Physical doesn’t exist it’s all energy in quantum fluctuations.

Damn, those are some fire quotes 🔥

Yet consciousness without matter carrying it has never been observed.

@-GinΠΓ Τάο Every living, conscious being has a material brain. Should computers become conscious, they have a material CPU.

@-GinΠΓ Τάο I have a university degree, but you may also contribute something to the matter, even if you don't. Until now you just said yada.

How then do you explain a newborn that has basically no consciousness? And when consciousness does increase, it is a slow process, arriving at a limit much later in life?

@@willp9226 Um, newborns have plenty of consciousness. I'm not talking metacognition here.

@@SebastianLundh1988 Um, newborns have very little consciousness and if you're not talking metacognition what are you referring to?

Sebastian Lundh, I understand the historical validity of Descartes formulation, but it isn't the only perspective. It is quite unreasonable to expect 100% surety in anything that happens here in the real world. We are physical creatures living in a tangible and unforgiving world of pain and excrement, so we get our proof every moment of what exists. Mind games about demons or the Matrix don't hold much weight against a cold floor and no slippers.

@@willp9226 Colors, tactile sensations, smells, etcetera.

Your conscious self is no less than the component reality is made of :)

Next on Closer to truth, does a person require a mama and a papa?

The universe does not always respond the our conception of reality. There may be more than one creator; where we are living in a simulation. Since particle are entangle with other particles, this "creator" could be an intelligences field. This field would be also be entangled with our human consciousness.

its not enlightening. dude's just off his rocker

@@mikebarnacle1469 Your failure to understand calculus, for example, does not mean those who do are crazy.

Interesting point about location of consciousness. I would add not yet. More to learn about how brain works.

I believe he meant consciousness is the memory (just like the computer memory) which is a snap shot of the the state & transition of matters, and science HAS successfully identified how memory is stored in human brain

Proof is not something often found in this series. These are discussions of theories for the most part. As for consciousness, I would argue that it is not contained in a specific place within the brain but can be represented as a series of states or snapshots of the brain as a whole. Cheers

😂😂😂

lol. Quite the opposite. Tipler's Xtian mythological excursus at the end shows that it's Tipler who is limited. Trying to bend reality to his mythological/religious preconceptions of a creator whose creation is good. You seem to have the same limitations as Tipler. Unable to face the mortality of your own individual consciousness. Clinging to myths that turn you, too, into a god by association. Classic narcissistic inflation. A key component to religious belief.

@@publiusovidius7386 and what about your teenagerish arrogance ? Do you really think to be able to really "search" something in your life with that attitude ? Nope ...

Yeah, I caught that too.

He’s brilliant and a rebel lol.

I directly looked at the comments when I caught it 😂

I don't know why you needed to add a soul there

@@fr3d42 It boils down to belief. I choose to believe our souls live on. Our spark, our essence, our energy doesn't die, it changes form.

@@beardedroofer If that makes you happy, good for you 🙂

@@fr3d42 Thank you, I pray for a happy life for you as well.

@@beardedroofer the soul could be real but I believe we all share the same one, it could be consciousness is infinite and fundamental to the universe, hence all the creativity/evolution/intelligence capacity, god is the culmination of it all, we are god but a fragment not separate but not the whole

Wow - Frank sure must have been mad LOL. Hilarious.

I’m pretty sure it was just an accident

I noticed that too :-)

I don't even need to click on the stamp to know what you're referring to 😂

Hilarious

Excellent comment but I’m not sure you’re using “mind-body problem” in the way most people do. You seem to be saying your account of the brain as a colony rather than a computer negates the mind-body problem but I don’t see it doing any more than negating a brain-body problem. It seems like you’re using mind and brain interchangeably but they’re not, hence the mind-body problem. The mind-body problem is all about consciousness and the fact that there is a subjective, qualitative, experiential component to reality. I’m not seeing how you’re account of the brain as a colony does anything to dispel the mystery of why existence has a qualitative component; of why feelings and thoughts and perceptions need to appear in consciousness when they could as well be taken in by the brain and acted upon by the brain without them ever appearing in experience. Put another way: why are the proverbial lights on for us at all? How does the physical matter of the brain give rise to felt experience? That’s the true mind-body problem. Have I missed something in your comment that makes sense of this mystery?

​@@motorhead48067 Wonderful question... you're paying attention. The explanation is quite extensive, but I'll see if I can summarize the essentials. The theoretical framework I work with is the biosemiotics of J. von Uexhüll synthesized with the semiotics of C.S. Peirce. All thought can be understood in the context of motivation, association (associative learning) and habituation. These 3 principles apply to all living entities (agents) and agency theory is getting renewed traction in these semiotics sciences. Agency theory relates to agents at all levels, including cells and neurons. As per Harry Klopf's book "the hedonistic neuron" and Eric Kandel's research on Aplysia, neurons also learn by association and habituation. Can this agency interpretation extend to atoms and molecules? Yes and no. We must appreciate the importance of third-power reduction. When you reduce the length/height of an entity, its mass (volume) is reduced by the third power. Third-power reduction to atomic and subatomic sizes releases atoms and molecules completely from the sorts of physical constraints that we humans are familiar with. A crucial question is, if atoms and molecules are “relieved” entirely of their macro constraints (as humans experience them), then is there another kind of dynamic that plays out at their levels? More specifically, might atoms and molecules need to “know” their properties? Geoffrey West’s (2017) book Scale examines the scaling relationships in living systems, from biology to cities. His book is directly relevant to the point I am making here. In interview with Cartlidge (2001), West says, “There’s no question that the interface between physics and biology is going to be a major area of investigation […] I think that some of the big problems in biology will only be cracked once researchers start to nurture this interface more.” My own belief (and I have written on this) is that quantum mechanics play a vital role in "entangling" the many cellular agents in a body into a unity. More specifically, DNA entanglement. And so all cells in an agent have direct access to the agent's collective knowledge (the binding problem) in the same way that media, internet and telecommunications provide all people in a city with direct access to that city's collective knowledge... hence why cities form into functional specializations just like brains do. With this biosemiotic interpretation, we solve several long-standing problems: Mind-body problem: solved. Binding problem: solved (tentatively, while we explore DNA entanglement). Entropy problem: solved. I am of the "you will know it when you see it" school. None of the explanations that currently dominate the narrative satisfy me. The notion of soul as separate to body, with god as creator of all things, doesn't work for me. Life has to make sense, and once we hit the right formula, we well recognize it. "Aha! so that's it! THAT's the formula I want to put on my t-shirt!" I yearn to see that day. No woo woo.

Congratulations!! 👏👏👏 Nobody cares! 😀

To be conscious of what, perhaps quantum fluctuations realized they exist, therefore it can think? Think again, present states of the universe and life are not its final form, it will never become anything determined, the process will never complete because there is no single process, processes will always change.

​@@xspotbox4400 It's not about realizing anything. It's just what it is. Try to think about the premise. What should it feel like being conscious of "nothing", but still being conscious? The true phisical existence, by itself, with no self-feeling or matter, just being conscious because it's alive and consciousness is its nature. And this conscious fluctuations starting to interact and exchange information and forming, little by little and with different intensities, all the complexity that we can see in our universe.

@@MeRetroGamer Well, i think you might end up with a great disappointment after you die, lol :) How sure are you about your completely undetermined idea, what happens if you're wrong, would you still preach your nonsense to others who might believe it if you could know for sure? Or would you simply admit it was nothing, only a thought that seemed nice at first glance, but you didn't really believe it. Am i talking to a kid or to a grown up, that's what i would like to know. I can imagine a lot, believe me, wouldn't engage in this kind of conversations if i didn't practice meditations and such. It's all good if you approach spirituality carefully, with an observant and critical mind, since our mental trans is such an intimate medium, can't be shared by others. How to imagine nothing, i think Tyson did a good show on that topic. It's layered and structured concept, can't reach absolutely nothing in a single step. Somewhere in the middle he talks about what it means to remove all material substance from the void, but physical laws still remain as they were, meaning if something would appear in that void, it would still follow the same rules as stuff before. So it wasn't completely nothing yet, there are many more notions to be removed before we reach the limits of anything we can possibly think of in physics. Physics itself included, then idea of the physics, idea of idea, idea about idea there could ever be an idea, every thing must completely vanish. Doubt you ever reached that far in your meditations, only a great scientist can cause such a total and perfect annihilation of everything, including nothing. What about the other way around, could we have everything inside our head, and more, even everything and more than never ends perhaps? There are also concepts and meditations like that, our minds are truly remarkable natural machines, beyond comprehension. This last thought seems most important to me, looks like the universe is not enough for the universe. Ideas of gods and divine nature taught us that single most important thing, we are free more than we could ever imagine. Therefore, pure consciousness must exist, but it's lost in the dimension of dreams, never to be known or found by anybody. We might just as well say it doesn't exist.

​@@xspotbox4400 I have absolutely no clue about what'll be like when I die, so I seriously doubt that I could get dissapointed. Answering your questions, I practiced meditation regularly from my 16th to my 24th and sometimes I still meditate, sporadically. I'm now 31, judge by yourself if I'm a kid or a grown up. Meditation gave me the glance that almost everything I believed to know about myself and the world is just an illusion, something that's filtered by some kind of "impersonal mind". And I felt that, somehow, this impersonal mind builds up from the structured exchange of "bits" of information, and consciousness is just this information itself. Then when I started to learn about fundamental phisics I realized that, even if something really complex can build up from something really simple and fundamental, the complex thing is just an "illusion", something ostensible (in the same way that consciousness forms a mind and a self). So I ended up with two distinct realities that apparently have the same nature and somehow comunicate between each other, and this is the nonsense. I don't want anybody to believe that what I'm saying is the truth, it's just that I feel the only reasonable and logic answer is that phisics and consciousness must be the same thing, or at least consciousness must be the true fundamental reality, because, man, It is just the MOST REAL thing. Consciousness is the only thing that we know directly, above every kind of perception or idea. And dualism is the nonsense if you think carefully and deeply about it. I just wanted to put on the table some kind of idea that arises from this intuition. I have the intuition, the idea is built from it, and I don't want anybody to think that this is just the truth because I REALLY don't know. I just feel that this idea is reasonable enough, or at least it is more reasonable than anything I've heard or read before.

we have no idea ... But you would be great selling cookware (any discount ?) ...

It's either that or magic. Call me names if you want but I assume it's not magic.

@@bozo5632 since materialists arent able to explain how it "emerge" then they are shifting to "it's all in illusion". So you have re-arrange your thoughts.

@@bozo5632 - Strong emergence basically is magic.

Your materialist paradigm has failed. The brain emerges from consciousness; consciousness is not an emergent property of the brain.

forty nine, it is very annoying to hear an intelligent person say that one thing is the same as a completely different thing. It would be easy enough to make it an analogy, or a category of "things that seem to do something", but to say they are the same thing is just puerile.

@@caricue Have you ever heard about the word "context" ? If you try to understand what the physicist is talking about you will probably understand that in some context brain and computer are identical things. Check your IQ btw.

Learn to write english before you comment... expert

@@mgame8082 I'd not attack a person for incorrect english, because foreign language is always a tough thing, I'd attack his ignorance.

@@aroundyouaroundme Yes, I mentioned the two contexts where it would be appropriate to say brains and computers were the same, but he did not, so I feel my criticism is valid, even if you do not. If you seriously want to say that a device made for a purpose by a person is the same as an evolved living organ, it's probably not my IQ that is in doubt.

Yet l've to detect value, virtue within your high state consciousness,

@@suatustel746 remember friend this incredible thing - that our reality is a strange loop. So we need to be holistic in our understanding because nothing stands in isolation. If you have time then I would really like you to read this amazing book by Douglas Hofstadter called Godel, Escher, and Bach (if I remember correctly).

You might be on to something, the future of multiprocessing and networking is the Arm.

Showing how something evolved doesnt explain what that something is.

Consciousness is what creates everything. Brahman

@@sneakcr3144 Yes - it actually does...

@@billmichalski6893 silly ...

@-GinΠΓ Τάο Since there is no such thing as '''pre-"material" world''', that was meant for dolts...

Soul is some concept of wishful thinking by those who believe eternal existence is probable. I am not one of them.

@@cps_Zen_Run"Conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed." Sounds like your existence can not be destroyed. Your soul is not created lasting forever. That is modern physics.

@@brandursimonsen4427 Pegasus is a horse with wings that can fly. Definitions do not make something real.

@@cps_Zen_Run Pegasus is a symbolic animal. Horse is strength like matter. Wings are moving in heaven, spiritual, like information. Tipler implicitly described the Pegasus. A creature of two worlds.

don't use the term soul, use the term consciousness. consciousness is fact.

@-GinΠΓ Τάο Tipler does not believe in a non-physical spiritual body. He believes that if there were a non-physical material body, it would still be material and therefore something physical and not non-material. It appears to me that Tipler is not taking into account what is metaphysically plausible and is falling back on his scientific background and ignoring the actual metaphysics involved in his own assumptions. Until I research further I cannot know his true position on the matter.

Not even close.

There is no need for a soul

@@fr3d42 I am not sure either but above is what I would imagine if there was one.

@@Traderhood It doesn't make sense because the brain is fairly recent in life's history

@@fr3d42 Not sure why age of the brain would have an effect on that view. In that view the concentrated field is the spirit or life if you will. It contains all mater and where there is the higher concentration of this field there is more complex life. All the way from a microbe to a human. Human at some point develops brain that allows him to ponder these concepts. Whether it developed this brain sooner or later is irrelevant.

@@Traderhood ok ok so it would be kind of a life force like in star wars

The only reason you can postulate the question is because of consciousness

Without a consciousness to do the detection? I'm trying to picture what the consciousness meter would look like. :)

@-GinΠΓ Τάο No it doesn't, in the context of the video

@-GinΠΓ Τάο A pattern is an abstraction, so no it isn't a physical thing. A pattern is only "present" to an observer and hence subjective to some extent, it is an object of the mind in the same way as the square root of 2

Osho, ideology for the people who got rich from selling BS and don't want to feel guilty about it. Sure pure awareness never go away, if it would, this would mean you're already dead.

@@xspotbox4400 Read the books I mentioned, and you'll see that there is no ideology at all. Just meditation practice to become aware. PS - Pure awareness doesn't go away even when you die.

@@andsalomoni And you know that how, probably because some dervish dancer bang a gong and make you swirl at place for a while in a dark room. Aware of what, if you numb your senses and emotions brains fall into self-induced trans, it allows you to do that because you instructed yourself to do so and because this give organs time to repair daily cell damages. Forget about dumb books nobody takes serious, better read comments under quality videos, you will learn much more about pure consciousness by becoming a part of human collective social sphere. Why science, it's because everybody can repeat experiments and come to exactly the same conclusions, regardless who you are and where in the universe you live. I understand you come from a different cultural environment, but please don't expect us to change, our technologies and methodologies work, your ideas do not, obviously.

@@xspotbox4400 It's exactly how it works with meditation. Practice it, and you will come to the same conclusions. "Please don't expect us to change". "Us" who? I wrote my comment for those who are concerned. If you are not among them, it's not my business. But it's funny that you feel the need to confute me, when nobody called you, and it's clear from what you write that you have no clue about it: "If you numb your senses and emotions..." numb what, when meditation exactly consists of being aware of your body, senses, emotions, thoughts, and of yourself experiencing that, independently of passive or active situation (e.g. Tai Chi Chuan, Kung Fu and Aikido, or Zen archery, do you think that they "numb" their senses?). If you think, as many do, that you can investigate the subjective via the objective, good luck and good running in circles. The seer cannot be found in what is seen, it is that simple. Meditation is not matter of "my ideas", nor of chatter, but of practice, available to everyone. To do it or not, it depends only on oneself, "obviously".

@@andsalomoni Ok, am convinced now, i would buy Osho for a dollar. Common man, what you're selling is a snake oil, look at western media and culture, see for yourself where your ideas belong in advanced societies. We have science now, people fly drones over Mars, but you still persist with that woo nonsense that lead you nowhere for hundreds of years. Listen to me very good my friend, you can buy a gadget you can use with your smartphone that can detect your brains activity and convert signals into electric pulses, making it possible to fly a military jet fighter without using anything but your thoughts?! And you're telling me about mental activities, you're playing with fire over there, making a gap between civilizations wider every day. One more thing. Read my previous comment, how can you reach a meditative trans without making your body numb first? Let me tell you about meditation in our civilization, it's a joke, better go for a Tai massage or watch a good movie.

It may not be a computer in the 2 bit binary sense, but it certainly is in the quantum computational sense. No? 🤔

@@RedPhil87 the theory hasn't been worked out yet. We'll find out soon, Roger is really pushing the boundaries in this field. Check out some of his incredible books.

@@RedPhil87 True the brain works like a quantum computer more than a classical computer, but the devil lies in the details. A classical computer works on formalizable logic, and forms of logic is quite arbitrary if you sit and think about it. Quantum on the other hand is famous for being flexible with its logic.

@@abhishekshah11 I'm really not an expert by any stretch of the imagination and I agree with you about Penrose. I'm really interested in his working hypothesis of consciousness involving microtubules. Looks like a promising theory in the making.

@@RedPhil87 it's a working hypothesis of consciousness but not of "self-hood" which seems to get conflated along with discussions of consciousness. The question is somewhat, why am I person X and not person Y. This identity or self-ness is not explained by mechanism. As for as the microtubulues go, there's a lot of science waiting there to be uncovered in the coming years.

He has.

@@suncat9 Oh, wow. That's great!

Other people perfectly have a right to their own opinions in disagreement with mine. They just don't have the right to insult or attack me because of the disagreement.

@@andsalomoni Things go over peoples heads sometimes.

Not if immortality is conditional.

I suppose you could claim that that's true by definition, but it still leaves open the question of whether such a thing exists at all.