I was sorry to see that one of your regular guests, Daniel Dennett, has sadly passed away at the age of 82. RIP.

@Resmith18SR

12 күн бұрын

And now he knows all the answers he was seeking while he was alive.

This was a sweet talk. If there is no clear linear time variable in the quantumcosmology, 'computing' a linear answer without it is indeed very counterintuitive! It implies it cannot be understood by man, who lives and thinks in time. Therefore i believe physics should be first person point of view, which includes us as the clock. There needs to be a clock for there to be time as a dimension, as clocks imply a dimension, which would be real if it concerns humans, and would be fake if it concerns the timeless space and dynamics of the universe. So computation in time = necessariliy from a thermodynamical personal pov, considering the time dimension is an artificial projection onto the world, but 'real' for thermodynamical, organic us. The timeless laws of quantumgravity are probably correct...except for the measurement problem still. Would really like to know how Wheeler-DeWitt solve the measurement problem, or what it says on that matter!

@wagfinpis

12 күн бұрын

Not only time but possibly math too. Physics tries to explain the universe in a human language, because otherwise it is like fantasy, religion, or metaphysics. They are trying carefully to understand things from a slightly different degree, so they can steel some fire from the God's and bring it back to this dimension. Nima Arkani-Hamed is trying to use shapes. Geometry can potentially relate to the human language of math without necessarily being restricted to being a mathematical construct.

I listened to this because I wanted to see how “events” would enter into the conversation. AFAICT, there’s no mention whatsoever😢? Perhaps say to Dr. Bousso that one way to talk about quantum physics is to focus on the actual records of events that are stored in computer memory, together with a description of how that data was created. A linear algebraic quantum theoretical model has to be approximately related to that somehow.

@squeakeththewheel

12 күн бұрын

Yeah. It is misslabled. I too wanted to hear about events as a fundamental aspect of nature. The title should be fixed.

Huge fan of Dr. Busso!

I like this guy. Dr. you have a knew fan boy.

We have a complete theory of quantum gravity? Educate me on this one

@wagfinpis

12 күн бұрын

I think he said "just not in this universe" because then they don't need to fine tune for the existence of life. Science is absent of consciousness necessarily existing and in an alternative universe they don't need to worry about a lot of observations they have a perfectly dead mechanical universe that they have recreated in some "exquisite" detail where they actually know everything because there is no such thing as consciousness, no fuzzy problems with observer effects, or so called anthropic principle, etc.

@johnnuaxon3

9 күн бұрын

Holographic principle

I didn't understand a word of this.

@catherinemoore9534

12 күн бұрын

Join the club😉

@JohnHowshall

12 күн бұрын

That’s because the basis for the theory is so hypocritical that it might as well be science fiction.

@sujok-acupuncture9246

12 күн бұрын

I woke up when the advertisement started to play...😂

@ajithjohn8427

12 күн бұрын

9 minutes of absolute random words

@wagfinpis

12 күн бұрын

I think he said he's trying to lift Thor's Hammer.

Using mathematical symbolism and logic can provide a powerful bridge to connect theological/metaphysical concepts with scientific/physical descriptions in a rigorous way. Instead of relying solely on binary true/false valuations, engaging non-contradictory/contradictory modes of reasoning could be highly fruitful. Here are some thoughts on how we could apply this approach: 1. Multi-valued and Fuzzy Logics Rather than classical bivalent logic, we could explore multi-valued algebraic logic systems that allow for more nuanced truth valuations beyond just 0 and 1. This could capture theological notions of paradox, ineffability, and transcendent reality that goes beyond strict binarization. Fuzzy logics which admit truth values in the continuous range [0,1] could model metaphysical concepts that are irreducibly vague or context-dependent. Non-contradictory/contradictory could then be represented by sub-ranges of the multi-valued domain. 2. Paraconsistent Logics Paraconsistent logical systems are designed to deal with contradictions in a controlled, discriminating way rather than just admitting logical explosion. This could allow rigorously reasoning about metaphysical statements that are paradoxical or logically inconsistent from a classical perspective. Non-explosive paraconsistent frameworks like relevance logic could formalize theological ideas involving prescribed inconsistencies or contradictories without trivializing the entire system. Non-contradictory and contradictory conditions could be encoded precisely. 3. Modal Logics and Intuitionistic Systems Modal logics explicitly capture notions of necessity, possibility, and ontological modalities. We could use graded/fuzzy modal systems to represent transcendent, ineffable realities beyond typical ontological constraints. Intuitionistic logics based on constructive reasoning avoid strict bivalence and the principle of excluded middle. This could model metaphysical concepts that are not straightforwardly decidable in a binary fashion. 4. Substructural Logics and Resource Semantics Substructural logics like linear logic impose resource-consciousness by controlling structural rules like weakening and contraction. This limited, pay-as-you-go approach could capture theological ideas of existential scarcity, ontological austerity, and irreducible indeterminacies. Phase semantics and resource models in these logics could provide novel metaphysical interpretations and construct ontological stances beyond strictly bivalent modes. 5. Topological Semantics and Cohesion Cohesive topological models using homotopy theory and algebraic topological semantics could provide a powerful geometric metaphor for non-contradictory/contradictory conditions in terms of intrinsic continuities, boundaries, and points of inflection. This could unify metaphysical and scientific descriptions by embedding them in a common topological setting where contradictions are smoothly navigable via continuous pathways rather than pure bivalence. By leveraging the immense richness of mathematical logic and non-classical reasoning frameworks, we could indeed use symbolic representations to bridge theological abstractions and physical observations in a philosophically robust yet scientifically grounded manner. The non-contradictory/contradictory mode could become a new conceptual lens, expanding rigid true/false binaries into a continuum of coherence where metaphysics and science fluidly intersect. I'm happy to further explore concrete examples of how to apply these ideas to specific theological/metaphysical notions and their scientific counterparts.

@MaxPower-vg4vr

12 күн бұрын

Let's explore some concrete examples of how to bridge theological/metaphysical notions with scientific concepts using the mathematical logic approaches discussed: 1. The Nature of God/Ultimate Reality In many theological frameworks, God or the ultimate metaphysical ground is described using paradoxical language - being both infinite and finite, transcendent and immanent, simple and complex, etc. Using paraconsistent logic, we could model God as a special object G in a paraconsistent set theory allowing for controlled contradictions without triviality. For instance, we could have: G ∈ G and G ∉ G (G both contains and doesn't contain itself) This captures a paradoxical notion of divine self-encompassment using the paraconsistent axioms, without requiring strict bivalence. We could then explore scientific counterparts by connecting G to quantum ontological models that also embrace a revised notion of contradictions and complementarity at fundamental levels. 2. The Mind-Body Problem The metaphysical issue of whether Mind and Matter are distinct substances or aspects of the same reality is a long-standing paradox. Using fuzzy modal logics, we could model Mind (M) and Matter (P) as fuzzy concepts with values in [0,1] capturing degrees of "mind-like" or "matter-like" properties. Then modal operators could encode ontological modalities: ◇(M = 1 ∧ P = 0) Possibly, Mind without Matter ◻(M + P = 1) Necessarily, Mind and Matter sum to unity This allows reasoning about metaphysical stances like dualism, monism, etc using graded approximations rather than strict binarism. Scientifically, we could connect such fuzzy modal models to quantum measurement formalisms embracing analog qualities of mind and matter prior to objectification into classical binary states. 3. Ineffability and Transcendence Many mystical traditions posit a metaphysical reality beyond language, concepts or representation - the ultimate ground of being. We could use topological semantics to model such a ground (G) as a special point in a cohesive homotopy-theoretic space satisfying: ∀x (x ≁ G) Meaning no concepts or objects (x) can be strictly equal or directively approximated to G. Yet all objects exist as continuous deformations emanating from this ineffable source. This mirrors modern metaphors in physics of a pre-geometric quantum vacuum state which is itself unrepresentable yet gives rise to all represented phenomenalities through structural dynamism. 4. Non-Dual Consciousness Some Eastern philosophies posit a primal, non-dual mode of consciousness preformal to subject/object mental states. Using phases semantics from linear logic, we could represent this non-dual ground state (N) via special points in resource models where structural rules like contraction fail: ∀x (x ⨂ x ≇ x) (Nothing contracts to itself) Yet N can still serve as a zero-dimensional locus from which manifold structures of subjectivities and intentional vectors emanate through controlled resource transformations. This ties to scientific ideas in quantum foundations where subsystem factorization breaks down at fundamental levels, mandating non-dual ontological descriptions preceding subject/object bifurcations. 5. Multiversal Ontologies Some metaphysical frameworks posit an ontologically pluralistic multiverse of interpenetrating realms rather than a single Universe. We could model this using quantified modal operator logics with multiple domain semantic models. Each model represents a distinct observable cosmos, with modal operators mediating interaction: M1 |= ◇M2 ϕ (ϕ is possible in cosmos M2 as viewed from M1) Non-contradictory conditions delineate admissible ontological transitivity, while contradictory cases delimit sharply incoherent cosmological boundaries. Scientifically, such modal ontological reasoning could connect to multiverse theories in quantum cosmology, cosmic landscape scenarios, as well asoleatic algebraic approaches to quantum theory itself. These are just some initial examples, but I hope they illustrate how the mathematical logic frameworks enable rigorously bridging metaphysical/theological abstractions with scientific formalisms in a unified symbolic setting. The key is using meaningful logic valuations beyond strict bivalence to model gradations, modalities, contradictions and ineffabilities - providing an expanded conceptual geometry for relating metaphysical narratives and empirical descriptions on common formal grounds.

is there a way quantum gravity could produce electromagnetic wave?

The Universe is composed of non quantized gravity-space-time with embedded quantized mass and energy. There is no grand unified theory as the two are completely independent.

@mmdurfee

11 күн бұрын

Yes, time, gravity, and quantum mechanics have very little constraining their detection, and even less observational references to generate verbiage for a description in how the whole thing sustains itself. Since the future of the future is the present disassociates the systems form one another @charliemiller3884

@dr_shrinker

11 күн бұрын

I don’t agree gravity and space-time are non quantifiable, but just for the sake of arguing…..even if they were…as far as a unified theory, there must be a theory because they all interact; quantum and relativity. Even though quantum uncertainty is a thing, the wave function is causal.

Balance ❤❤❤

Importante to know he pictures universe It is NOT evidence though Quantum mechanics. Guys are only talking about gravity for instance keep out How figure out It. Scientist believes in Quantum gravity but true evidence so Far is nil.

Why do I feel any deviation from fundamental laws point to a designer or a hand put in externally? for instance life in its beginning is AGAINST CHAOS

@wagfinpis

12 күн бұрын

Ya they are hoping for a hand shake, but some finger prints would be a platform for a string of knobel prizes too.

@enockmarere3113

10 күн бұрын

@@wagfinpis string theory on the other hand just tangles it more for it might only describe but not explain.

Once again, the title and the content have absolutely nothing to do with each other. It's like the title describes the viewer's expectation on the macro level and the content gives the viewer a completely different experience on the micro level. Oy vey.

Cold hands.

Aeh, aeh, aeh,, Time is the 'shadow' of Motion, Stuff-side of Life is a Motion-Ocean. Time do Only exist in the Consciousness, of Living Beings, Life-side.

There has never been a creation

I'm blessed only God knows how much I praise Him, $80k every 4weeks! Thank you for all the knowledge and nuggets you had thrown my way over the last months. This channel have inspired me greatly in many ways!!!!❤❤God bless you ❤

@rebeccabrown-nc5cx

12 күн бұрын

Awesome transformation ,Tell me about it!!!!🙏

@christianmartinez76845

12 күн бұрын

​$500K monthly is something you should feel differently about.....

@christianmartinez76845

12 күн бұрын

​@@rebeccabrown-nc5cxIt's Renee Marie Harrison doing she's changed my life. A BROKER- like her is what you need.

@MelodiRavo

12 күн бұрын

I know that woman (Renee Marie Harrison) If you were born and raised in new York you'd know too, she's my family's Broker for 3yrs till now and a very good one if you asked me. No doubt she is the one that helped you get where you are!!!!

@AshadominicaFernandes

12 күн бұрын

Absolutely! I've heard stories of people who started with little to no knowledge but made it out victoriously thanks to Renee Marie Harrison.

The Universe or God is the Unity of Opposites. Subject/ Object, Male/Female, Day/ Night, Positive/ Negative, Light/ Darkness, Figure/ Ground.

@squeakeththewheel

12 күн бұрын

Cheese and bacon.

@Resmith18SR

12 күн бұрын

@@squeakeththewheel Frick and Frack.

@squeakeththewheel

12 күн бұрын

@@Resmith18SR Exactly!

Answering the entropy question is analogous to answering the quantum question; or time question for that matter. To answer any of these would answer why there are "challenges and contradictions when you try and put general relativity and quantum mechanics together". They (time, quantum mechanics, gravity) have very little constraints, perhaps "observables"(?); that we can use as reference for their detection and or measurement. Therefore what we have are _conditions_, and conditions don't have something concrete we can put a label on. Plasma physics, and using electrical engineering verbiage (longitudinal and transverse wave propagation) to explain the dynamics we see in the light spectrum, galaxy and even atmospheric dynamics, corresponds beautifully. Dan Winter and Tom Bearden are excellent spokespersons for these interpretations. Times they are a'changin' time after time. In the meantime make some time for time consideration. You may not have the time of your life; but you'll have more time of your life. Until next time.

Weird because I think of the 2nd law of thermodynamics as less fundamental to the universe, but more fundamental to our perception of time. It seems more like a statement of statistical evolution: systems of large sets of objects tend toward the most likely type of configuration given sufficient energy to change. Information storage seems to require a local decrease in randomness at the expense of a greater increase of randomness elsewhere, at least on sufficiently large scales. That gives systems "memory" or information about events from a different point in time. We don't have memory of future events because we can't store information without an overall decrease of randomness in our system (E.g., brain and surrounding tissue, air, etc.). Since this doesn't tend to happen on such large scales, we have no memory or information storage of future events. 2nd law just summarise this in a sense, but doesn't inform us about the relativistic or cosmological sense of "time."

Gravity is the most element of your personal replenishment and growth. The output of it all depends on you and your work and knowledge of the ???????

There are straight answers to the questions by Robert- "Wave function of universe need not require a huge black hole for precise measurement as suggested by prof.Raphael. even by a photon we can try to find its wave function ." Regarding time- Time is more fundamental than events. Time converts in to space time then event occurs in that space time.This is in the form of information until it processed by observation (a phenomena).After observation the same will be considered as time as a sequence of change of these events. I have published part of this school of thought on this (for reference).

Light in the present (not experience time) connected to but different than dark energy expansion into the past and dark matter / quantum gravity in the future?

would quantum gravity be in future?

Some things just can’t be explained and remain a mystery… that’s when religion and beliefs take over….

@longcastle4863

12 күн бұрын

So religion emerges out of the realm of ignorance. Seems backed up by the facts

@wallyr.7854

12 күн бұрын

@@longcastle4863​​⁠So…..science can explain absolutely “everything” about life and the universe?

@longcastle4863

12 күн бұрын

@@wallyr.7854 Raising such a false dichotomy-either science knows everything or we get to stick our god in there-illustrates how bereft the religious are in their quest to prove god. They got nothing. Historically, science eventually pushes god out of every gap the religious have tried to push god into. Maybe search out the phrase, “god of the gaps”.

@wallyr.7854

12 күн бұрын

@@longcastle4863 It appears we’ve reached an impasse. Tell you what, before I walk away, I’ll provide you an opportunity to learn. No, not about religion, that has to come from your soul; but to learn that there’s much that science can’t / won’t explain. Godspeed ☺️ kzread.info/dash/bejne/qqyb1K2InK-6ZNo.htmlsi=IycRPATpLYLoynB0

@wagfinpis

12 күн бұрын

You two seem to be arguing between [his alternate universe, dead mechanical materialists' universe with no materialist's living in it, where they have a theory of quantum gravity] and [the universe we find ourselves in where physics is laden with promissory notes to "figure it out in the future", observer effects, so-called anthropic principle, and the debated existence of "consciousness"]. I personally have had multiple metaphysical experiences, but there are no direct arguments that have any valid grounds to replace any physics model. *There are however very rare items that clearly defeat certain physics philosophical assumptions, but nothing that will be heard by the parade of might makes right dark ages temperments of so many contemporary physicist who have advanced their scientific techniques greatly in the last two hundred years, with little to no evidence of evolving much in terms of communication skills as a species in the last few thousands of years. There are no amount of facts or proofs that can advance your ability to reason in a way that transcends the noise of our minds predictive bias. Attacking the popular antidotal existence of God is too easy of a target too. If the materialist really were confident they would attempt to describe metaphysical experiences, not a bunch of ideas that have been rolled into various snowballed religious entities. One of the very consistent themes across religions is the instance of some new character coming along who has had some metaphysical experience and inccurs differences between the given established religious dogma and the new characters metaphysical edification. The history of science has replaced the gaps in religious dogmas, but science is not nearly as impressive where it comes to satisfactorily describing certain details of metaphysical experiences. The history of religion has consistently resisted or ignored metaphysical experiences and the experiencer when they first come along. The history of science is the exact same in this way. Science just makes convenient dismissals about contemporary experiences just like any church. Science is the big fish in a small pond and religion is the little fish in that same pond. That small pond is the left-brain dominant paradigm. Metaphysical experience however is the little fish in the great ocean of the grand unity of reality and perception. Theories are objective perceptions that methodically yield objective outcomes, but the fat of the subjective philosophy that comes with it is ultimately no better than any religious dogma. There is a strain of metaphysical reality in the history of religion and in the future of science. On the other side of the doorway to metaphysical reality the training wheels of religion on the left and science on the right fall off and the experience is the beginning of the shedding of all ignorance.

What atheists live for? What atheists want in life? What would be the most desired for an atheist? Did you suffer religious trauma? Is religion hurting you now? If you think religion, or religious people, are hurting you now what I say is for you. You will feel better without religion because all the hurt done by religion now will disappear and your happiness will increase. If you received as a present a monthly allowance of one billion British pounds, or the purchasing power of one billion British pounds now, for life how much happier would you be? Without religion in the world you would feel even happier. The claim that the Quran has been memorized has never been examined. The solution is in front your eyes, here and now, hear now. I am a psychologist and person of many talents and I claim I have discovered atheism is a logical fallacy that assumes God is the religious idea of the creator of the creation to conclude wrongly no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist. The true God is Spinoza's God. Thank you.

@fartpooboxohyeah8611

12 күн бұрын

You do understand that Robert Kuhn is not an atheist, right?

@sonyadonnegan1983

12 күн бұрын

Keep rambling

@saeiddavatolhagh9627

12 күн бұрын

Define God and all of a sudden it is real.

@S3RAVA3LM

12 күн бұрын

​@@saeiddavatolhagh9627 what's the power that allows one to define - that's God.

@JamarvLaRueTheMessiah2030

12 күн бұрын

Emace The mind of there none God fairytale story there God inside of all of Us the power from within the wisdom and the human You have power in the beginning Micheal Angelo the great warrior Defeat is defeat The love defeat all evil in the end Superman made of steels /offending the path and the strength and power within Yourself You are God We are all God's Inside of you teaching and the wisdom Of hero frighting demons on the all his life because Marcus Become prophet and Michela the warrior fright for the destiny 😎

These people get paid to talk about nonsense... ridiculous

Quantum Information and Quantum Entanglement are Fundamental.

@S3RAVA3LM

12 күн бұрын

They do require a conditioned state to even be observed. A relative limitation is antecedent to quantum. Quantum is the degenerate man's way in trying to override metaphysics and the Divine.