and no one agrees with the other. We are all blissfully stupid. Have a phenomenal and fantastic life experience my friends. Peace and joy

After three minutes my mind exploded!

"You'll see, it's all clear. You were meant to be here, from the beginning"

@CM-dq4qp

Жыл бұрын

But there it is.

Consciousness is like an existing loop or circle has no ending nor beginning…. Thought process, evolving or keep expanding… this what my brain can sum up for now, from this magnificent conversation 😂

@Setton1000

Жыл бұрын

Consciousness is nothing less

Henry's arguments backs up the simulation hypothesis of the universe. According to him a physical event has both representation in quantum world as a wave function collapse and in a psychological world as an aspect of a knowledge change.

The very fact I can verbally describe my own conscious states as I experience them is only possible if those conscious states have a causal power to initiate their verbal description. Therefore, conscious states cannot be mere epiphenomena.

@afeather123

Жыл бұрын

That's a word I've needed to learn in my discussion of this, epiphenomena. This has always bothered me about physicalism - it has always implicitly posited consciousness as an epiphenomena, even though we sit here talking about "what it is like to experience." Is it just a total coincidence that the mechanical system we passively experience talks about experience, which is it's pure byproduct? It seems much more likely that experience is part of something causal.

@charlesvandenburgh5295

Жыл бұрын

@@afeather123 On the other hand, if first-person subjective phenomena do have the power to cause objective physical effects it would violate the conservation of energy as the cause would appear to come from nowhere.

@seetowin

Жыл бұрын

Yes!

@charbelbejjani5541

Жыл бұрын

That is not true. With careful analysis (that I can't cover in detail here), you will see that no real logical contradiction arises. I do agree though that its affect my credence of Epiphenomenalism being true.

@charlesvandenburgh5295

Жыл бұрын

@@afeather123 As you point out, if the mind plays no causal role then it would have never been targeted by natural selection to give true pictures of reality. Any correlation would be purely conincidencal, and to be so repreatedly and consistently would be a statisical miracle.

Enjoyed this one. Your guest is good teacher.

The Brain is the exceptionally beautiful receiver of Consciousness

The brain is not the cause of thought; it's a condition for it.

@vinceofyork1757

Жыл бұрын

Well said.

THE ESSENCE OF CONCIOUSSNESS IS CONCIOUSSNESS ITSELF

He’s describing two frontiers: one Quantum/Classical Mechanic and the other Psychological or Mental or Spiritual. The former, we have made inroads, the latter we barely understand at all.

@psterud

Жыл бұрын

When you say "we don't understand it," you mean Western materialism doesn't understand it. Humans did this work several thousands of years ago and came to a fairly thorough understanding, namely with Hindu philosophy. An analogy of a sort can be made with Egyptian sculpture and how they made very finely detailed and artful figures out of extremely hard stone that even today, with all our technology and ingenuity, we could not accomplish. Attempting to answer these questions about consciousness is simply a new culture reinventing the wheel, and it will likely take another couple thousand years if we don't consult, and integrate, our previous wisdom.

@elijahpicklestein1718

Жыл бұрын

@@psterud Have you heard of the documentary that came out a couple years ago called "the end quantum reality" in Wolfgang Smith a Physicist and Mathematician examines quantum theory,there is a part where he talks about visiting India and consulting with many religious leaders as well as spiritual teachers but when he asked the important question of is there an afterlife or does consciousness survive death and basically gets an answer of no or one that is not very satisfying. I brought this up because from reading your comment it sounds like your saying that the Egyptians and Eastern Philosophical traditions and teachers have figured the question of consciousness out long ago but like I mentioned from the documentary when put on the spot these same teachers couldn't give any sort of a satisfactory answer.

@psterud

Жыл бұрын

@@elijahpicklestein1718 Good questions. I have not seen that documentary. My assumption is that we've had great answers to these questions in the past, but they've been forgotten because our priorities are constantly changing. For instance, in a few hundred years we won't know how to make a cell phone or a car.

@elijahpicklestein1718

Жыл бұрын

@@psterud I think it all comes down to consciousness once that is explained thoroughly or the mechanism by which it operates is demonstrated then the whole argument about souls is done with,as of now though it seems no one in the scientific community can show how it operates through material means which is a good sign. Robert Lanza is doing some great work with his Bio centrism theory of how consciousness creates our universe and reality. I've come to the conclusion that the evolution theory has holes in it and when one of these holes is exposed the materialists invent an explanation out of thin air,this is the very thing they accuse theologists of yet they are guilty of it as well,all in the name to keep their theory in tact instead of getting to the actual truth.

@psterud

Жыл бұрын

@@elijahpicklestein1718 Great points. I'll reveal to you that I currently believe that consciousness is the "ground of existence." And yes, I absolutely agree that both science and religion have holes, and that both of them can have a variety of reactions to their vulnerabilities being exposed, depending on who owns the perspective of the given philosophy. Ultimately, we're all still human and susceptible to the power of the the ego, or the identity, or whatever you want to call it. "Soul" is another acceptable word for it. And "spirit," and so on. We're flawed masterpieces.

Its highly unlikely you can answer what Consciousness is by looking outward for it.

@blijebij

Жыл бұрын

Precisely! The west always looks at consciousness from the outside in. From waking consciousness as that is the only stage of recognition for most people to identify themselves from.

Wow, that really clears things up lol

@_Baleful

Жыл бұрын

the perfect comment. l m a o

Henry seens to be in the right way to consciousness understanding. Great conversation. Thank you all.

@dadsonworldwide3238

Жыл бұрын

You cant incorporate our soul command centers ability to intervene and over ride our conscious independent operations like breathing together. My soul idea is telling my consciousness to physically text the spirit of this text to you. When im asleep or in a coma I can assure you I am not consciously aware f my meterial body or environmental surrounding but it is definitely aware of my spiritual characteristic of being.

Upanishads might be worth a read for anyone interested in this question.

Hi Robert, as for your two questions: :1. Your assumption that it is "impossible" for matter and something non-material, such as spirit.consciousness to interact is not an actual given. The first misconception - which involves your second question also - of a closed system - is that matter produces consciousness. The wisdom of Bhagavad Gita states just the opposite; that the Source of all energy, both material and spiritual, actually produces consciousness. The mystery which is consciousness - it is considered is a symptom of non-material energy or spirit; that consciousness is not produced by matter at any level. One cannot inject matter into a death body, to bring it back to consciousness. When the non-material spirit leaves the body, consciousness goes with it. How the individual spirit and consciousness experiences matter, is due to the all-pervading consciousness upon which the universe rests. There is a connected universal consciousness which is also personally conscious in each heart, directing the experiences of each living being. Nothing is impossible for Godhead/Source/Brahman. All contradictions of how matter and spirit are separate, but can still interact, are explained in the 13th and 18th Chapters of Bhagavad Gita As It Is. Therein it is noted that God/Spirit/Brahman accompanies each soul in it's sojourn through matter, and can directly reveal in one's heart awareness of matter and it's interactions and more, which cannot be perceived by one's limited sense perception and intellect alone. To hundreds of millions of Vedic culture in India, Krishna, the speaker of the Bhagavad Gita, is understood God who appeared on Earth over 5,000 years ago - a time which modern man has actually very little knowledge of - but plenty of speculations. For those who think it's impossible for God to appear anywhere and anytime He likes, even in one's own heart, such a fallacious concept has very little respect for the potency and unlimited capabilities of the almighty Source of all energies. If God is all-powerful and the source and controller of matter and spirit, is anything impossible? Sri Krishna informs Arjuna: Bg 18.61 The Supreme Lord is situated in everyone's heart, O Arjuna, and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy. Bg 13.1-2 Arjuna said: O my dear Kṛṣṇa, I wish to know about prakṛti [nature], Puruṣa [the enjoyer], and the field and the knower of the field, and of knowledge and the end of knowledge. The Blessed Lord then said: This body, O son of Kuntī, is called the field, and one who knows this body is called the knower of the field. Bg 13.3 O scion of Bharata, you should understand that I am also the knower in all bodies, and to understand this body and its owner is called knowledge. That is My opinion. Bg 13.5-7 That knowledge of the field of activities and of the knower of activities is described by various sages in various Vedic writings-especially in the Vedānta-sūtra-and is presented with all reasoning as to cause and effect. The five great elements, false ego, intelligence, the unmanifested, the ten senses, the mind, the five sense objects, desire, hatred, happiness, distress, the aggregate, the life symptoms, and convictions-all these are considered, in summary, to be the field of activities and its interactions. Bg 13.13 I shall now explain the knowable, knowing which you will taste the eternal. This is beginningless, and it is subordinate to Me. It is called Brahman, the spirit, and it lies beyond the cause and effect of this material world. How the Supreme spirit, as the controller of both matter and spirit - and how the individual spirit is inconceivably present in both spiritual and material awareness is described below ( and again, consciousness is not considered to be in the closed set of matter - the idea life arose from matter only, is considered inaccurate, short-sighted, and non-reproducible) Bg 13.15-18 The Supersoul is the original source of all senses, yet He is without senses. He is unattached, although He is the maintainer of all living beings. He transcends the modes of nature, and at the same time He is the master of all modes of material nature. The Supreme Truth exists both internally and externally, in the moving and nonmoving. He is beyond the power of the material senses to see or to know. Although far, far away, He is also near to all. Although the Supersoul appears to be divided, He is never divided. He is situated as one. Although He is the maintainer of every living entity, it is to be understood that He devours and develops all. He is the source of light in all luminous objects. He is beyond the darkness of matter and is unmanifested. He is knowledge, He is the object of knowledge, and He is the goal of knowledge. He is situated in everyone's heart." One can go on experimenting and speculating, or seek answers from revealed texts such as Bhagavad Gita. The "proof" will come in the form of one's own experience. If one turns away from the light, one only sees shadow reflections of reality. When turning to the ultimate source of light, Who exists in each heart as the Supersoul, one's journey out of darkness begins. It's a choice everyone has. It's a step by step journey, not dependent on blind faith, but rather intellect reinforced by personal experience and revelation, and confirmed by sacred holy texts as guides.

You can tell when an answer is smart and we'll articulated and when it is not. This is an example of the first case, in my opinion. Even though I think the case for a deterministic mind is strong, I admit I'd also like the argument for consciousness as a non deterministic process to be true.

I DONT NEED QUANTUM MECHANICS TO KNOW THAT I AM CONSCIOUS

@brianvan6933

Жыл бұрын

Are you 100% sure?

@PriitKallas

Жыл бұрын

Th q is not if you are concscious, but what consciuosness is. What do you think

@GabrielGarcia-jf2uc

Жыл бұрын

@@PriitKallas the laws of phisycs exist without consciousness? Thats the quesrion, is like: "if a tree falls in the jungle and there is no one near to heard it, does make a sound?

@notanemoprog

Жыл бұрын

​@@GabrielGarcia-jf2uc Not the same question at all. In the "falling tree" case, it made a wave in the air (objective change in the universe) , but it did not make a sound (subject needed to hear it). In the Laws of Physics case, they obviously exist _without consciousness_ because they acted on the Universe for billions of years before our conscience started existing. Laws of physics are _formulated in the language of mathematics_ in our consciousness but they are not a thing that ONLY exists in our consciousness (like sound only exists)

@Dion_Mustard

Жыл бұрын

i've experienced non-local consciousness so i know without any doubt that consciousness is MORE than brain.

I really like the content of this guy’s answer, but I _love_ how he mentions quantum mechanics as many times as a six-year-old kid who’s trying to explain his favorite superhero movie and mostly just repeats the hero’s name. 😆 That’s real admiration right there.

@chrisbennett6260

Жыл бұрын

I don't see that at all

@nupraptorthementalist3306

Жыл бұрын

​@@chrisbennett6260 No worries; that's not what happened.

Excellent question!

Stapp kept cycling back on the same information that didn’t seem to register with Kuhn. The question to pose back to Kuhn might have been: “Where and how is information stored in the physical brain, and how do changing chemical and electrical potentials resolve down to an experimenter “deciding” and formulating one question versus another?”

Their gestures are hysterical! Mute the video and watch it.

@randomone4832

2 ай бұрын

Use the force, Luke!

I was always blown away be the slit lamp experiment and the collapsing of the light wave form by the observer

@wthomas5697

Жыл бұрын

You're misunderstanding the results of the experiment if you think the collapse of the wave function requires an observer.

@axutgautam1187

Жыл бұрын

What do you mean sir? Can you talk about this briefly?

@lawrencefitzgerald

Жыл бұрын

@@axutgautam1187 kzread.info/dash/bejne/qJ5sr61rn6qWgpc.html&ab_channel=TheoryInk

So basically quantum physics describe the universe as possibilities, which consciousness actualizes (collapses) as one instance that we experience. This sounds to me like a possible bridging of the gap, through science, between eastern and western philosophy.

RLK should find a Grete Hermann expert. She supposedly refuted some of the things Von Neumann was saying about quantum. _Between Physics and Philosophy_ is a Springer monograph that explores her thoughts on determinism in quantum. She studied under Noether and had to leave because of her politics.

Maybe the experimenter is a dynamic tool for prioritizing its own conscious rules over the other types with similar qualities. Like sensor lights, estasis turns on when a cat walks by and no one actually knows because they are inside the house. Except the experimenter gets direct notification on his phone from the outside camera while sitting inside the house too. Idk. Maybe consciousness is time sensitive and is dependant on an experimenters tools to acknowledge it if not, he must either accept or decline its properties.

''in clasical mechanics the physical world is a closed system''. That is a assumption used as a working basis, a framework, for what the physical world is according classical mechanics. Unfortunately we do not know if the physical world is all there is or wether the physical world actually is a closed system. Other than that it also unclear wether or not classical mechanics is capable of being able proper to describe what consiousness is.

I've long been intrigued by the origin, or source, and the nature of consciousness. I've watched dozens of videos of highly intelligent and educated people discussing consciousness. If I were to summarize their conclusions about the nature and the origin of consciousness, the "wave function" would collapse to this simple statement: "No one really knows, no one really understands consciousness." They can couch their comprehension of consciousness in highly sophisticated concepts and terms that are largely unsatisfying. Which is not to be critical, it truly is "the hard problem of consciousness."

how would consciousness come about in classic mechanics, and for what reason there?

Khun came out swinging and it sounded like he was gonna win, but then Henry took him on and said "Oh yeah, well quantum physics!" lol happy holidays

what might ask questions in quantum mechanics for nature to respond to?

This question is so tricky. It would be interesting to put the following question to Khun: If You Believe that the brain causes consciousness, then a brain would be alive without a living body. So what gives Life to my body? For me it's Earth, because living beings depend on the environment. There is no brain without Life, and Life is just another word for Consxiousness.

with causation related to change in space less change in time, and causation squared energy over mass; how would these two causation equations interact with quantum mechanics and gravity?

what are the four distinct processes of quantum mechanics?

@SingularSolarus

Жыл бұрын

yeah, what are they? This guy was not convincing at all.

Awareness is known by awareness alone.

could there be a super-physicality for consciousness and subjective experience?

My takeaway is that quantum mechanics states the experimenter’s choice is a probability among many possibilities and therefore cannot be causally determined as per classical model. This means that choice is a unique input that affects outcomes. We observe that choice is the result of a conscious process,i.e., consciousness. Therefore consciousnesses must be the source of the causal input. Thoughts?

Consciousness, whether it's actually real (separate) or just a byproduct of intelligence, would be very hard to be aware of if you never had any life or sensory experiences through your body. Who you view as your Self is likely slowly based on knowing that you are separate from others, and your dreams and goals are based on past experiences. I believe in a vacuum we would not be aware of our selves; that it is only our life we've lived and learned through that gives us the illusion of consciousness.

@svperuzer

Жыл бұрын

I agree.

@francesco5581

Жыл бұрын

Thats why reality exist, to feed consciousness (that i see as an expression of an underlying consciousness). Can a materialistic approach exist in vacuum either ? Nope. Also dont forget that ALL the sensory experiences are there only to be appreciated/felt by a consciousness. Colors are only felt/appreciated by a consciousnes...and that is true for shapes, sounds, sentiments.... All reality can ONLY be felt by a consciousness.

@travisewart

Жыл бұрын

@@francesco5581 , you think that this presumed reality exists to enhance the conscious experience? Is this like the matrix concept?

@francesco5581

Жыл бұрын

@@travisewart for now i am just "happy" to see that the universe produce or have embedded things that can ONLY be felt/appreciated by conscious beings. why there was the "potential" of sounds, colors, shapes, views, sentiments, tastes IF consciousness is just a byproduct ?

@travisewart

Жыл бұрын

@@francesco5581 it is an amazing place we live in :)

There is a difference between having a thought, and knowing that you are having a thought. Those are two separate processes. Your neurons fire to produce a thought, but a feedback system allows your consciousness to know that the thought was produced. So here is an interesting experiment: What would happen if that part of the brain could be isolated and a one second delay was inserted into the feedback. Now your neurons fire as a decision is made, but you don't recognize that you made the decision until one second after the decision occurred. So what does that mean ? Let's say you had this brain modification and are now sitting at a table. You see a glass of water on the table and think that you would like to grab it and have a drink, but just before you know that you made that decision, your arm reaches out to grab it. As far as your consciousness is concerned, your hand moved BEFORE you completed the thought, because the delay means that you are not aware that the decision has already occurred. You get startled and think to look around if anyone else noticed something strange, but your eyes and head move before you complete the thought to look around. Suddenly every action that you intend to take happens before you consciously complete the thought to make it happen. Your consciousness doesn't know that the decision was made by you before you know that you decided it. From the perspective of your conscious self, you have just lost all free will. Every action that you take occurs before you know that you made the decision to take it. It would seem like everything you do is predetermined. You would feel as if you are being controlled and unable to do anything that isn't already happening to you. So now ask yourself what is a conscious decision ? Is it the decision that is made, or is it consciously knowing that the decision was made. Because if it is consciously knowing that the decision is made, then all of reality can be predetermined, but your conscious self is convinced that the decisions are created in real time, when they could have been created a second ago, or an hour ago, or a thousand years ago, or over the course of the age of the universe.

@willp9226

Жыл бұрын

Interesting, yet the conscious decision to act, whether that be through thought, speech or physical action always occurs just prior to the act itself. It's just that most of the time it occurs so fast that it appears to have occurred without intention. This can be witnessed by oneself through deep meditation practices.

@hencole

Жыл бұрын

@@willp9226 there is some research that suggests the choices you make happen before you are aware you have made them.

@willp9226

Жыл бұрын

@@hencole I've seen those studies too, but they weren't conclusive, nor was it 100% of the time.

Interesting. 💯 The word 'psychogical' is meant to represent an aspect of consciousness. Maybe we are creating reality by simy living? 🤔

make sure you keep asking ppl who don't know methods for perfecting introspection

something with reasons makes a choice how to measure quantum wave(s) / fields?

If i understood it right, the brain itself is determined by quantum mechanical potentiality and something which asks the questions, so the brain can can actualize it's states or collapse the wave function. What i'm taking out of this is that this psychological aspect of nature must be everywhere, actualizing the state of the universe, even when no human consciousness asks a question.

Strong emergence as linguistic basic unit, the self, and the self as composed of words. Consciousness flats between these two strong emergent concept.

The math we use is so far wrong, it's stunning. Our science only really ever describes things, and never explains them.

Brilliantly interesting 😆 🤣

Consciousness - There is heedfulness is characteristic . There is no forgetting and not confuse as a mission. Have custody as a result . Have accurate in emotion memory is cause to happen.

conscious perceptions and awareness participate in causation?

So, Sean Carroll says it’s the disruption of the quantum system by the physical measurement that causes the collapse of the wave function. Many others including this gentleman disagree completely and take the position that it’s the mental process of “choosing” what experiment to run or the choice to observe/measure at all that causes the collapse. My language may be imprecise as I’m not a physicist, but I’m curious if we are “closer to the truth” haha on which position is more probable and whether any experiments like the quantum eraser experiment points in either direction?

How is consciousness related to qualia? Does one emerge from the other? Can one exist without the other? Could it possibly be they are the same thing? Would it be ethical to produce it artificially, if that turns out to be possible?

@theotormon

Жыл бұрын

I think that qualia is the content of consciousness, while consciousness is the awareness and/or ability to reflect on qualia. (But it could be that awareness and reflection are just types of qualia.)

The only question all Scientists would certainly agree is: What process helps me earn the maximum? That is why physics designs the most expensive projects in the history of search for knowledge that don't serves any purpose in satisfying the needs of ordinary people (think LHC, JWST,....).. So, quantum mechanics provides the priests of science the harlot's prerogative (authority without responsibility), that God provided the priests of traditional religions, CLASSICALLY demonstrated by Bohr's question " who are we to tell GOD what to do?".

Consciousness is everything

I like this explanation. The deterministic view that our choices do not influence the world we find ourselves in seems totally depressing to me. The universe is continually evolving. Initially, the collapse of the probability waves was random and chaotic. Eventually, random collapsing waves resonated and gravity emerged. Stars, galaxies and planets formed. Life sprang from random chemical reactions. Complex life forms and then consciousness evolved. Consciousness attemps to make order out of chaos. We shape the environment (universe) now to make it more to our liking by asking questions, projecting ahead mentally considering different potential answers to our questions and choosing our path.

Back to the earth "humans" being the center of the universe, the ego wins again

How can something that is not physical interact with something that is physical that's impossible. Energy is how the physical interacts with the nonphysical. How does my internal thoughts become real actions inside the world? Energy allows for my consciousness to bring forth physical interactions. We keep thinking physical material is something more than memory that is where we are misconstrued. A diamond is solid material but it can be turned into a gas you can breath that's how physical our material world truly is.

@Raj0520

Жыл бұрын

Energy is a physical entity.

@thebookofclyde1822

Жыл бұрын

@@Raj0520 Energy can be compared to a rule defining how a certain game is to be played. The game is sometimes called "the physical universe." It is played on the quantum field, and the game pieces are called "particles." The particles are just wave patterns within the field itself (and its subsidiary fields). It starts simple and gets more complex as the game progresses. Game-play can be referred to as "cosmic evolution." Some game instances give rise to a form of play called "biological evolution." The object of the game is for the player to discover that a player exists and to explore its own nature.

@Raj0520

Жыл бұрын

@@thebookofclyde1822 Great fiction writing.

@davideowatching

Жыл бұрын

Physical simply means something that is made up of substance. Therefore, energy is physical since it's has to be made up of substance. And in our "physical" world, that substance is called atom, but if there is a spirit world parallel to ours, it might then be a far smaller substance than the atom itself. Consciousness is a passive perception through the means of operators, but it's not capable of exercing any force on physical matters. So, I think we might have some kind of life force in us that can cause the motion of our physical body. And when we die, the life force is being removed and there is just no way to ever reanimate it. Because if there was only atoms, since our physical body is just made up of them, it should be able to be reanimated. Indeed, the lifespan of an atom far exceeds that of a human.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

Жыл бұрын

Energy is a physical entity. Movement is abstract. Process (lots of little movements) must then be abstract too. Being conscious is a process (self evidently) so being conscious is abstract and as being conscious is of thoughts thoughts must be abstract too. But there can be no process without a material substrate to perform all the little movements that constitute it. (In the absence of matter... absolute nothing). This is what people mean when they say the brain is an object and the mind is what it's doing. A frozen brain is not conscious because the process has been halted. This is why one's willing suspension of disbelief takes so much effort during the climax of 'Vanilla Sky'.

1. Something not a part of the physical world, mind/consciousness, interacts with the physical world constantly and in more ways than we understand. 2. Physical world is not a closed system. There is much we do not know yet or understand about the physical world.

Any measurement of a physical quantity involves some interaction between the measuring device and the object under study. In this case, not only the object under study affects the device, changing its state (due to which measurement becomes possible), but the device also acts on the object under study, changing its state to some extent. Thus, in the general case, the observer is an evolving (- when measuring, his state changes), researcher of the spontaneous evolution of the Universe. That is, the result of the measurement is a change in the state of the measuring device; a change in the physical state of the observer; and, finally, a change in the intellectual state of the observer (+ changes in the intellectual state of everyone with whom the researcher shared his observation/measurement results). P.S. After two stages of cognition of reality: the monologue of the observer without a physical experiment (natural philosophy) and the observer/nature dialogue - a physical experiment (science); the third stage begins - a physical experiment in the "reception" mode, which changes the state of the observer (a monologue of nature). In this case, the object, of course, affects the observer (changing his state), and it is thanks to this that measurement becomes possible: and this is not an ordinary astronomical method, and this is not "peeping", but the desire: "Read the thoughts of God" (Kepler - Einstein) - to cognize the root cause.

A fantastic explanation. Mr Henry Stapp is a genius!

The problem with Robert is that he only see's consciousness as the observer but consciousness also has a dynamic side to it as well. Since most of our activities are centered around increasing our happiness and diminishing our distress the conscious self is the pleasure principle that impels us to be the enjoyers of life. Being the pleasure principle the conscious self is the source of love, and Isn't that love nature of the self the cause of activities for material sensual pleasure! And from seeking sensual pleasure we become exploiters of the resources of nature to provide us such pleasure so by consciousness being a love potency we are manipulating nature for our enjoyment thus it does have a causal effect on the world.

Which question is easier to understand? What is the essence of consciousness? or. What is the purpose of consciousness?

Maybe that's why the speaker says interaction with a psychologically adept system causes a quantum event.

That was one slow dance, the fact is all living things have microtubules where collapse of wave functions take place. These collapses build a potential that cause neuron spike gaps to fire. Our thinking and decisions are a quantum physics process.

Smoked a doobie plus two glasses of wine and I got it. It's umm you know something we don't know what doing we know not what.

Excellent...... thanks 🙏.

Consciousness is that which causes the “collapse” of the primordial quantum wave function. The entire universe is a creation of mind and it manifests completely, at the speed of thought, in each moment of consciousness.

He is saying, ultimately, that we do indeed ourselves fill that quantum gap: potentialities are determined by our intentionalities.

@PriitKallas

Жыл бұрын

But what happened before there was life on Earth?

@mikel4879

Жыл бұрын

rileyh • He is ultimately saying a stupidity, because cause and effect is not probabilistic at all It is absolutely real, uninterrupted and unique. Only the idiots that are profoundly indoctrinated in "mathematics" wrongly believe otherwise.

@RolandHuettmann

Жыл бұрын

@@PriitKallas Maybe there is and was a mind, or there are more minds? Maybe we are ants not understanding someone watching us? There may be other dimensions we will not understand with our human ability? The whole universe may be full of life we cannot see because it is hidden from ordinary view? I think it is a real option. We all have an ant view. Evolution may form other species with more insight, or may already have created many. Is it just an entertaining thought?

@rileyhoffman6629

Жыл бұрын

@@mikel4879 You sound like you've proven something. Only arrogance can sound so sure of itself.

@rileyhoffman6629

Жыл бұрын

@@RolandHuettmann With you all the way. As someone (not I) said: we evolved to survive, not to see what's here.

How then do other organisms which probably do not have consciousness function in a world of potentialities.....

Quantum mechanics does not show that classical mechanics is "not true." It does show that CM is "not the whoe story." In like manner, QM might not be "the whole story." The term, "consciousness," is a collective noun that describes the level of activity and intercommunication of neurons in the brain. It isn't some thing and it doesn't do anything. QM surely plays a role at the subatomic level, but by and large, the brain works according to CM.

Consciousness is a Subset of physical reality. It is the portion of inviolability that constitutes our animating spirit, interacting, through the observation of mutual exclusion, with other forms of identity in conceptual space. Take the set of all humans... you can factor what constitutes a human into insignificant/arbitrary differences, identifiable macro physical differences, and the software/animating spirit differences. Similarly take objects. The future of these has a form in timeless possibility space like a phase diagram; possibility phase. Consciousness is the virtual consideration space where this manifold of potential futures kaleidoscopes as one considers our various potential valid selves and the consequences of reacting to outcomes. This is accompanied with "feelings"... A queriable network of interrelated spectra that is traversed as consequences for an identity. When we are hungry for example we are tormented by the futures where we die when we consider anything involved with energy and digestion; it intrudes and grips us, demanding primary factorship by prodding the primitive unicellular reactions of our nervous system... However it can be overridden by drugs or will. It's both imagined in the virtual space of our identity, but is completely real in it's queriability and consequence. If you don't eat, you will die, and this the consciousness of hunger is the component of all reactions to potential futures that is tormented by this fact. It's like circuit-bending music... Your experience gets twisted, and this twist can be explored, and this is all "experience" itself: complexly queriable spectrum self-twisting of identity in potential space. It's all as real as the pauli exclusion principle and as complex as our neutral network allows. Greater complexity equals greater "pleasure" and "pain"; it's the interaction of the base physical realities with our virtual identities that's possible because we have bodies that are actually facing consequences and thus the calculation of formula can be experienced (continuously, usually unavoidable, queriable) as a component of all realization (resolution of intuitive/distributed pattern seeking within the representations of embodiments).

It has something to do with gravity collisions, and holes moving through a loop.

Consciousness as fundametal to everything was discovered milenium before through inner exploration through scientific methods by Indian sages. To know consciousness, you have to wake up to the inner world and sleep to the outside world.

YOU CANNOT GET BEHIND CONSCIOUSNESS WITHOUT CONSCIOUSNESS THERE WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING

0:47 Problem one is that how can something that is not part of the physical world interact with the physical world that's impossible. And secondly in the physical world there's a closed system and so how can you have something like consciousness not part of a closed system. Two big problems, how do you deal with that? 👍 Very good questions! 8:34 but in quantum mechanics the quantum mechanical process that is the generalization of the deterministic laws only determines the evolution of potentialities for an event to happen in quantum mechanics you have this state of the universe but it only describes potentialities and so and the potentiality and there's a continuum of things that might happen and in order to cut this continuum of possibilities and potentialities down in such a way that quantum mechanics can be used um you need in practice a process that asks a question and if you look at the way quantum mechanics works this asking of the question is not given by this evolution of the potentialities this only evolves potentially always and so the possibilities are smeared out and no one is favored over the others so you're something extra that's not to try that's not described by the quantum mechanical equations of motion is needed. and in practice that extra something is in fact determined by a psychological process. 9:53 👍Bob: so let me see if I got this we need consciousness because of this openness in quantum mechanics to come in uh ask the question The Observer needs to ask the question so that the quantum mechanical system can function that allows consciousness to have a causal impact not just to be real in some far away manner but to really have a cause on the world. My problem is and again maybe I'm betraying my bias and for my old brain science days is that the consciousness itself or the decision or the thought to where I want to ask the question or place a God account or whatever is because of my brain functions so my brain function is causing this feeling and then this cause feeling is good it seems like it's a circular loop that becomes a causal how do we break this loop his consciousness independent of brain? 10:49 ... ... 11:51 and where does that reason come from? The reason is something in the psychological realm, isn't it? Bob: Where does that comes from? HS: Well that's the other part of nature. (Okay) in this picture you have not just a physical realm but you say that there are also psychological realities. Bob: between this psychological realm is another of nature which is not part of the physical realm sa at least the physical realm of my brain. HS: the laws of quantum mechanics deal with on the one hand the physical evolution of potentiality. (yes) and that there is needed another part of the dynamical process which is a choice of a question (right) and that this choice of a question is not determined by the quantum mechincal laws that are analogous to the physical laws those only determine potentialities. 12:38 Bob: and everything in my brain runs by physical laws the quantum mechanics and has this potentiality but then where or what is this a Observer and the consciousness of that Observer if it's not part of my brain. 12:52 HS: Well if you have two processes in nature (yes) one of them is the part that's described by the physical laws and then there's another process that is closely connected to the physical world in fact the way they're linked is the quantum mechanical structure requires actual events to happen and each of these actual events has two aspects it has a representation in the physical world there's a certain collapse of the wave function it's called and it also has a representation in the psychological realm because knowledge is changed the way that quantum mechanics works is there's the change of knowledge when you change this (and your claim is that those are two different things) well the quantum mechanical laws do not determin this the choice of the process so it's not part of the quantum mechanical laws, you need another part and uh in practice that other part is in fact determined by psychological processing. 【至理明言 BTS pp says】In order to avoid to be rejected as a dualistic heresy my hypothesis is based on the affirmed facts that there are two speed limits, as mentioned and defined before, light speed and dark speed, which make Reality The Whole three Portions: Planck World, Dirac Sea (mental field is included) and Divine Realm (Wisdom and Truth and Life, Jn14:6). Accordingly, a general structure of LORD God and human is suggested in Deut 6:4~5, strengthened in detail by Mk12:30, Lk10:27, and Mt22:37 where conciousness (mind) is described as temporal beings generated by soul and strength (body). Therefore, so called psychological processing is actually happening in Dirac Sea, resulting from human brain where under structural level of elementary particles, e.g. self spin of electron is obviously a characteristic of overpassing light speed action. Merry Christmas to You all my friends.

@deanodebo

Жыл бұрын

Keep in mind it is well-established in quantum mechanics the measurement problem Second, incompleteness was proven by Godel There is no such thing as a closed system

Hi

the ONLY thing i am CERTAIN of in this universe is that I AM CONSCIOUS.... everything else is Uncertain.... Science is better of accepting that FACT, since Science by its very nature itself is constantly correcting itself as "new" truths emerge...

Kind of reminds me of my credit score going down when I check it.

Pain is friend

Life and Consciousness is Eternal, the Rainbow present the Over-Consciousness, as holds, the Under-Consciousness, (shades) as consist of the Day-Consciousness and the Night-Consciousness. So, this is the very Essence. If Life didn't have the Ability to Re-new it self, there would Never have been any Life. So, Life is Eternal, and the Development of the Consciousness is on going, from Development-Circuit to Developing-Circuit. In-volving/out-volving - in-volving/out-volving.

@andreasplosky8516

Жыл бұрын

Wubba Lubba Dub-Dub

I would really like my consciousness to have some special character some independence of the physical world how very interesting i and extremely revealing

This is the first video on this channel where I decided to stop because I didn’t understand which points were being made. It was the suspense without the pay-off so to speak. I just didn’t get it 😀

There is a metaphysical universe. Some are controlled by it and very few control it... None are aware it exists. It where our thoughts originate. What we choose to act upon is where our self and the Ego is created. Choose wisely.

If Brain Science, Neurological design, had the answers society would be very different.

Ultimately, can an the observer's emotions have already been preset & staged for release at the point where the superposition corrolates with its counterpart ... and thus be the precursor for the awe of that observation? Or more deterministically, why has the emotional response been factored out at all? Are they not part of this equation? Is this why phycics fall short of predicting "When" [-in the timeline] their pre-cogs will play out? Emotions come timestamped like speed bumps. Not stop signs that may stop time ... but a slowing (dilation) of time that offers room for the emotion to act out within this bump in our timeline. Think of impacting a target car in front of you on the interstate. Time dilation distorts our perception of rearending that car from a 50 / 50 amplitude ... equilibrium. Emotions must factor through time dilation, and thus, intensify accordingly. Skid marks wont change measurements ... time perception does. It's simply, the future playing out on time to the coordinates of these positions. So, past, present, and future are static ... as are the prime numbers that hold these coordinates. Check it out ... Clockwork 137 ... A prime numbered universe. Mind shredding.

The idea of 'free will' and the debate of whether we have it or not, or the ability for consciousness to have a causal effect on physical processes, is irrelevant because having it or not doesn't make a difference to the human experience. For example, let's say I'm watching the recording of a soccer match that has already happened. Personally, I do not know the outcome, however, the future of this particular soccer match is pre-determined in the sense that there is a result that I could look up prior to watching the recording. Even though I am fully aware that I am watching a recording and that the result is pre-determined, because the match is over, I still don't want any spoilers. It wouldn't be the same to watch it if I knew the result, i.e. the future. That's what makes a difference, not that the result of the match is pre-determined - as long as the future is unknown to me personally, from my perspective everything can still happen, each of the teams could be the winner, or there could be a draw. I might even be praying for a certain outcome if I'm somebody religious. I don't know what the future is going to look like, personally and from my relative point of view, so I will feel all the emotions, hope, fear, whatever it is, until I know the final result for sure. This is both similar and different to Schroedinger's Cat. The fate of the cat is undetermined until observation. The outcome of that soccer match is actually determined, regardless of observation. However, again, from my personal perspective and experience, the future is still open to all possibilities until I personally know the outcome. In short, the presence or absence of free will, however it is defined, simply doesn't matter to the human experience. The only thing that matters in regard to this debate is our inability to predict the future.

The essence of consciousness is the ability to choose.

@andreasplosky8516

Жыл бұрын

Couldn't there be unconscious mechanisms that make choices based on mechanical processes?

@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC

Жыл бұрын

*"The essence of consciousness is the ability to choose"* ... It's not the essence of consciousness, but the "selection process" plays a very important role. Inanimate structure emerged and formed countless physical sets (planets, stars, moons, elements, chemicals, species, etc.). Then consciousness comes along and chooses the best and worst from every set that has ever formed. This information is then used to facilitate the next stage of existential evolution. The essence of consciousness is the assimilation, assessment, and generation of *new information* in the form of value judgments. We are the newly emerged "arbitrators of value" in the universe.

@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC

Жыл бұрын

@@glamoagency5642 *"it is unknown (to us, presently) if consciousness is emergent from matter, or matter is emergent from consciousness. Look into it, don't just react to my comment."* ... Consciousness is high-level information that emerged (evolved) from previous inanimate information. The universe represents a 13.8-billion-year-long evolution of *information* with "us" emerging at the tail end of this evolution. Here as a 38-minute-long "reaction" to your comment that clarifies my claim. You can either watch it or not: kzread.info/dash/bejne/eWilxayThKu4Y9Y.html

@PaulHoward108

Жыл бұрын

@@glamoagency5642 Matter is a dream.

Why is it so inconceivable that consciousness is a spectrum? Animals have instincts, some of them have what I would call low degree of consciousness, some humans are also pure instinct (ie later stage dementia patients).

Many people because of the laws of mechanics thinks that that implies or systems are deterministic. But that totally ignores the randomness of quantum mechanics and the rules of chaos that take over in highly complex systems

@caricue

Жыл бұрын

Determinism is a philosophical conjecture at best, and rank mysticism more generally.

@MiloMay

Жыл бұрын

Have you heard of Superdeterminism? It's the view that Quantum mechanics is still deterministic.

as science collects and develops theories about what is observed; might the observer in quantum mechanics have more than science?

His conclusion: Psychological processing is not part of the laws of quantum mechanics. Again, consciousness as involved in psychological processes, is divorced from physical laws as we try to understand them. Symptoms of consciousness, such as thinking, feeling and willing, take place in one's subtle, or etheric body, according to ancient texts. The the gross physical body, and the subtle etheric body where thoughts take place, are like coverings of one's spiritual body, like a shirt and coat cover one's visible body. The physical body reflects the state of the subtle body - like seeing invisible emotions like joy or sadness in someone's face for example.

The essence of consciousness is "information." Everything is comprised of information, and consciousness represents the tail end of 13.8 billion years of continuously evolving information. What we call "consciousness" is in actuality just information that's able to assimilate and process other types of information. We can't reconcile our own existence because we represent the exact same thing we're trying to reconcile. Likewise, we can't separate consciousness from the information we observe because we are equally the information we are observing. Quarks are the information that comprises physical existence. Consciousness is the information that analyzes the information that quarks bring to the table.

It seems Henry pre-supposes that consciousness is not an emergent property of classical physics, and is therefore is non-deterministic. With this presupposition, his case is - yes consciousness is causal, because it chooses the question, then nature simply responds to based on quantum probability and then classical determinism.

@robbiep742

Жыл бұрын

I remain skeptical that consciousness is emergent, rather than fundamental (i.e. despite the lack of evidence, I believe consciousness is causal). Henry makes a fantastic point - if consciousness is useless, why did nature evolve it? It seems to me that if we make the case that consciousness is an emergent property, this argument must follow that any sensing system has a degree of consciousness. Given a large enough network of those sensory systems, primary and secondary consciousness emerge. In that case, a webcam is conscious. I don't hate that argument either however, but that would mean it is simply a fact of how perceiving systems must operate, and therefore on Earth is absolutely everywhere.

@robbiep742

Жыл бұрын

While I am not sold on Penrose's OORT cloud theory mechanics, it highlights something what appears to be the most simplistic explanation - consciousness is fundamental and simply just needs to be accessed.

@robbiep742

Жыл бұрын

Given how poorly we understand physics, claiming consciousness is the stuff of pre-determined materialism seems about as sound as heliocentrism. At the time, the data we were able to gather pointed to the sun being the center of the universe... how'd that FACT age over time as we understood more.

Awareness is a field eternal beyond concepts like time and space. If you lust for knowledge about the difficulties of being here you don't have to stay in the moment. You just day dream all day about understanding instead of concentrating on your Awareness and breaking the cycle of thought.

The same rule would apply to quantum as it does to classical - if it ineracts with the Universe at the quantum level then it must be quantum. Consciousness would follow the same patterns as all other quantum wave functions and therefore must be a coalessence of a wave within a field. Consciousness would be a Universal field, like all other fields, and follow the same laws.

It is either Henry Snapp couldn’t answer the question of where does consciousness or thought processes come from ,and this is ok because science doesn’t have all the answers , or he didn’t want to answer such a question directly so did this indirectly in a way a politician would. If he feels that consciousness is everywhere like for example the cloud is for WiFi on a mobile phone etc as was mentioned by Richard Dawkins, then just say so.

The faithful adherent of scientism must either reject quantum theory or reject his materialism

Is he talking about idealism?

I'll politely disagree. The wave function does NOT collapse making his point moot. How would you explain the delayed choice modification of the double slit experiment if consciousness "decides" outcomes in quantum incertainties? You'd need some retrocausal nonsense to happen where the consciousness collapses the wave retrocausally in the future while somehow this same retrocausal mechanism wouldn't collapse the wavefunction in a regular double slit experiment even though there should be no discernable difference. It simply doesn't work. Wave collapse interpretations fail but especially those that claim consciousness causes it.