@@michaeljfigueroaidk about ur income myself ? I’m retired and on a fixed income. My taxes dollars already n probably helped pay for his education. If he went to a public college r university and there r so many programs on Utube I couldn’t possibly afford to give every one I agree with “ a dollar a month “.
Most podcast players support chapter markers, so does TH-cam, and I find that they would be particularly useful on the AMA episodes. Since the questions are already typed in, I imagine pasting them on the description along with time stamps shouldn't take that much more of your time.
Entropic Force. Wow, Sean, your description was spot on for me to understand this. I never considered this aspect of reality before, and now I know I should. Now my head has to go and re-evaluate everything. haha. Gr8! Peace ☮💜
I think this video in the series was an excellent. 1:53:00 this sounds like the ball was simply rolling in one location but the surface itself was moving. 2:23:00 🤣 thanks. Everyone should start the day with such questions. As always, I admire the smooth turn around Sean.
Never miss a Mindscape AMA. Take them all and hear them out? Yea! 12:05 - 13:42 the non-orthogonality reminds of either fractal dimensions, or packing constraints in higher dimensions, both of which are potentially interesting, and in a Penrose visual-thinker kind of way, I understood more than I have any right to do. ❤
About the placebo question: doctors in fact do prescribe placebos in some cases while pretending it's not a placebo or sometimes even they don't know it themselves. I'm talking about homeopathy.
1:55:04 The actual reason is of course quantum mechanical. It takes the least action path because because for a macroscopic massive object, the Planck's constant can be actually taken to zero. Look up the Feynman path integral for the rest of the story. 2:27:52 Not to speak of the possibility of learning everything from those civilizations, which would automatically take care of the other options.
I think you missed the point of the question at 1:38:20. The asker isn't surprised that a single photon can interfere with itself, but that it can do so even when the paths between the beam splitters have such different lengths.
if you were to commute two fields, what field would be considered the field? more importantly, this superposition of fields does not use or need locality due to them being fields. so again, which field would be the field that makes the field.
re: 1:08:16 walrus at the door: I have been awoken by a sea lion at my front door (the side not facing the beach & up some stairs) so I have no trouble believing the walrus scenario!
Sometimes someone summons the vast ignorance we humans possess with his specific knowledge of something seemingly universal and concludes that's wisdom enough to sit on a wide sofa and say "ask me anything". And that's the black hole of intelligence.
If light (or photons) travel only to the retina, what then travels through the optic nerve? And same for other senses: vibration and ear drums, texture and touch? Physical input vs biological processing
I'm surprised you reject the "choose your own adventure" analogy out of hand even though it seems really good to me. You say we're not making choices that affect the wave function, but the same is true about the characters of the story: all possible variations of the story exist on different pages of the book, and you need a subjective viewpoint (player/reader) to commit to a specific timeline.
Ah, maybe I see the difference: the choose-your-adventure story does not dictate the probabilities of various choices, the reader is supposed to make them arbitrarily, whereas in the wave function the probabilities are baked in.
Another Patreon member wrote me the following: Not Sean but: it is not a "choose your adventure" story, but rather "all adventures are chosen" story, though each story has a different "thickness". A Laplace's demon could scroll through the book of all possible adventures, and in some of them an imperfect copy of you would be asking your question, and in others another copy would not, and in yet others you would not even exist. This book of all possible adventures is the block universe. So you could reconcile the intuition of free will with "could not have been any different" by stating that it is different in different but equally real timelines. This has nothing to do with "our consciousness allowing us to choose among these branches", however, as even in a non-many worlds universe the "consciousness" part is much much higher in the emergency hierarchy from quantum mechanics to subatomic physics to atomic physics to chemistry to biology to sentience to consciousness. Our internal narrator tells us the story of what we do, narrating the play-by-play using the terms like choice and decisions after the fact, without having any actual influence on the game that is being played.
@@marccoumeri902 I can only guess this person (and possibly Sean too?) doesn't know what a choose-your-own-adventure book is, given how they contrast it to "all adventures are chosen" (that's exactly what that is!)
I think the issue is that the choose-your-own book analogy places consciousness in the middle of the whole thing. Such a story on a shelf, branching out, existing as a block is a nice analogy. It breaks down when you place consciousness (and choice) in it.
@@tapksaI think that’s right. I would have liked to hear Sean elaborate on the block universe as containing all the branches, even though our consciousness is not choosing paths. Even in the classical picture, without many worlds, where my future could be someone else’s past seems remarkable to me. I really enjoy these AMAs, Sean explains concepts really well. But always have follow up questions.
I sometimes contemplate whether there can be another realm or world or universe or multiverse that has nothing to do with our space be ours 3 dimensions of space or 4 or 5 or more but somewhere else that our minds have a difficult time conceiving of. In other words, somewhere that our so called "universe" could not possibly expand into or move into and interact with because it is somewhere else and not out there somewhere in our space. Do you ever conceive of such a realm?
One of the earlier questions is about us and them. The question is asked and answered from the point of view of "us". I am one of "them". We do actually exist on this channel😅
1:12:57 That would actually be pretty funny if you did, because i also listen to Bill Burr's 1 hour Monday Morning Podcast, and he always throws in an older episode after his 30 minute "Thursday Afteroon Just Before Friday" episodes. So, that would make for 2 similar podcast formulas, but the content couldn't be more different, haha. Maybe he might be a fun guest some time, if you don't intimidate him and him not getting on the defensive, you both like sports and have similar theories about it.
I basically randomly took a botany course in college as an elective AND I LOVED IT! Even now, 25 years on, I still drone on an on about plants to my kids when we are out on hikes!
I have to disagree there is no connection between the existence of the Moon and life on earth. I thought the existence of the Moon keeps the orientation of the earth stable in its orientation with the Sun and that allows for seasons. Otherwise, the temperature in any location could swing between what we is in Antartica and at the equator. Wouldn't life be a lot different?
Why does the Earth need the Moon to stabilize it's axis? Is it because the Moon is much farther out and thus more resistant to having its own orbital axis tilted by the slow wobble of the Earth's axis?
@@brucecombs3108 I am watching "The most surprising discoveries from our universe - with Chris Lintott" on the Royal Institute website. At 49mins or so, he says the Moon stabilizes the earth's axis. This is what I remembered. Without stable axis, we'd have chaotic temperatures - not seasons.
This is a good guy BUT how much does he pay to always pop up next without me subscribing. Lol. Literally everytime I leave a video to run Sean is next! Good work.
I have heard a claim that Isaac Newton did not know the mechanism that causes gravity to happen, but that Albert Einstein disovered what that mechanism is. I say neither knew what the mechanism is. Einstein said that bodies of mass warp the space around them thus causing gravity. However, he did not suggest what the mechanism is that a body of mass warps the space around it. Does anyone know what the mechanism is as to how a body of mass warps the space around it?
That's true but Einstein did go one layer further down than Newton. We can always say "But why" to any explanation and it doesn't take long to reach the current limits of human knowledge. So give Einstein some props for going down an extra level.
This podcast gave me the inspiration to get into ap physics as a sophomore in high school( 1 year before my school usually allows). It's one of the best decisions I've ever made :)
Sean, I have a question but I don't have money to pay for an answer. Perhaps you can say something about this subject because more people may have the same doubt. Light it seems doens't experience time, right? Now, if a pair of particles are entangled and one particle is on earth and the other one is in andromeda, the mesurement of their spin wouldn't occour instantaineslly? If so, does that mean that entanglement is acting at the speed of light, because it experience no time? Or does that mean that entanglement is acting faster than the speed of light? Thanks for the attention anyway.. .
I hope someone much smarter than me reads this and tells me where I am wrong. I’m so ignorant to the quantum universe but pick up enough to be dangerous. I have a theory involving religion and wanted to share it for feedback. I’m growing thanks to God’s grace and I’m reading a lot, and I still studying quantum mechanics. I think the two are fascinating and you see God’s hand in the quantum universe. Recently, it’s become a theory in the quantum world that we are tied together with a universal consciousness that is tied by quantum waves. Then evolution. Scientists tell us it’s “survival of the fittest” and that a genetic mutation takes hold and replicates itself for the betterment of the species. Tie in duality (particles being in two places at once) and I have a theory. I haven’t researched if anyone else has had it yet. I think there is a difference between consciousness and having a soul. I do think quantum waves ties all things together with a universal consciousness. That’s how I explain evolution. A generation that passes remains in the quantum consciousness and helps the species by DNA memory and that’s how the changes slowly come about. It’s at the cellular level this information is passed from generation to generation. 2nd I think that it’s our soul that goes to heaven. When we pass and have been redeemed by God’s grace our souls go to be in His presence. However, the quantum consciousness of that human remains to contribute to the evolution of the species. Those who do not know God remain here on the quantum level. Hell has been described as not being in the presence of God. And while I have ALWAYS been a skeptic I believe that there are truly some people who are more in tune with the quantum consciousness and can tap into it to “know things” a la a medium. I don’t think psychics can tell the future but I think there are some people who can tap into the quantum consciousness and they can give information from it. Speak to the dead so to speak. I don’t believe in ghosts but I can see how a potential manifestation could perhaps become visible at some time. All crazy stuff I know but to me it wraps science and religion together perfectly. Thoughts? Am I insane?
50:05- Actually natural science varies a lot among fields. Biology for instance varies so wildly that many if not most of lab research results can't be replicated .
Dear patrons: Please give Sean a break about AI learning a model of the world. Yes, he is wrong. No, he is not going to read and understand the ROME paper, or the Emergent Linear Representations (in Othello-GPT) paper, just for an AMA question. So they're probably not the best medium for this discussion.
Thankfully, we have your expertise , to inform us about who's wrong or who's right. Sean's opinion about AIs is reasonable and obviously on the right track.
@@vicenzor3625 At least I think he's wrong in what seems to be an all-or-nothing approach to having a model of the world: either you have it or you don't. I believe there's more nuance there.
@@vicenzor3625 I'll answer you seriously. It all comes down to a question of "what do you mean, 'learning a model of the world?'" A sensible take is that if you're modeling the world, you have to take in sense data and then use it to form an internal representation that has some dynamics that are approximately isomorphic to the dynamics of the real world. E.g. If an AI gets video of a bouncing ball as input, and processes that video into an internal representation that tracks the position and velocity of the ball, and then predicts future internal representations using approximate laws of physics, that's an AI that's modeling the world. It doesn't do this *despite* predicting based on a data set, it does it precisely because modeling the ball is a useful way to predict the data. Of course, bouncing balls are simple and boring - it's easy to get an AI to model a bouncing ball, but hard to get one to model a rainstorm, or a person, or the entire real world. It's a continuum, both in terms of how complicated the internal representations are, and how faithfully the internal dynamics mirror the dynamics of the real world. (This leads to interesting, non-black-and-white questions like "How many orders of magnitude of complexity and fidelity does this continuum span? How quickly is AI advancing along this continuum?") In the paper Emergent Linear Representations in World Models of Self-Supervised Sequence Models, by Nanda, Lee, and Wattenberg, they take a GPT-style AI that's been trained on board game Othello (only on the sequence of moves), and they find that at a certain place inside it, it's learned a representation that tracks the contents of the board (Here 'tracks' means the representation is linear - you can read out the contents of the board just using linear operations). And then they can flip the color of a square inside the AI's representation, and it will play as if the board had the flipped-colored piece.
Didn’t you mean the creator of GOD’s Schrödinger equation? A cocktail party reply. Expect to see into my guru style nature here; In the analogy of the house and the paint property of the house, whereas both were created under the umbrella of physics… Where’s the origin of the physics umbrella, the known universe(s), and true everything? It feels somewhat unclear to most current, conscious, sentient beings. Except for those who’ve experienced out of body awareness. As Sadhguru says Your body and mind are materials that you have accumulated from the Earth over the coarse of time. You are not the hip-hop mass that you accumulated from food. You are the spirit that accumulated the resources and occupies the mind. This is where I add my perspective. Creation brought my spirit to consciousness. Consciousness brought me back to spirituality that brought me back to Understanding creation. GOD is LOVE is LIFE is YOU is GOD is LOVE is LIFE is YOU is Repeat in a perpetual cyclical state 🔁
Im going thru a drug withdrawal and these podcasts are helping me focus on the bright size of life.Ty so much
Right here with you ❤ the struggle is real 😮
kinda freaking me out how relevant this comment is to my situation. stay strong, It's more worth it every day.
Rooting for you bud.
Good luck
What kinda drug? I'm just curious and rooting for you. And curious
I am amazed at the breadth of Sean's knowledge and his patience ))
Whole new respect for You, good Sir. Listening to You was a great pleasure.
Love the AMA's very much professor, and everything else you do!
I usually hate when people talk sports. Sports nerd thing wasn't so bad. Although I hope to never hear it again.
Thank you for doing these Sean
I feel bad I only give him 1 dollar a month on patron
@@michaeljfigueroaidk about ur income myself ? I’m retired and on a fixed income. My taxes dollars already n probably helped pay for his education. If he went to a public college r university and there r so many programs on Utube I couldn’t possibly afford to give every one I agree with “ a dollar a month “.
Sean and team, please add the time stamps for every question when you post an AMA. Thanks!
Its on his website. You will have to look there. Sorry
If you subscribe to mindscape patron you get to ask a once in a lifetime question. I wasted mine making a dumb joke.
Most podcast players support chapter markers, so does TH-cam, and I find that they would be particularly useful on the AMA episodes.
Since the questions are already typed in, I imagine pasting them on the description along with time stamps shouldn't take that much more of your time.
@@tambourine_manyou should definitely do this, for sure :)
Entropic Force. Wow, Sean, your description was spot on for me to understand this. I never considered this aspect of reality before, and now I know I should. Now my head has to go and re-evaluate everything. haha. Gr8! Peace ☮💜
I think this video in the series was an excellent. 1:53:00 this sounds like the ball was simply rolling in one location but the surface itself was moving. 2:23:00 🤣 thanks. Everyone should start the day with such questions. As always, I admire the smooth turn around Sean.
Great Episode! I listened to the whole 3+ hours in the 3 minutes it's been out!
Just one time through?
I can't thank you enough for these
Never miss a Mindscape AMA. Take them all and hear them out? Yea! 12:05 - 13:42 the non-orthogonality reminds of either fractal dimensions, or packing constraints in higher dimensions, both of which are potentially interesting, and in a Penrose visual-thinker kind of way, I understood more than I have any right to do. ❤
Mark Kumari, if you're reading, thanks for asking exactly the priority question that I would probably ask Sean.
Ps the notion that consciousness is the thing which chooses which branch it's on appeals to me too. But I'll admit I'm a bit of a panpsychist.
“Babe wake up, new Sean Carroll AMA dropped”
About the placebo question: doctors in fact do prescribe placebos in some cases while pretending it's not a placebo or sometimes even they don't know it themselves. I'm talking about homeopathy.
1:55:04 The actual reason is of course quantum mechanical. It takes the least action path because because for a macroscopic massive object, the Planck's constant can be actually taken to zero. Look up the Feynman path integral for the rest of the story.
2:27:52 Not to speak of the possibility of learning everything from those civilizations, which would automatically take care of the other options.
What are these comments regarding?
I think you missed the point of the question at 1:38:20. The asker isn't surprised that a single photon can interfere with itself, but that it can do so even when the paths between the beam splitters have such different lengths.
if you were to commute two fields, what field would be considered the field? more importantly, this superposition of fields does not use or need locality due to them being fields. so again, which field would be the field that makes the field.
How about "make science great again", block the biased political persuasions.
Yes with political slogans! Great start!
re: 1:08:16 walrus at the door: I have been awoken by a sea lion at my front door (the side not facing the beach & up some stairs) so I have no trouble believing the walrus scenario!
Sometimes someone summons the vast ignorance we humans possess with his specific knowledge of something seemingly universal and concludes that's wisdom enough to sit on a wide sofa and say "ask me anything". And that's the black hole of intelligence.
i have a question. are there any theory's that think time and space is the same as the expansion of space and gravity pushing us down?
If light (or photons) travel only to the retina, what then travels through the optic nerve?
And same for other senses: vibration and ear drums, texture and touch?
Physical input vs biological processing
Thank you Sean. 4 hours. Fantastic.
I'm surprised you reject the "choose your own adventure" analogy out of hand even though it seems really good to me.
You say we're not making choices that affect the wave function, but the same is true about the characters of the story: all possible variations of the story exist on different pages of the book, and you need a subjective viewpoint (player/reader) to commit to a specific timeline.
Ah, maybe I see the difference: the choose-your-adventure story does not dictate the probabilities of various choices, the reader is supposed to make them arbitrarily, whereas in the wave function the probabilities are baked in.
Another Patreon member wrote me the following:
Not Sean but: it is not a "choose your adventure" story, but rather "all adventures are chosen" story, though each story has a different "thickness".
A Laplace's demon could scroll through the book of all possible adventures, and in some of them an imperfect copy of you would be asking your question, and in others another copy would not, and in yet others you would not even exist. This book of all possible adventures is the block universe. So you could reconcile the intuition of free will with "could not have been any different" by stating that it is different in different but equally real timelines. This has nothing to do with "our consciousness allowing us to choose among these branches", however, as even in a non-many worlds universe the
"consciousness" part is much much higher in the emergency hierarchy from quantum mechanics to subatomic physics to atomic physics to chemistry to biology to sentience to consciousness.
Our internal narrator tells us the story of what we do, narrating the play-by-play using the terms like choice and decisions after the fact, without having any actual influence on the game that is being played.
@@marccoumeri902 I can only guess this person (and possibly Sean too?) doesn't know what a choose-your-own-adventure book is, given how they contrast it to "all adventures are chosen" (that's exactly what that is!)
I think the issue is that the choose-your-own book analogy places consciousness in the middle of the whole thing. Such a story on a shelf, branching out, existing as a block is a nice analogy. It breaks down when you place consciousness (and choice) in it.
@@tapksaI think that’s right. I would have liked to hear Sean elaborate on the block universe as containing all the branches, even though our consciousness is not choosing paths. Even in the classical picture, without many worlds, where my future could be someone else’s past seems remarkable to me. I really enjoy these AMAs, Sean explains concepts really well. But always have follow up questions.
Thank you
I feel like you are trying. Thank you, I am "MAGA".
I just want to affirm that I love sports talk as much as science talk. Keep up the occasional basketball topic, and go spurs go.
Your only telling me what a plumber does,,,your not telling me what a plumber is !! 😂
sp. you're
@@joelnasdaq2724 I acknowledge you're existence 😌
@@spaceinyourfaceI'm an AI-bot ... thanks for accepting me.
@@joelnasdaq2724 you're existence matters to some .
@@spaceinyourface[sp] your
Lots of pushback on many worlds lately. How bout discussion with naysayer
I sometimes contemplate whether there can be another realm or world or universe or multiverse that has nothing to do with our space be ours 3 dimensions of space or 4 or 5 or more but somewhere else that our minds have a difficult time conceiving of. In other words, somewhere that our so called "universe" could not possibly expand into or move into and interact with because it is somewhere else and not out there somewhere in our space. Do you ever conceive of such a realm?
One of the earlier questions is about us and them. The question is asked and answered from the point of view of "us".
I am one of "them". We do actually exist on this channel😅
1:12:57 That would actually be pretty funny if you did, because i also listen to Bill Burr's 1 hour Monday Morning Podcast, and he always throws in an older episode after his 30 minute "Thursday Afteroon Just Before Friday" episodes.
So, that would make for 2 similar podcast formulas, but the content couldn't be more different, haha.
Maybe he might be a fun guest some time, if you don't intimidate him and him not getting on the defensive, you both like sports and have similar theories about it.
Awesome!
I basically randomly took a botany course in college as an elective AND I LOVED IT! Even now, 25 years on, I still drone on an on about plants to my kids when we are out on hikes!
Can you talk about LK99 a bit?
Send the big donaters merch
I have to disagree there is no connection between the existence of the Moon and life on earth. I thought the existence of the Moon keeps the orientation of the earth stable in its orientation with the Sun and that allows for seasons. Otherwise, the temperature in any location could swing between what we is in Antartica and at the equator. Wouldn't life be a lot different?
Why does the Earth need the Moon to stabilize it's axis? Is it because the Moon is much farther out and thus more resistant to having its own orbital axis tilted by the slow wobble of the Earth's axis?
@@brucecombs3108 I was not sure of this but was hoping someone would let me know.
@@brucecombs3108 I am watching "The most surprising discoveries from our universe - with Chris Lintott" on the Royal Institute website. At 49mins or so, he says the Moon stabilizes the earth's axis. This is what I remembered. Without stable axis, we'd have chaotic temperatures - not seasons.
This is a good guy BUT how much does he pay to always pop up next without me subscribing. Lol. Literally everytime I leave a video to run Sean is next!
Good work.
Why does the TH-cam algorithm play this channel next after every flat earth video?
I have heard a claim that Isaac Newton did not know the mechanism that causes gravity to happen, but that Albert Einstein disovered what that mechanism is. I say neither knew what the mechanism is. Einstein said that bodies of mass warp the space around them thus causing gravity. However, he did not suggest what the mechanism is that a body of mass warps the space around it. Does anyone know what the mechanism is as to how a body of mass warps the space around it?
That's true but Einstein did go one layer further down than Newton. We can always say "But why" to any explanation and it doesn't take long to reach the current limits of human knowledge. So give Einstein some props for going down an extra level.
Right....
This podcast gave me the inspiration to get into ap physics as a sophomore in high school( 1 year before my school usually allows). It's one of the best decisions I've ever made :)
I ❤ trig . Prof .Carroll please don't say it's JUST trigonometry. Trig is amazing. ❤ from 🇨🇦
Sean, I have a question but I don't have money to pay for an answer. Perhaps you can say something about this subject because more people may have the same doubt. Light it seems doens't experience time, right? Now, if a pair of particles are entangled and one particle is on earth and the other one is in andromeda, the mesurement of their spin wouldn't occour instantaineslly? If so, does that mean that entanglement is acting at the speed of light, because it experience no time? Or does that mean that entanglement is acting faster than the speed of light? Thanks for the attention anyway.. .
Give a scholarship to an already advanced student.
Circus
Oooh would love a classic episode of Mindscape once a week.
Mitä tänne laitettiin
I hope someone much smarter than me reads this and tells me where I am wrong. I’m so ignorant to the quantum universe but pick up enough to be dangerous. I have a theory involving religion and wanted to share it for feedback.
I’m growing thanks to God’s grace and I’m reading a lot, and I still studying quantum mechanics. I think the two are fascinating and you see God’s hand in the quantum universe.
Recently, it’s become a theory in the quantum world that we are tied together with a universal consciousness that is tied by quantum waves. Then evolution. Scientists tell us it’s “survival of the fittest” and that a genetic mutation takes hold and replicates itself for the betterment of the species. Tie in duality (particles being in two places at once) and I have a theory. I haven’t researched if anyone else has had it yet.
I think there is a difference between consciousness and having a soul. I do think quantum waves ties all things together with a universal consciousness. That’s how I explain evolution. A generation that passes remains in the quantum consciousness and helps the species by DNA memory and that’s how the changes slowly come about. It’s at the cellular level this information is passed from generation to generation.
2nd I think that it’s our soul that goes to heaven. When we pass and have been redeemed by God’s grace our souls go to be in His presence. However, the quantum consciousness of that human remains to contribute to the evolution of the species. Those who do not know God remain here on the quantum level. Hell has been described as not being in the presence of God. And while I have ALWAYS been a skeptic I believe that there are truly some people who are more in tune with the quantum consciousness and can tap into it to “know things” a la a medium. I don’t think psychics can tell the future but I think there are some people who can tap into the quantum consciousness and they can give information from it. Speak to the dead so to speak. I don’t believe in ghosts but I can see how a potential manifestation could perhaps become visible at some time.
All crazy stuff I know but to me it wraps science and religion together perfectly.
Thoughts? Am I insane?
Sean has a video up on TH-cam called “God is not a great theory” if you wanted to listen to that
50:05- Actually natural science varies a lot among fields. Biology for instance varies so wildly that many if not most of lab research results can't be replicated .
tyty (a little tickle for the algorithm lol)
Dear patrons: Please give Sean a break about AI learning a model of the world. Yes, he is wrong. No, he is not going to read and understand the ROME paper, or the Emergent Linear Representations (in Othello-GPT) paper, just for an AMA question. So they're probably not the best medium for this discussion.
How is he wrong?
Is AI learning no longer predictive based on input of a data set? Have they become sentient? Are they listening??😮
Thankfully, we have your expertise , to inform us about who's wrong or who's right.
Sean's opinion about AIs is reasonable and obviously on the right track.
@@vicenzor3625 At least I think he's wrong in what seems to be an all-or-nothing approach to having a model of the world: either you have it or you don't. I believe there's more nuance there.
@@vicenzor3625 I'll answer you seriously. It all comes down to a question of "what do you mean, 'learning a model of the world?'" A sensible take is that if you're modeling the world, you have to take in sense data and then use it to form an internal representation that has some dynamics that are approximately isomorphic to the dynamics of the real world.
E.g. If an AI gets video of a bouncing ball as input, and processes that video into an internal representation that tracks the position and velocity of the ball, and then predicts future internal representations using approximate laws of physics, that's an AI that's modeling the world. It doesn't do this *despite* predicting based on a data set, it does it precisely because modeling the ball is a useful way to predict the data.
Of course, bouncing balls are simple and boring - it's easy to get an AI to model a bouncing ball, but hard to get one to model a rainstorm, or a person, or the entire real world. It's a continuum, both in terms of how complicated the internal representations are, and how faithfully the internal dynamics mirror the dynamics of the real world. (This leads to interesting, non-black-and-white questions like "How many orders of magnitude of complexity and fidelity does this continuum span? How quickly is AI advancing along this continuum?")
In the paper Emergent Linear Representations in World Models of Self-Supervised Sequence Models, by Nanda, Lee, and Wattenberg, they take a GPT-style AI that's been trained on board game Othello (only on the sequence of moves), and they find that at a certain place inside it, it's learned a representation that tracks the contents of the board (Here 'tracks' means the representation is linear - you can read out the contents of the board just using linear operations). And then they can flip the color of a square inside the AI's representation, and it will play as if the board had the flipped-colored piece.
Didn’t you mean the creator of GOD’s Schrödinger equation?
A cocktail party reply.
Expect to see into my guru style nature here;
In the analogy of the house and the paint property of the house,
whereas both were created under the umbrella of physics…
Where’s the origin of the physics umbrella, the known universe(s), and true everything?
It feels somewhat unclear to most current, conscious, sentient beings.
Except for those who’ve experienced out of body awareness.
As Sadhguru says
Your body and mind are materials that you have accumulated from the Earth over the coarse of time.
You are not the hip-hop mass that you accumulated from food.
You are the spirit that accumulated the resources and occupies the mind.
This is where I add my perspective.
Creation brought my spirit to consciousness.
Consciousness brought me back to spirituality that brought me back to Understanding creation.
GOD is LOVE is LIFE is YOU is GOD is LOVE is LIFE is YOU is Repeat in a perpetual cyclical state 🔁
Anything?
🙄Okay then. Why is your last name Carroll?👽🤮