I could listen to this man talk for days straight. This is the kind of person we should be idolizing not celebrity garbage.

This man is 92! And his mind is so clear!

Roger Penrose is one of my favorite modern mathematicians/thinkers - he's humble, open-minded, curious, and brilliant.

Sir. Penrose, one of the last great Geniuses of the 20th Century. A living Legend.

He is 92 years old. Woaahhhh🤯 Looks 15 years younger. Stability in voice, no significant shaking, no spectacles, lot of hair on head, hearing perfectly well, doesn't look physically weak eithr . This man has done wonderfully well in keeping his body & mind healthy at this age also. I know there are genetic factors as well, but you stil need to put in efforts.

That chair leg an inch from the edge scares me.

Sir Penrose is amazing - still incredibly sharp. Thumbs up for this video.

The more I look at this man, the more he seems to have God in him. Even at the age of 92, he is still in the world of education. I pray to God to keep him healthy .

PLEASE - as with 'Closer to Truth' - PLEASE give us the DATE on which the talk was recorded! This is historically significant; without knowing when these talks were recorded, it's hard to follow how a given thinker's thoughts have evolved.

I always feel like I’ve leveled up after listening to Penrose. He’s a treasure

I could listen to Roger Penrose speak for days

a strong proponent of the importance of philosophy in the scientific method.

Such a likable genius. One of the greatest thinkers of our age.

Can listen to this man for hours. Hope he is around for a long time! Inspiring person.

How many scientists does it take to mischaracterize the Schrodinger's Cat problem? Just about every one. Penrose never gets muddled. He's my go to for reality checking physics and cosmology and anything else he wants to weigh in on.

To hear Roger explain the Emperor’s mind is a beautiful gift… the book is a very challenging mountain to scale.

General relativity and quantum mechanics will never be combined until we realize that they take place at different moments in time. Because causality has a speed limit (c) every point in space where you observe it from will be the closest to the present moment. When we look out into the universe, we see the past which is made of particles (GR). When we try to look at smaller and smaller sizes and distances, we are actually looking closer and closer to the present moment (QM). The wave property of particles appears when we start looking into the future of that particle. It is a probability wave because the future is probabilistic. Wave function collapse is what we perceive as the present moment and is what divides the past from the future. GR is making measurements in the observed past and therefore, predictable. QM is attempting to make measurements of the unobserved future and therefore, unpredictable.

Than you sir Roger Penrose. We are all lucky to have him

This is a particularly profound and detailed interview with Sir Penrose. Excellent and thanks for sharing.

Roger Penrose is a joy to listen to, I understand almost nothing he talks about, but he seems to enjoy his subject so much that its a pleasure to hear him discuss it.

I'm not a scientist or mathematician. But I like how the noticing of anything has now seemed to be part of the quest for understanding more than we used to understand.

I like (and appreciate) how he explains things in terms which I can follow. He must have almost infinite patience, or be very comfortable with a way of life which enables his studying. People like him are essential. I wish I knew everything 😊

thanks for making this video, i learned a lot.

Looking well roger

Please, please keep Roger Penrose’s innovative thinking going. We need someone to pick up the ball in ten years or so, as Sir Roger is obviously defeating time. He’s the best of the visionaries in the modern age.

Sir Penrose- An epitome of humility and intelligence!! Always fond of hearing him.

Thank you Sir Roger for that.

Wow fantastic. . I could listen to Professor Penrose all day. . Thank you.

It’s an enormous privilege to have access to such an engaging person with a brilliant ,lucid mind.

This has serious rewatch value! Thanks!

Just amazing to be accurate to listen to this mini lectures! I just hope Sir Roger Penrose get to live at least another 20 more years 💪😁

I read Emporer's New Mind and it made me obsessed with Turinv Machines which led to me becoming obsessed with 6502 assembly programming! Thanks Sir Penrose

"There is something outside computation in human understanding". Contra mathematization of everything including human nature. Thank you Sir.

Wouldn't it be delightful to be able to sit and talk to such a charming profound thinker? He seems to be completely without condescension and have such intriguing thoughts.

That was inspiring. Wow, my mind is blown. Thank you

Excellent interview, so nice to see Mr Penrose is doing well, I have read a few of his books.

What an insightful and articulated view!!

I appreciate his clarification on his position on physicalism because i hear people come to the wrong conclusion after hearing him speak almost any time that comes up.

Love this man

I love this interview. Sir roger penrose sitting in what I’m guessing is his back garden, discussing science, the river in the background with the canoe slowly passing by… There’s something so quintessentially english about the whole thing. Makes me proud to know that intelligence and peaceful tranquility can still be found in this country

I am in awe how people can be so smart. I couldnt follow most of what he was saying and had to rewind... great stuff, cant stop watching though

In science, “incomplete” just means the theory doesn’t work and we don’t know how to fix it.

He sealed the deal for me when he described himself as a visual thinker. I used to think everyone was. My heart pauses at the thought of having an in-depth conversation with Sir Roger. Not only is this far out of reach, but the time needed to establish thoughts understandable to both would make it even more impossible.🐦 🐦 🐦

Love the interview. Love Rogers insights. It echoes my understanding of some of the problems not being dealt with, ie the inability of a machine to prove concepts that rely on infinite continuity of logical conclusions. For example, using real numbers, the infinite series of x+1 will always be consistent without limit into infinity. Or, 2 parallel lines, using a fixed system of geometry will never touch, ever. Although a computer in theory could run forever, it still relies on finite bits and therefore could never finish calculating a real number. If quantum systems are truly indeterminate and probablilistic curves and wave functions actually link reality to a ‘Real’ foundation then logic alone, and intuition in particular, should admit to the impossibility of machine solutions ever modeling comprehensive truth. Maybe quantum computing has a chance since its foundational qbits can be ‘Real’ components. Now we just have to figure out how to make ‘Real’ measurements. Since we’ll never be able to verify that a qbit’s ‘Real’ value is correct with a deterministic classic computer, it will take a quantum leap of faith to accept that the real values/real States are true at the infinite scale.

one of the greats

i enjoy him sharing his passion so much .. would love to be his translator to gallileo -- even if i surely wont understand half of what sir PENROSE is saying if they get down into the meaty stuff 😅

Simply excellent !!

glad he finally gets the recognition he deserves and we need. it's good that he is there to witness it all.

Bless you ❤❤❤❤❤ we need you

This is a lovely and timely record of a great thinker. But, for me, science and physics are missing the foundational reality of consciousness. It just cannot be excluded from physics, because it is an integrated aspect of all perception and consciousness is like the quantum level of reality and for me, is the very nature of God and is what reality is!

Merci merci. Plus on réalise et moins on comprend. Une contradiction il semblerait mais ensuite tout prend place. La confiance est aussi une valeur importante. Il faut ce courage pour se lancer dans le vide, sans garantie mais poussé par une curiosité inébranlable, une foi certaine en la vie.

I wish there is more people like Penrose and Chomsky

There are so few physicists who display the kind of curiosity and determination to seriously question accepted solutions and willing to posit new ideas even at the age of 92.

We need more great thinkers working on the mystery of consciousness. I believe it'll open the door to a realization that we, humans, and our minds, are embedded into the universe itself in a way that consciousness is preserved.

You said that you have a lot more questions at the end of that talk, than what you had in the beginning. That is knowledge, as I se it, Not make answers, make the questions. Best whishes from Sweden.

Brilliant! 🔥

A good answer always generates 10 new questions

Understanding is direct experience of the thing.

It’s like the difference between what we are and who we are. Classical physics tell us who we are; our properties, mass, inertia, how we react to forces, etc., as an assembly. Quantum mechanics describes what we are, how a waveform collapsed to determine the stability of atomic level forces that create the platform. We are related, connected, who and what we are, but we are not sure how.

A brilliant man 👏👏

I find the questions, very childish, but this guy keeps on coming up with fantastic answers Absolutely amazing, I could listen to him for hours

You are so right!!!

I love this guy!

4:48 Imagine paddling along in a canoe on a nice day, randomly passing by Roger Penrose sitting on a deck talking about the transcendental qualities of understanding

4) Einstein's phrase "spooky action at a distance" was euphemistic for asserting non local hidden variables are TRUE. The incompleteness is based on the entangled hidden variables. 5) Wave collapse requires inner and outer i, so to speak, its an i/o feature of entangled root access. think of it like Admin permission on a Unix shell.

What a way to end the interview. Thank you

This is great ! :) I just wish that Roger Penrose heard , or spoke to , Bruce Lipton and his amazement with discovery how do our cells behave, what goes on micro level that we didnt know before . I am sure that would broaden the road towards some real realizations . :) Thank you for this interview , I have utterly enjoyed it ! :)

I think Dirac is his most favourite physicist 🙌🏻

Dr. Michael Levin has shown that the electric field about a cell can be manipulated which changes the signaling in the micrutubules. Maybe the collapse of the wave function happens within the electric field of the cell.

Would love to see a discussion between Penrose and Wolfram!

It’s amazing that he can formulate his thoughts so clearly & coherently despite being above 90.

Only now do I think I understand what he means by consciousness transcends computation.

I think an interesting collateral aspect of "the understanding" being able to transcend the rules is that it gives Evolution a reason to favour consciousness development. Even if an advanced non conscious specie (or even an artificial neural network for the case ) could solve very complex tasks they could never get the advantage provided by "understanding". To me this can explain the devopment of conscoiusnes by Evolution. If there is an unknown resource in nature that somehow can permit to build self awareness and consciousnes with it, then Evolution will find the way to create it sooner or later, because it provides an advantage. Logically this doesn't explain how consciousness emerges, but at least it could explain why.

My favorite person ever.

This man is a legend

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 *🐈 Schrödinger's cat thought experiment aimed to show the absurdity of quantum superposition applied to macroscopic objects.* 00:29 *🎓 As a graduate student, Penrose took courses by influential thinkers like Bondi, Dirac, and Steen, sparking his interest in physics and computation.* 01:24 *🧩 Gödel's incompleteness theorems showed that our understanding transcends any fixed set of rules for proving mathematical statements.* 04:11 *🧠 Penrose argues that consciousness, not just following computational rules, enables humans to transcend formal systems.* 06:05 *⚛️ As a physicalist, Penrose consciousness must arise from known physics, suggesting quantum mechanics as a possibility.* 10:22 *⌛ Penrose theorizes that the quantum measurement problem, involving wave function collapse, cannot be computed and requires a new physical theory.* 12:26 *🧵 Hamerhoff's suggestion about microtubules led to Penrose's orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR) model of consciousness.* 14:14 *🌍 Dennis Sciama greatly influenced Penrose's understanding of physics, especially cosmology, despite Penrose's mathematics background.* 15:23 *🖼️ Penrose describes himself as a visual thinker, which posed challenges in algebra-focused math courses requiring written explanations.* 17:40 *🌌 If he could meet anyone from history, Penrose would choose Galileo for his groundbreaking physical insights and principled stand against authority.* Made with HARPA AI

More. Please.

Nailed it. I don't think we will be able to divorce consciousness and how it works from QM and WFC.

Him and Dr James Watson are probably the most legendary scientists alive.

Dr. Subhash kak says the similar thing, specially about consciousness.

Please never put this man's chair so close to the edge of a platform ever again. Thank you.

I have solved it for him, what is outside of these rules is our ability to reason.

This is a really nice video. What a British treasure 😊

Prof Penrose mentions his respect for - and learning from - Dennis Sciama. It is interesting to note that Dr Alexander Unzicker's critical theory of relativity is inspired - I think it's fair to say - by the work of Sciama. See youTube 'Unzicker's Real Physics'. And odd perhaps, that Unzicker is himself a trained neuroscientist? Thanks to IAI for presenting tremendous material!

excellent

Recently I've been thinking a lot about quantum mechanics, if their random nature could be explained by God or some other scientific force not understandable by us, and the consequences they have on our consciousness. This could explain if we do have free will or not. It's fantastic that I could find a real source about this exact topic right now.

Well I may have to watch this a dozen more times to get it, but at least this time he discussed why consciousness in his concept is not computational.

I’ve always thought that consciousness and sense of self was as a result of our brains interaction with fields permeating the universe. Similar to our eyes evolving to interact with the electromagnetic field

The problem with modern science is that it’s limited to pen and paper or in today’s world a man made computer. Any person who was working within the boundaries of modern science got enveloped inside a set of theorems and a limited process. Thereby limiting the logical analytical comprehension ability. When you explore the science of creation and through the meditation method of analysing creation you get into higher consciousness or higher awareness and than the real knowledge starts unravelling automatically. I can explain this through a talk

Mind-blowing to think that Roger got to attend classes by Paul Dirac

Interesting point

An example of a complete Turing machine is a person writing an autobiography. An example of a conscious computation is red plus green equals yellow. Further reading: Writing with the hands is understood within the science of electricity as signals from the brain orchestrating the hands, no Quantum Mechanics is involved in writing. Let explaining one example of consciousness be sufficient to objectively explain consciousness. Let a person writing an autobiography with their hands be sufficient to be the one example of consciousness to be explained. Let the explanation of a person writing be the science of electricity. Therefore, consciousness is objectively explained as electricity.

Our science already objectively explains consciousness, as electricity. Physics explains standing up must be electrical since gravity pulls down, not up. Philosophy explains "I, my consciousness" can prove to others "I stand up".

If perceived reality is altered by conscious observation, then we must each exist in our own individual quantum world. The universe we think we live in is much weirder than most people can imagine.😊

How can we know the rest mass of an electron or other particles when we have Heisenberg's uncertainty principle? (i.e. at rest mass the momentum is zero and thus we have lost information about the particle's position)

Many thanks! A very important topic for deep open global brainstorming. It's time to realize that Quantum theory and General relativity are phenomenological (parametric, operationalist. "effective") theories without ontological justification / substantiation (ontological basification). Lee Smolin: "All the theories we work with, including the Standard Model of Particle Physics and General relativity, are approximate theories applicable to truncations of nature that include only a subset of the degrees of freedom in the universe. We call such an approximate theory an effective theory." Fundamental science "rested" in the understanding of space and matter (ontological structure), the nature of the "laws of nature", the nature of "fundamental constants", the nature of the phenomena of time, information, consciousness. John A. Wheeler: "We are no longer satisfied with insights only into particles, fields of force, into geometry, or even into time and space. Today we demand of physics some understanding of existence itself." To understand the EXISTENCE itself means to "grasp" (understand) the nature of the primordial TENSION of the Cosmos, to understand the nature of space and time. And for this it is necessary to "grasp" the primordial generating structure of matter - "La Structure Mère" (Ontological SuperStructure). That is, to build a model of the metaphysical triad "being-nothing/otherbeing-becoming". .. More than a quarter of a century ago, the mathematician and philosopher Vasily Nalimov set the super-task of building a "super-unified field theory that describes both physical and semantic manifestations of the World" - the creation of a model of the "Self-Aware Universe" (V. Nalimov, 1996). In the same direction, the ideas of the Nobel laureate in physics Brian Josephson (which are not very noticed by mainstream science), set out in the essay "On the Fundamentality of Meaning" (2018). The paradigm of the Universe as an eternal holistic generating process ("PARADIGM OF UNDERSTANDING") gives a new look at matter. MATTER is that from which all meanings, forms and structures are born. Space is an ideal entity, an ideal limit for the states of matter. Space is an ideal entity, an ideal (absolute) limit for the states of matter. The ontological structure of space (absolute, ontological, existential) is rigidly connected with the absolute forms of the existence of matter (absolute states). And there are three and only three of these states: absolute rest (linear state, absolute Continuum, ideal image, form - "cube", "Cartesian box") + absolute movement (vortex, cyclic, absolute Discretuum, ideal image, form - "sphere") and their synthesis - absolute becoming (wave, absolute wave, absolute Dis-Continuum, ideal image, form - "cylinder"). What is especially important: each absolute form of the existence of matter has its own ONTOLOGICAL PATH (bivector of the absolute state). Accordingly, SPACE (absolute, ontological, existential) has three ontological dimensions (9 gnoseological dimensions). But we must "dig" deeper into ontology in order to “grasp” the MetaNoumenon - ONTOLOGICAL (structural, cosmic) MEMORY, “soul of matter”, its measure. Ontological (structural, cosmic) memory is that "nothing" that holds, preserves, develops and directs matter (enteleschia, nous, Aristotle's "mind-prime mover"). To understand SPACE and TIME we must move from the physicalist concept, the simple ideality of “SPACE-TIME” to the ontological concept of “SPACE-MATTER/MEMORY-TIME”. That is, to generating processes with memory. See continuation... TIME (ontological) is a polyvalent phenomenon of ontological (structural, cosmic) memory, which substantiates the quantitative certainty of the existence of the Universe as an eternal holistic process of generating meanings, forms and structures. Time (ontological) is the dialectic of the generation of number and meaning. Ontological time = cyclic ("horizontal" of being of the Universe) + wave (emergent, time of becoming of the generating structure) + linear ("vertical" of being, hierarchical time). The birth of the "arrow of time" is the birth of light. Gnoseological time ("human-dimensional") - past, present, future. Information is a polyvalent phenomenon of ontological (structural, cosmic) memory which substantiates the certainty, orderliness, essential / substantive unity of the Universe as an eternal holistic process of generating more and more new meanings, forms and structures. InFORMAtion is a polyvalent phenomenon of ontological (structural, cosmic) memory which substantiates the certainty, orderliness, essential / substantive unity of the Universe as an eternal holistic process of generating more and more new meanings, forms and structures. Consciousness is an absolute (unconditional) attractor of meanings. Meaning is the unconditional foundation of the existence of the Universe. Consciousness is a qualitative vector/bivector value. Consciousness is a unique phenomenon of ontological (structural, cosmic) memory, which manifests itself at a certain level of being of the Universe as an eternal holistic process of generating meanings, forms and structures. Evolution is an eternal process of accumulation of memory. Fundamental science requires a Big Ontological revolution in the metaphysical / ontological basis. Physics must move from the stage "Phenomenological physics" to the stage "Ontological physics". The paradigm of the Universe as a WHOLE must come to the aid of the “part paradigm” that dominates science. The New Information Revolution is also pushing for this. J.A. Wheeler: "To my mind there must be, at the bottom of it all, not an equation, but an utterly simple idea. And to me that idea, when we discover it, will be so compelling, so inevitable, that we will say to one another, 'Oh, how beautiful.' How could it have been otherwise?'" Pierre Teilhard de Chardin: "The true physics is that which will, one day, achieve the inclusion of man in his wholeness in a coherent picture of the world." A.N. Whitehead: "A precise language must await a completed metaphysical knowledge."

Its not about being an incomplete theory; it is about being wrong from start to finish. The start part is when an artifact, waves on water, was proposed by Huygens in 1670 and got accepted by everyone in SQM due to no one being able, until 1970, to find any other way to explain the 2 slit experiment. The waves were found to be an artifact in 1960-70 by marine engineers doing analysis of waves on water to find that the any wave on water is only the 2D surface part of a 3D under surface mechanism. Waves on the surface are caused by 3D horizontal rotating water columns beneath the surface. The electron's energy consists of a rotating set of many charge currents traversing around the nucleus of an atom, and due to its light speed Fourier transform components forms a solid material surface, according to E=MC**2. That was modeled by Hermann Haus, a top notch electronics engineering prof at MIT in 1986 after deriving his "Non-Radiation Condition:" to better explain why the electron, when modeled as a point, does not fall into the nucleus as expected due to radiating way its orbital energy. SQM never addressed that problem. By using Haus paper on NRC, a sit in student in Haus' post grad course in electronic engineering, Randell Mills, derived the exact same model of the electron as had Haus. That was the base on which Mills derived the rest of his Grand-Unified Theory-Classical Physics. GUT-CP was used to guide the development of the hydrino reaction, as used in the Suincell®. This device produces useful power at a cost of US$0.001 per kilowatt hour. The Suncell®,is on track to being mass produced late 2024 and then to be leased by at least 70 power generating utilities. Before that device, Mills also had developed, in 2010, a molecular modeler, the "Millsian®" that is at least 100 times more accurate and thousands of times faster than anything similar that was developed under the guidance of Standard Quantum Mechanics.

A person standing up and walking are understood within the science of the force of electricity as signals from the brain orchestrating the legs because the force of gravity pulls down, not up or to the side. Let explaining one example of consciousness be sufficient to objectively explain consciousness. Let a person intentionally standing up and walking be sufficient to be the one example of consciousness to be explained. ("I stand up" and "I am walking" are common expressions that localize "I"). Let the explanation of a person standing up and walking be the science of electricity, per above. Therefore, consciousness is objectively explained as electricity.

How did Gödel prove his conclusions? Up to a point, the structure of his demonstration is modeled, as he himself noted, on the reasoning involved in one of the logical antinomies known as the "Richard Paradox," first propounded by the French mathematician, Jules Richard, in 1905 [...] The reasoning in the Richard Paradox is evidently fallacious. Its construction nevertheless suggests that it might be possible to "map" (or "mirror") metamathematical statements about a sufficiently comprehensive formal system into the system itself. If this were possible, then metamathematical statements about a system would be represented by statements within the system. Thereby one could achieve the desirable end of getting the formal system to speak about itself - a most valuable form of self-consciousness. ~Nagel & Newman

I love what Roger Penrose is saying. I really wish they would have muted the interviewer's interjections. All if his 'Yeah, yeah' and 'right' and other non-essential blobs of speech I find very distracting.