TIMESTAMPS: 0:00 - Introduction 2:37 - The Holographic Principle 11:00 - Entropy vs Intropy (Thermodynamics vs Infodynamics) 22:05 - Non-Locality & Quantum Entanglement 28:40 - Consciousness 32:00 - Conscious Realism (Donald Hoffman) 34:41 - Quantum Consciousness (Roger Penrose & Stuart Hamerhoff) 39:00 - Observer Effect 42:20 - Applications of Infodynamics 49:43 - Is the Universe Finite? 53:20 - The Science Status Quo & Shifting Perspectives 56:59 - Addressing Misinterpretations 1:04:08 - Unity & a Whole World View (Practical Implications) 1:12:43 - Conclusion THANKS FOR WATCHING! If you enjoyed the content, please like this video, subscribe to the channel and turn on notifications for future updates. :)

I love how she expresses our collective awareness capacity to make choices of peace. She's supporting our cognitive narrative of collective awareness to emerge

@drtevinnaidu

18 күн бұрын

She's wonderful!

Absolutely love Jude! ❤

Absolutely lovely, the heart of the Universe is calling to us all. Let's end the long divisions we have suffered and gather together as a whole to heal our home earth and heart each other ubuntu

@drtevinnaidu

11 ай бұрын

I am because you are.🙌🏽

i'm yet to read her writings, but it's a little difficult to understand inferences she seems to be making from the scientific structural understanding & the empirical stance. she's very erudite, but all the 'meaning' and lovely, flowery language seems to me to be just vibing that doesn't at all follow mathematical physics. it sure sounds very nice to imagine & speculate about ways of living that are pleasurable & egalitarian & kind & aware of interdependence, but there's just no 'oomph' from the empirical stance to back all the normativity & loosey goosey concepts. i don't know... she may well be right about the narratives she's talking about, but it seems to me that when it comes to speculation about purposes, values, meanings... we are probably babbling unintelligible, non-referring but warm feely-inducing word salads, being 'not even wrong'. if 'everything' is consciousness, or 'mental', or 'physical' - then these are trivial statements, we haven't said anything. if it's all one oneness, with very intricate differentiation 'within', well, then 'everything' is a self-referential circlejerk, like maybe all this is a sort of unintelligible happening, or like a bored, or a playful succession of different states of whatever. it's extremely strange, but if we can't find something *other* in terms of which to ground the microstates of this 'system', then i don't see how sensemaking is not arbitrary/trivial/always-already empty due to self-reference. brute facts don't explain. anyway, nice interview. it got me into a hyper-aware state, bewildered at the strangeness of whatever is going on, which i enjoy tremendously, even if, upon attending to the strangeness, i feel almost unbearably overwhelmed by the very fact that what is happening is happening at all.

@drtevinnaidu

11 ай бұрын

Love this! Glad you enjoyed it and that it invoked such a response. Great comment!

👍👍👍

I dont mind holographic and unlike some of my faithful brothers our traditions don't need a big bang or physical evolutionary climb. This is more of social construct idea than anything else. Nature trys to lead us but we keep adding filters to accommodate time

Trying to force time onto all fields of study then build a uniform musical chair of relativeness through physics geology biology every one of these run into the same problems from all that I've witnessed. They all run out of time to explain the evolutionary mythology we try to force the evidence to fit into.

@drtevinnaidu

11 ай бұрын

The devotion of time can be a difficult task indeed!

@gerontodon

11 ай бұрын

What is a uniform musical chair of relativeness?

You know how you can tell you are not dealing with a true scientist? When they state something as if it is an established fact when instead it is hypothetical and speculative. "Our Universe is a cosmic hologram". Oh really, is it now? And you can demonstrate that beyond any sensible doubt? Right, I didn't think so. This alone should make anybody immediately suspicious of their scientific credibility.

@drtevinnaidu

11 ай бұрын

I hear you. While Jude and I having fundamentality different views, she's most certainly a true scientist. Great work done in her PhD in Archeology & her Master's in Physics too. Credibility is there, but the overall Hypothesis/Theory does not have to be agreed upon. Even I have my own suspicions in that regard. Still a great conversation nonetheless 😁

@NondescriptMammal

11 ай бұрын

@@drtevinnaidu My objection is to the title of this video, why state it as if it is a fact? Why not qualify it properly? It's not a theory that has much if anything in the way of convincing evidence to support it. It's one of those speculative theories that justifies itself on the premise that "the maths tells us so". I wasn't really pointing my finger at her credibility... just the credibility of whoever worded the title in such a blatantly unscientific way. I'm not sure she ever said it that way during the conversation.

@drtevinnaidu

11 ай бұрын

Ah, I see. I agree with this point. How's the new title?

@NondescriptMammal

11 ай бұрын

@@drtevinnaidu I think it is no longer unscientific. 😺 I am glad you didn't just think I was being a pedantic stickler for unimportant detail. It seems you do see the value in carefully wording things properly in a scientific context. I just happen to think it can undermine the credibility of a scientific source, when you incorrectly present a hypothesis as if it were an established fact. I realize that probably wasn't your intention. In my opinion it is an important improvement, but that's just my opinion. Your attention to this detail has provoked me into subscribing. 😺 I appreciate your forum and the discussions you engage. Even if this theory seems outlandish to me, that doesn't make the theory unfit for scientific investigation or consideration, and I find such discussions interesting and like to keep an open mind.

@drtevinnaidu

11 ай бұрын

Thanks for subscribing! I appreciate it your comments very much. Anything that helps the channel grow and is constructive is welcome from my side. I'm also very pedantic and attentive to detail so your input helped in that regard because I already had doubts about the title - so thank you! 😊 Enjoy the rest of the content.😁

Tev dear, what would a total and utter bonehead read before attempting to read this lovely woman's work? I feel like I understand...fleetingly, the gyst of what you're discussing but then lose the thread. Any ideas?