Michio Kaku on God
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 เม.ย. 2009
- Dr. Michio Kaku dishes on spirituality, Einstein, and God in this latest installment of Dr. Kiki's interview with him.
For more great science news and discussion, check out the This Week in Science (TWIS) channel: goo.gl/c1teGr
Subscribe for weekly news discussion: goo.gl/JaaX98
Want more Michio? Check out this playlist: goo.gl/iu7Iye - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[TH] VCT Masters Shanghai Playoffs DAY 5 // 100T vs PRX | FUT vs TH](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/q75pv359eP4/mqdefault.jpg)
This man renews my faith in humanity :D
Lol you still feel the same?
same :D
exactly. Im a firm believer that God and science can go hand and hand
💯
But not religions and science
Are u christian
Science reveals God to us
@@zahid887 That depends on the religion
I was so glad that the reporter was respectful, I was watching the other interview, where reporter was trying to dominate, but this one was calm and peaceful
Beautiful presentation , Beautiful Q/A- It shows/reflects beauty of the human mind.
In other words, Michio seems to say 'I don't know the personal god, but I enjoy studying his creation' ♥
I think this man want to destroy God's creation.
@@carmenmoldoveanu4897 this man is open minded not like communists
He believes God may or may not exist
@@pradipchaterjee9576 he is an open idiot who don't care about humans because he, himself pretends to be god.
@@carmenmoldoveanu4897 I don't see what's wrong with him?
@@nathdadugrrgod899 he is the perfect globalism-vector.
Beautifully explained
I am gr8 fan of Mr.Kaku..I love to hear his videos ..Love live Mr.Kaku..
That is amazing. I love to think about how everything is the way it is. Not just about how a few of us lucky animals get to actually appreciate the world we live in, but why everything the way it is. It boggles my mind how we get to learn something new all the time and expand our horizons. If there is some entity that created our universe along with many others, it would be a question i think all of us would love to find out.
Michio Kaku is one of my favorite thinkers of all time.
He's a glorified science fiction writer.
@@slow-mo_moonbuggy I never expected to get a reply to a 10 year old comment I don't remember commenting lol
@@theoblivion87 what your age man? How yea doin?
hes a great public speaker, everything comes out so clearly
Good to see people still watching this in 2020
For those who are wondering what Michio Kaku's beliefs are:
Kaku was brought up by first generation Japanese immigrants in the United States. Some eastern philosophical religious principles surely influenced his upbringing. As a scientist and thinker, Kaku seems to feel that the universe, in its order and symmetry, is the higher power and not God. He is a pantheist, who puts no consideration into monotheism.
Pantheists are nature lovers, I do like them
You think?
Than why there are loose in this(?) th-cam.com/video/-MG-XBkCTDY/w-d-xo.html
PANTHEISTS believe in a God who is nature.
Same thing different names, He believes in God, any higher power is God.
Obviously! He believes in God. He knows the real purpose of life.
I really like Einstein's definition for "God", it is very logical.....
With that definition, we can say all gods are true, as all of them were gods attempt to teach humanity
@@theeagle1335 And a baby killer.
I like the Bible's, given to us by God's Spirit.
@@theeagle1335 and thus we can not be "made in his image", as that controdicts this argument, or in the atempt of not controdicting this argument controdicts the bible. If you truly beleive what the bible says, god can not be this, infact due to the multitudes of controdictions, the biblical god can not exist at all.
@@starkillerz6235 Your statement is due to the lack of understanding the bible.. No one can understand the bible using human reasoning, You need the spirit of God to enable you to understand that the scriptures teach. Nowonder to you, the bible is full of contradictions
the lady is very good interviewer! keep it up.
..and whole universe can be put into one point...damn.. sir michio kaku how could you miss it
And you've proven that the universe can be put in a single point? I'd love to see that experiment
maraming salamat,mag ingat ka
Perfectly said mate, we aren't all narrow minded to look at only one idea, we want them all, to discover the world, the universe, and everything that makes it beautiful
"Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble."
-- Albert Einstein
“God is a scientist, not a magician”- Albert Einstein
It’s so weird that many scientists are abandoning God even when the most accomplished believed him.
@@SpaceDin0 "I no longer believed in the known God of the Bible, but rather in the mysterious God expressed in nature."- Albert Einstein. Many of the most brilliant scientists do believe in a god, but not the god of the common people, most of the atheist scientists you see are specifically against the casual believers religion and have no problem with Einstein's god. (If you are talking specifically about hawking he has said a lot of stupid things and isn't worth listening to outside of his area of expertise imo.)
@@Hhjhfu247
Pantheistic, not Atheism
@@Hhjhfu247 not atheism, He believes In God,but an impersonal God, and what do you mean by laws of physics, you do know that even christains, Judaism, Sikh also have the same notion of God right? Judaism call God the "law", Christians the "word", Sikh the "Ultimate light", They are all the same thing.
I think what fuels atheism is religious semantics, Most people oppose religion and what they drop into is atheism. It is kind of daft if you ask me. It is like "parenting", you realise that you do not like some ideas and practices of parenting, then you say "parenting" doesn't exist... kind of daft right?
For as long as I can remember I took both science and Christianity for granted, and in my mind neither contradicted the other. Philosophical as I am, once I became older and more aware I began to question both. But not once during my pondering have I been able to answer any of my questions. I believe that science and religion and philosophy and spirituality all have a lot in common, on that very fundamental level. Adhering to one thing over another is putting a most severe handicap on yourself.
Wow never thought I’d find someone with such a similar view as mine.
That is extremely fascinating! It seems to me that we must be multi perception of fingers instead of leaning on one course the other.
Science and religion shares one thing in common, and that is the quest for truth and how we relate to reality. Religion do it trough pure faith while science do it trough empirism and mathematics. The problem however is that they are two distinct frameworks that dosn't fit together to explain one cohherent image of reality. They have to be coupled in a new framework fusing science and religion together using logic which is the structure of truth which they both claim to consist of. They both consist of serious problems that must be adressed for this unification. Science explores the world using observations which are perceptual states and then models them using cognition. This major aspect of science is however not usually adressed and when cognition and concscioussnes is adressed, it is claimed to be an emergent result of particles and that our relation to reality is dualistic trough the mind-matter cartesian dualism. Since reality is one coherrent structure, mind can't be logically seperated from the rest of reality since this would break the necessary non-dualistic nature of reality. Reality is metaphysical since it has to define, process and configure itself since its self-contained, this means that there are certain aspects of it that cant directly be deduced from physics which includes conscioussnes, our relation to reality and the underlying structure necessary for reality to actualize itself. Religion on the other hand is faith based and its insights are oftenly not based on logic which is necessary for it to be considered a valid framework of truth. Since reality is the all encompassing set of things that exist, its an all knowing, all present and all seeing identity. Sounds familiar? Its the standard definition of God in religion and from the fact that reality is self-composed we can know that this must be true. Since science obviously corrosponds in some extent to the behaviour of physical processes taking place in reality, or more specifically, this universe, it also consist of some truth. Since both religion and science consist of truths they must be integrated into one model of reality while extending the methology of search for truth to also encompas logical deduction since all aspects of reality can't be directly observed but can still be known trough the implications of perception and cognition.
Hi Ultra. Thanks for these posts. Usually I'm just on YT looking for a debate, but I can really find none with your posts.
Good info, good insight and thanks for sharing. :-D
Oh I see. I have to look into this James Herold Smith then. Thanks for the info
Well said :)
Only question I am trying to figure out is if God got up and created the universe or the universe needed a God and appointed One. I have no doubts the universe alone is intelligent because I see gears when I look at solar systems doing their job, beautiful moving gears that are in time with one another. Chicken or the Egg? I know we have a God, I am just examining His work. Brilliant Architect He is. I refuse to believe humanity was an accident in Nature. To much symmetry to buy that
Actually, science has shown that the chicken was first - due to the discovery of a protien in the egg shell that can only come from a live chicken. Simple and makes sense I know, but even with this discovery ( that doesnt contradict the biblical creation belief) many still refuse to accept the bible. And even that was predicted by the bible - the bible says that the Gospel of Christ is foolishness to those that are perishing. Also, laminin is a recent discovery that puts the bible in a whole new light, incredible, make the biblical verse "in Him all things hold together". What a wonderful God we have :)
Beta chains are called "Lamb"
I just think that is odd with Jesus being called the Lamb for millennia now. I am pretty confident the Earth itself is intelligent because I see symmetry everywhere I look, even in things not rooted
Eric Reinhart the symmetry you observe was designed into the environment during creation. physical matter behaves according to a set of complex laws established at creation - so although the earth appears to have intelligence, it really is operating in accordance with complex laws the creator established at creation. however, the power to uphold matter and keep it functioning comes from God. like a tv, pre-assembled physical matter animated by constant energy flow. a very simplified analogy.
Eric Reinhart
the lamb reference is a symbolic foreshadowing of Jesus dying on the cross in our place for us while at the same time permitting the process of confession, repentance and forgivness of sin before Jesus' birth - so many many people could have thier sins forgiven, not just those after His death on the cross.
If there is a conscious fundament underlying the physical universe, it will clearly be far more subtle, elegant and sophisticated than any fantastical (and violent) Iron Age myths. It will make sense on an intellectual as well as an emotional level, much as Einstein describes it. Cheers.
Cheers! from the future
@@thelrdroca9412 Cheers! From the future
@@Tom-xb2ml 🤦🏻♂️
What do you mean “more subtle”? Look, you’re perception it God is between “God is a sky daddy” and between “God is not a dumb human like us”, you’re saying God has to be a more “elegant etc” but Why would God not be “someone” why do you see God as a robot, maybe this God is someone, as he is self sufficient and doesn’t need anyone or anything and doesn’t need to create, then why would he create in the first place ? I hope you get what I mean ; there is an answer, this God, is not a robot, and doesn’t create random things “out of boredom” as some braindead people would say. But out of love, creation is known as an attribute of love, love creates. But love towards who ? Towards irrational animals ? Or towards his own creation ? As if he is impressed by irrational creatures with no free-will that he himself did ? No, God as the Bible says “created us in his image” not physical, but spiritual, love and more, in orthodoxy there is something called a “nous” it’s a word Greek wich shows in what way we are in the image of God and how we can communicate with him and have rational consciousness and free will. God wouldn’t “forget” his creation as human does, and if God would crate something, as I showed before, then it should have a reason that isn’t a random one. So If God existed, then he would have sent a message or made a specific action, wich he did. The Incarnation and the holy scriptures
@@FireFox-oo4ge Bro said a whole lotta nothing
It was an interesting response, but he didn't answer her question lol.
Exactly
He did. God is another word for nature.
@@robnorwood3591 true2
He did answer her question by defining who God was to him as a theoretical physicist; just the same as Einstein did in his time.
I've seen a handful of comments of his about God (or, at least, what little us humans can comprehend of something like God), and it seems to me like his approach is something along the lines of agnosticism with a tendency towards pantheism.
Whatever the case, I'm just happy to hear a popular contemporary physicist talk about their approach to the question of God in such a unique way. It doesn't entirely match with my own (Methodist here), but I can't help but respect and appreciate his perspective. The universe is a big and strange place, and one of the things that I find so wonderful about it is that it always seems to give us a foundation to explore our most deep-seated questions, whether they be of a scientific, philosophical, or theological nature.
...Sorry if this comment is too long. Just felt a bit inspired is all 😅
Love that guy!
please respect him
Does anybody know where I can find the full version of this interview?
Kiki split the whole thing into TH-cam sized chunks years ago. It might be on a DV tape somewhere...
@@ThisWeekinScience should we ask god so that it be found whole again jkjkj
Wow. Kudos.
I believe in the infinite power of God to create. I find it hard to deny the physics of the universe as explained by science; however, I believe that even the most complex theories of physics are well within the capability of God to create. In short, God gave us the ability to develop the fields of physics, quantum mechanics etc.
Actually math and physics are the language of God, we are just slowly beginning to understand.
2:19 *shameless plug*
Hahahahahahha true!!
what? He contributed so that is why he is telling.
Nah! It added to the aesthetic.
HE MAKES SOOOO MUCH SENSE WHEN HE TALKS. 🤌🥺💓
Michio Kaku never disappointing you.
Also well said :)
Preach on, Brother Kaku!!!
He's not "preaching". He's just a scientist stating the opinions of other scientists.
@@ThinkTank255 Ok, wooden advocate.
@@ThinkTank255 Heath Ledger Joker: "Why soooo serious?"
You speak the truth my friend.
Really Great...♾️
One thing I like to think about the universe that makes it seem so far out in any direction of any thought is that maybe our universe is just one idea a single species have thought of and created. And out of the infinity amount of ideas that are out there, our universe is just one of them. Or maybe all the species that have ever lived and came together at the end of time, created the universe we see, and made it this way for a reason and it is the best idea they could ever dream of.
I know your comment is 10 years old but you seriously just blew my mind!! 🤯👍🏻💕
This man referenced Spinoza and the Philistines. Dude is so intelligent.
Alan. I laughed while reading your comment.
She looks up to him, as if he is her boyfriend or a father, so much passion in someone’s eyes is a sight to see
“In Him we live, move, and have our being” ( St. Paul)
@Harrison Ford will kill someone with his plane Huh? Thats what we call our homeboy Elohim in da getto. 'Him.
@Harrison Ford will kill someone with his plane From Elohim to Her? Eloher? Makes no sense but figures cuz u from da geto
Its actually an ancient greek text for Zeus but ok
@@user-jh5ur5ft1w Zeus, the one true god. Or is it Thor, or Apollo?
The only true god is Oprah
science cannot disprove god any more then obsolete organized religion can prove it
we have a winner!!
ThinkTank255
The truth is the truth even if no one believes it and a lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. Define evidence. Scientists and mathematicians will generally say that any possibility that is 10 to the 50th or greater is impossible. Do the math and you will see that this universe is indeed impossible without intelligent design and a creator who has always existed.
ThinkTank255 You're an idiot
Dae Han No, he's right. In the scientific method, nothing is accepted as truth until evidence can demonstrate it to be so. You don't need to prove a god to not exist if there is no evidence in the first place to demonstrate its existence.
The evidence is the wonder of the universe itself...
Science is amazing, all it is just the study of the INTELLIGENT DESIGN'S work...
Pbaylis1, which evidence are you referring to? The archaeology evidence or other evidence?
Yes, there is archaeological evidence, but I'm talking about more recent evidences. I offered a few above in response to allgoo19.
That's not evidence of a "God". In fact, ALL the supposed "evidence" we have for "God" is second, third, fourth, billionth hand testimonies of memes passed from one person to the next. Seems to me like you have a viral meme, not a "God".
Legends watching this after 12 years 😊
Love is the answer to all of our problems and the beauty of our souls will prevail....selfishness transmuted to selflessness....Until we all learn this lessons we keep coming back again and again. We are offered million of chances to smarten up until we eventually become love...
Love will keep us Alive 🎵🎵🎵
The Eagles.
nice how he evaded the question what he actually thinks by talking about Einstein i really should learn that trick
And just what exactly do you suggest with that advice?
True genius
I didn't really get an answer out of this. Not a straight yes or no. Still unanswered.
+Toby Royson There is no straight answer. You cannot disprove god! But everything seems to work without the assumption of a god.
Andrés Vélez I know. I don't like when it gets like that neither. Sometimes you can have a good discussion though.
You asked me what do I believe in...
I don't know exactly what I believe in, but after many years of wondering, about the answers people give to the universe and our existence, and learning about science, I think we can be pretty sure that people invented god, and not the other way around. That's why I call myself an atheist. Not because "we don't believe in anything", like many people like to say...
My turn :P... honestly, have you ever asked yourself why you are a chirstian, putting into perspective all we know about history, biology, psychology, physics, the age of the universe and of life?
+Toby Royson there is order in everything, from atoms to galaxies. Everything has a purpose and nothing is ever wasted. Does this sound like a system of random chaos? No, there is a force behind it all that humans can barely comprehend.
+Toby Royson It was pretty much a no on the bible bullshit. But that a pathetic concept of 'God', IMO.
research and read Spinosa, Einstein, Hawkins and form your own opinion...
Music to my ears , it's such a great time to identify as a child of God.
I like that.
I'm glad to see that you have done your homework! There are many stories from antiquity (different cultures & religions) that parallel the OT Stories, with only slight variations of the facts. All the more reason to believe that these events actually occurred! The God in the OT is not sadistic, according to today's definition. He was very strict, just as any good Father should be while trying to teach His (very immature & selfish) children how is behave properly.
Prof Kiku is a brave and beautiful human he understands physics is the only way to see into the mind of God and no math is required.
if we believe in nothing we then have an open heart and mind and question everything and then the universe in its own times gives us answers into itself. Do not be deceived by any ones belief seek for your self knowledge your heart will tell you, you know when you know, What god becomes then is part of you it is consciousness Life is precious free will the rarest thing in the universe. don't give it away by following the belief of others.
Coopracy or Chaos.
Tao of love passion and comedy That is a very powerful statement. Thank you for that.
an open mind and open heart makes one free ideology closes both hearts and minds and enslaves in belief rather live in wonder than doubt
Tao of love passion and comedy You actually failed to grasp it. There is no physics without mathematics. Physics is merely an approximative description of nature which is subject to our own perception. As such, physics will never be able to objectively describe "everything" (in and out of our own universe) without mathematics. Mathematics is the closest thing to ultimate truth that we have.
You should be careful not to confuse this statement however, we are clearly not just some weird equation and mathematics has nothing to do with those, but with connecting and describing things objectively. Unfortunately school and even university shines a wrong light on maths, thus even many mathematicians see it as just a toolbox of dry shit and not for what it actually is.
Maths is actually the only thing that objectively "frees" you up in the sense which you suggest, everything else is just the enslavement brought by our own perception.
+Tao of love passion and comedy Astute observation but I'd argue that math and physics are inseparable.
maths allows people to explain physics but physics is natural system math is observation accounted for
God created and set the laws of science in motion. God wills it.
This conception maintains a separation between creator and created. I think there is none. It is a continuum -- the spirit is matter. God is nature itself.
Evidence?
Amelia Hartman
None -- just a speculative thought.
thepenguin114 Well it's a horrendously absurd speculation. It presumes many things that have yet to even have a shred of evidence for, such as, "God" and "the spirit".
Bruce Wayne yes and no
You have much to learn.
I want to meet this man.
Science proves the existence of God. The beauty of life and everything is absolutely mind boggling and beautiful!! Stars, trees, water, planets, and humans and how complex we are!
This is so true!!!!! We need to Praise the one and only True god!!!!
Praise be the one and only true god!!!! Praise be the Magic Toe Nail!!!!! AMEN!!!!!!!!!
Scientists are smart enough to say they don't know anything.
Religionists think they do know everything.
And there's the difference.
+TacomaPaul science and religion can technically be the same thing. Why don't mainstream scientists study life after death? That seems like a pretty important question. They do not study it because the major religions of the world have already answered those questions.
b bb
They haven't *answered* anything.
+b bb Because there's nothing to measure or study in that regard.
The Anal Atheist how would you know, energy can be measured and studied, and it is not created or destroyed so the life force inside a person must go somewhere when they are dead
b bb
When a battery dies, where does that energy go ?
How much do we know about ourselves? How much do we know about our equations ? do our equations describe (create) the universe?
Exactly!
Kaku and Kiki sitting in a tree, K-I-S-S-I-N-G!
It is actually quite amazing that the totality of human experience can be boiled down to a simple set of equations..
Kaku is a contributor of String Field theory, which does have answers for black holes and physics in the Big Bang. He was probably referring to the theory of relativity and newtonian physics when he said physics can't describe it. Kaku has many videos on which he explains this, check Big Think.
sound ?
Just one thing (And mankind have not been given of knowledge except a little) (وما أوتيتم من العلم إلا قليلا) surah al-Isra [17:85]
The more you try to scientifically dig into the existence of God, the more you get lost and confused...God is spiritual.
It is until you believe(have faith) in his existence,sovereignty,and totality, you will understand who God truly his and how he works.
i'm sorry but that is simply none sense, If god is real then it doesn't matter what we believe, he'll be able to be demonstrated, but he isn't real. Gods and supernatural things are all just beliefs born out of superstition in ancient humans due to ignorance (understandably) but there's no evidence at all for a supernatural anything. If you care about what's true and your beliefs being in accordance with reality you'd say ''I don't know yet, but i'll follow the evidence''
@@nickydaviesnsdpharms3084 are you daft on purpose?
Since you can't observe Consciousness. Prove to me consciousness is real?
Where did the point come from?
Com que base voce diz isso?
I wonder if he could write an equation on Brexit?
Universe isn't chaotic
Dinosaurs:Yeahhhh...
Do you live in that era???
Hahahahahahahah
What a great question ? What an intellect asking ?
I would postulate that it was even some kind of a higher person, that we all once had a feeling for, in no particular religious doctrine of course. This phenomenon is observeable in people who are deprived of sensual input for a while. All of them come up with a feeling that "somebody" is there with them, that they are being watched.
I hate when people ask "well, if God created us, who created him." All that does is twist the concept of God. The whole idea of God is that he is the ultimate being. To say he has to have a creator is impractical if he is at the top. Since we are born and live then die we for some reason can't grasp the concept of eternity. We try to fit God in a human box and give him parents and grandparents and so on.
+daniel hudson "Never was there a time when I did not exist
nor you nor these lords of men." - Bhagavad Gita
exactly, we humans think that we can know everything but some stuff are beyond our mortal human brains to understand. if i told you to imagine different colors other than those that we see you wouldnt be able to do so but that doesnt mean that there are no other colors than what we see.
+Hunter Larkins the logic you used is like saying "why couldn't I have been George Washington" or "Why isn't Lil Wayne my dad." The concept of God is an eternal immortal being, meaning he has been there and will always be there and by asking who created him, you are attempting to strip his power from him and make him human. We are human, and we are mortal, and we are finite. We have to be created. God, however, is in his own plane of existance, which doesn't behave the same as ours. Take heaven and hell for example. Both are irrational unless you apply something more. Eternal fire and eternal light? Doesn't make sense. But then you apply the fact that time doesn't really exist in the realm of God and it works. Psalm 90:4 says "For a thousand years in your sight are like yesterday when it is past." the way I read that, it means God doesn't have to play by our rules, because our rules don't apply to him. To ask who came before God is implying that something or someone had to, which is irrational if you think of God as an immortal all powerful being. Also, in a place where no time exists (or behaves in a way we can't understand), how can there be chronological order (the way we can think of it)?
Also, if God didn't exist, I would be asking the same question of the big bang, which, being bound to time like we are, could not have just existed or created itself. Not saying it didn't happen, I'm saying if some being could simply say a word and the whole universe listened, that would look a little like an explosion as spacetime reacted to such a powerful entity. To say that this little ball of mass was always there and that dense is irrational because it is mass and is bound to time and the fact that it exploded when it did is weird to me. Why didn't it explode when it started existing? 'but it never started existing it just existed exactly.
You are absolutly right ! When people ask me who created God , I ask them , what sense would make to worship a creation ? Is The fact that GOD is uncreated that makes GOD worth to be worshiped. That HE is the creator of Everything. Its ridiculous Hoe people accept gravity , but denies the creator .
Hunter Larkins what is gravity ? Mr right ..
Men of religion, it is said, claim to have answers, while men of science only claim to have questions. This philosophy is often twisted to try to prove that God doesn't exist solely because science can't prove He exists. There are two problems here.
Firstly, the true point of science is to seek understanding - to pose questions, and answer them. Whatever is said about the philosophy of science, its purpose is to seek knowledge (in this case, the knowledge that the universe evolved naturally).
First of all, that’s one point, second, the nature of god is to have answers, answers that no one has, yet will continue to make up. The nature of science is to pose questions that further everyone.
@yanyan zhang Apparently, my 2014 self wrote the second point in a second comment :)
Just because we humans don't understand something, doesn't make it unknowable. We are an insignificant part of this planet, let alone the universe, yet some of us imagine ourselves as gods! I would hope any God capable of creating our reality would know enough about the place to correctly answer questions about it.
I am also cautious about saying questions posed by science stand to benefit everybody. That depends on who is posing which questions... and what is done with the answers!
I really don't get why you people say there is no "evidence", there is a lot of evidence for me every single day, I see the attributes in nature, I see the attributes in the universe, I see the attributes in the laws of the universe, I even see the attributes in Quantum physics/mechanism .... like what else do you guys what? What evidence do you guys want again?, you want the sky to fall as evidence? Like what else?. Even your dna is evidence, talkless of the variety of unique DNAs hosting life. I will never get you people. God is a spirit intertwined with the universe or the laws of the universe, is it too hard to grasp? .
Great scientist ...
The rythem of the universe!
PART 4: Now, before I ask my question, I’m going to say this: the only thing Kaku has done in his professional carreer is to write papers and publish textbooks, he never won a nobel prize and no paper that he ever published showed any great insight that helped the scientific community .. makes one think that there was a damn good reason why he left the field and became a science commentators (contd)
Most people don't win Nobel prizes or, if you really want to be pessimistic, offer any new insight. Same can be said about DeGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, and many other commentators, but seems only Michio Kaku gets constant flack on the interwebz.. Hmm I wonder why. I'm an Atheist by the way.
What have you done????
Who gives a f about the Nobel prize ?! This man is incredibily intelligent and has published his own theorys.
I will bet that he knows how to spell career.
If every scientist won a noble prize then we would already be living in Pluto.
Einstein probably had a hard time understanding god because he knew nothing of god. You dont say a prayer and it happens, you pray a prayer and believe it to be true. Good things happen to those who believe good things will happen, because people who believe good things will happen strive for those things to happen.
That is just disgusting and if that's true, your God is evil.
@@mugiwara-no-luffy shut up man.
@@David-jy7vh no, i will not shut up. what you're agreeing with is that God answers good people's prayers. those same prayers that are never answered by the poorest, must unfortunate people in the world implies that those people are not good and don't deserve their prayers heard.
Oh yeah Einstein wasn't as smart as you, my friend 😁
Dr. Mitchell Kaku has been searching for the God Equation, but what he should be searching for, is the “Expression of Internal Energy,” which creates momentum, represented by the physics formula Ep. The “God Expression” can be defined as Ep equaling everything. ~Guadalupe Guerra
the BIG BANG!
Ansgar Feicht
"Well I wonder where "God" woke up and who created him."
The definition of "god" is that it is not created. If you're asking what created god, then you're just implying the universe doesn't exist at all.
"I'm an Athiest, so I am willing to believe what's rational, and what's presented with evidence, or at least, possibility based around what we know of our surroundings (theories).So that cancels out religion instantly lol"
You answer your doubts yourself. that's weird. If I were you I would ask someone else to explain religion to me, because you don't seem to understand what religion is.
"If there was a "God", it could be a machine, a being, a bunch of beings, or just like string theory suggests.. music."
It's not "if there was" that you should yourself, because there is a god. And to think what kind of god is that, just disproves your concept of god. God isn't his creation, god isn't anything like you can think, he isn't a machine, for machines are created, he isn't just a "bunch of beings" or music. Because those things do not exist outside the universe.
"But what would have created this "God", where would it have come from?"
If it's not created there are only 2 explanations: 1) it created itself or 2) it was there all along. 1) if you don't exist you can't deice to create yourself, you're not in control. Just like when you're sleeping, you can't decide to wake up.
"Something would make up that God,"
If something made up that god, then that wouldn't be god. Instead, the thing that created god would become the new god.
"Which leaves me to believe that the world is purely scientific, random, and beautiful by nature (sometime ugly and destructive as well though, so that supports randomness)."
the universe is indeed scientific, but not only, because the definition of science is something that can only be proven with tangible evidences, without reason and logic. I would say more than scientific, the universe is reasoned and logical. You have to define what do you mean by random.
Gods name is not god.
Its YAHUAH.
Try eating a cloud on a hot summer day...very refreshing.
Interesting response to a multifaceted question.
Huh, I had no idea I could throw a ratio off a cliff. Amazing.
I could tell the lady was stuttering, probably because she's talking to a great person.
In Layman's terms, You will never figure it all out because you are not God!
@@ThinkTank255 From all religions, I think God is the creator of the universe and creatures. Besides, this universe has patterns that are so calculated and perfect. Some people argue that the patterns are not coincidences because someone designed them.
@@lukayaroslav9914 Arguing for something is worthless unless they can prove it.😉
@@FourDeuce01 Nature proves it. Cope.
@@ThinkTank255 have you changed your view since the 7 years ago you made this comment?
but who would you trust to tell you how we came into being, imperfec man, or a perfect and powerful being
Albert Einstein's religious views have been studied extensively. He said he believed in the "pantheistic" God of Baruch Spinoza, but not in a personal god, a belief he criticized. He also called himself an agnostic. Einstein used many labels to describe his religious views, including "agnostic", "religious nonbeliever" and a "pantheistic" believer in "Spinoza's God." Einstein expressed his skepticism regarding an anthropomorphic deity, often describing it as "naïve" and "childlike". He stated, "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem-the most important of all human problems."
On 24 April 1929, Einstein cabled Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein in German: "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind." He expanded on this in written answers he gave to a Japanese scholar on his views on science and religion, which appeared as a limited edition publication, on the occasion of Einstein's 50th birthday:
Scientific research can reduce superstition by encouraging people to think and view things in terms of cause and effect. Certain it is that a conviction, akin to religious feeling, of the rationality and intelligibility of the world lies behind all scientific work of a higher order... This firm belief, a belief bound up with a deep feeling, in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God. In common parlance this may be described as "pantheistic" (Spinoza).
In a letter to Beatrice Frohlich, 17 December 1952 Einstein stated, "The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naïve." Eric Gutkind sent a copy of his book "Choose Life: The Biblical Call To Revolt" to Einstein in 1954. Einstein sent Gutkind a letter in response and wrote, "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text."
On the question of an afterlife Einstein stated to a Baptist pastor, "I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it." This sentiment was also expressed in Einstein's The World as I See It, stating: "I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the type of which we are conscious in ourselves. An individual who should survive his physical death is also beyond my comprehension, nor do I wish it otherwise; such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls. Enough for me the mystery of the eternity of life, and the inkling of the marvellous structure of reality, together with the single-hearted endeavour to comprehend a portion, be it never so tiny, of the reason that manifests itself in nature."
On 22 March 1954 Einstein received a letter from Joseph Dispentiere, an Italian immigrant who had worked as an experimental machinist in New Jersey. Dispentiere had declared himself an atheist and was disappointed by a news report which had cast Einstein as conventionally religious. Einstein replied on 24 March 1954:
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
In 1945 Guy Raner, Jr. wrote a letter to Einstein, asking him if it was true that a Jesuit priest had caused Einstein to convert from atheism. Einstein replied, "I have never talked to a Jesuit priest in my life and I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist. ... It is always misleading to use anthropomorphical concepts in dealing with things outside the human sphere-childish analogies. We have to admire in humility the beautiful harmony of the structure of this world-as far as we can grasp it, and that is all."
In a 1950 letter to M. Berkowitz, Einstein stated that "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."
Einstein was a Humanist and a supporter of the Ethical Culture movement. He served on the advisory board of the First Humanist Society of New York. "The foundation of morality should not be made dependent on myth nor tied to any authority lest doubt about the myth or about the legitimacy of the authority imperil the foundation of sound judgment and action." "I do not believe that a man should be restrained in his daily actions by being afraid of punishment after death or that he should do things only because in this way he will be rewarded after he dies. This does not make sense. The proper guidance during the life of a man should be the weight that he puts upon ethics and the amount of consideration that he has for others." "I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation."
It was made to our liking purposely. We are cared for in His creation. Protected. Provided for... so, ya. I disagree with Einstein on that. We are a part of His plan, unlike anything else.
I like how she's pretending to know what's Michio talking about
😂
She is a Dr. Kirsten Sanford. Google her. She understood every single word and more, you sexist asshole
@@GauravSharma2106 He said absolutely nothing that would make one think that he's sexist.
@@joeslacker1020 And I saw nothing in Dr. Sanford's reaction that indicates that she is "pretending" to understand. The reason why I called out ArrowOfLonging's sexism (unlike you, I will not assume that this commenter is a male) is because countless times female interviewers are mocked for not being bright interviewers. This recurring sexism happens on business/finance/sports news channels all the time.
I know I will not change your opinion. These things never happen on TH-cam comments. So I will not engage further and waste my time. Hope you introspect.
@@GauravSharma2106 Makes some good sense. However, you're right -- my statement still stands that (that person*) has said nothing to indicate that they are sexist, so you won't change my opinion. As you have said nothing to make me think otherwise. You reacted off an assumption as I have when I stated that 'it' was a male. I made a mistake sure, but, you were quick to assume what someone was thinking. This may be an accurate thing provided we can see their body language or how they say something. But, this is not the case, now is it? Obviously MOST of the time we cannot tell how someone is saying something over an internet text comment. As well as we quite simply cannot tell what they are thinking when making that comment, especially.
Thanks for the vocab lesson, however. I need to look up that word (introspect).
"I've always had two parts of my brain that were in constant warfare with eachother." - Michio Kaku - Closer to The Truth Video Interview...
The Apostle Paul speaking about the inner duality warfare of man - Romans 7:22-25 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!
Nicely put. Indeed most people do feel the need for that type of hope, I'm not one of those, I am completely happy and I don't feel the need for a higher being but there are those who do need it.
While criticizing quantum mechanics, Einstein once said, "I do not believe that God plays dice with the universe." He meant that God is not a being who plays uncertain gambles with humans and the universe. It is also evident from his statement that Einstein believed in a rational God. He was even once asked, 'What do you believe about God?', he said, 'What I believe is that the universe is so wonderful that only God could have created it.' Another of his famous quotes about God is, 'God is subtle but He is not malicious.'
Secondly, we have the fact that in no way can science actually prove whether or not God, or anything, exists. So it no longer becomes a question of science, but of philosophy. Adhering to science should have absolutely no influence on your views of religion, as religion is purely a matter of philosophy.
Many people such as yourself choose to believe that no God exists, but by whatever means you came to this decision, it was not by means of science.
How on earth can you assert that Science cannot prove that there is or isn't a God?
Bravo
Jack Kraken How on earth can you assert that science can prove that there is or isn’t a God?
@@muadsaleh1061 I don't assert it can. But I simply ask how do you know it can't? My reasoning stems how we didn't know about many things in the past that over time were explained pretty well through science, but before that time many would have never thought that we would know it. so like that maybe at some point we will know enough about our universe to make that conclusion. I'm not saying its the job of science to do so, but in discovering the truth about our world, we may inevitably know something about how it was creator and if it had a creator.
The burden of proof is the person who claims that there is a god. Scientists don't need to disprove God the same way they don't need to disprove Santa Claus. The burden of proof is not on the scientists!
"The word God is the product of human weakness" - Albert Einstein, Jan 1954
www.lettersofnote.com/2009/10/word-god-is-product-of-human-weakness.html
I am beginning to feel like classifying Michio Kaku in the same category as *****
When you escape matter and/or energy you will see what God looks like. Of course human weakness can exist, but the existence of God is real.God created energy and matter, as any body can understand God is not made of matter or energy. God is something like you understand nothing.
Actually we have blurred understanding (view) of nothing.Right?
Albert Einstein was an extremely spiritual person, probably more so than Kaku. He was not however religious and that letter makes reference to that fact. He definitely did not believe in the God of the bible, which is exactly what Michio Kaku is saying. I think Einstein and Kaku are basically on the same page on this subject.
I hope you don't really believe that last sentence...
God n all we kn
He sound like exactly like David henry hwang
God is every where, and it is not a kind of matter, and we cannot track it up there. Right?
Unicorns are every where, but they're not a kind of matter and we can't track them in the rainbow. Right?
Mike Mazinsky Wrong. Unicorns didn't create the universe Mike
Harry Jones
Says you son, I believe they did so it must be true
Mike Mazinsky
God is suppose to be the source of life and intelligence so that's really a strawman argument.
But he's right, it depends on what you define as "God". In pantheism "God" is the entire cosmos. In christianity God is suppose to be that which was, is, and ever shall be. What was, is, and ever shall be from a purely scientific perspective? The universe! So you see where the logic of pantheism comes from.
Asserting that life and intelligence sprang forth accidentally from a dumb, stupid, and dead universe is just as silly as when Descartes asserted that "I think therefore I exist". When it's obvious that only because you exist you are capable of thinking.
So the life and intelligence needs and creator; a source.
The laws of physics is like java-script. It didn't invent itself.
dab0331 Well maybe unicorns did exist
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/11/141112-unicorn-deer-slovenia-antlers-science-animals/
Maybe they still do?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_rhinoceros
If someone created God then he won’t be called God
Nice logic.
I hope u r just a kid or you were stoned
@Bubbha 1 And how did you come to that conclusion??
@@gdobie1west988 this "conclusion" must be the most reliable truth. Do you think everything is confined in one dimension and in time? Reality is way scarier and weirder than humanity can think of.
@@danyalajmal2715 Ok, and you know this how?? It may be true, not sure. Nobody knows what comes after death, we can only hope for the best.
Gdobie1 West because everything in our universe is within the space-time continuum and therefore cannot be truly eternal. However, whatever is outside the space-time continuum, such as a creator, could theoretically be eternal and is beyond human comprehension. Your mind cannot truly imagine something timeless and spaceless. The second you start to try to imagine something timeless, for example, you are imaging time and that is not timeless.
he'd still be an engineer
not in profession, but he still has the knowledge and experience he acquired as an engineer
there are only few professions you can truly give up and say: that's not me anymore
There is nothing like good