Sir Roger Penrose on Consciousness and New Physics (Part 3) | Closer To Truth Chats
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- Sir Roger Penrose joins Closer To Truth to discuss consciousness and new physics. Can the known laws of physics explain consciousness? Can the mind be duplicated by a computer? What is the argument against Strong A.I.? What is consciousness and how does it relate to Penrose's Search for a Missing Science of Consciousness? And what are the implications of a New Science of Consciousness for the Three-World Model of Physical, Mental, and Platonic?
Part 1 - • Roger Penrose on Mathe...
Part 2 - • Roger Penrose on Space...
See more interviews with Sir Roger Penrose: bit.ly/3UvbYkw
Sir Roger Penrose is a mathematical physicist and philosopher. He is the Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the Mathematical Institute of the University of Oxford, as well as an Emeritus Fellow of Wadham College. He is a Nobel laureate for “the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity”.
Register for free at closertotruth.com for subscriber-only exclusives: closertotruth....
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and produced and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
The calibre of the guests on CTT is complemented by the quality of Kuhn's interviewing.
Yes, but please get Roger a decent quality microphone.
Please tell Rodger that he can do it! My mother lived until 107 years! And at 95 we could still debate political viewpoints. :))
Consciousness gives creatures the ability to plan, ie attempt to predict to future. Consciousness rides the Schrodinger wave to imagine possible futures.
My hunch is that consciousness is created by the neurons when they create brain waves like musical instruments create sounds in an orchestra. These brain waves are the "music" that the brain produces and that we call "consciousness" - it's this rhytmic, democratic contribution of the neurons that gives rise to consciousness.
From the explanations provided by Prof penrose, a few other conclusions can be derived here,as the followings:
Microtubial coherence effect could be originated by some kind of crystaline vibration ,to initiate the process,and also a new analogy in between the creation of a state of resonance,specialy once it is explained here there are active symmetrical elements working at two higher and lower levels of may be frequency and vibrations,what could be also associated with microscopic sw energy,having a direct role in the entire operation of creating a super position phenomena,in within the brain structure,which can also be incorporated with the existance and creation of tiny black holes,with holding vast amounts of informations and memories at their surfaces,which can be recalled and get access to via the selective method of taping into the archives of stored informations,and it all looks very much a alologeous to what could also explain the theory of everything,which its actual mechanism also most certainly not only envolves the application of sw as the main carrier and intermediate wave in action also justifying the mechanisms for the quantum mechanics entanglement ,also working as the spooky hidden variable in action as Prof Einstein put it,and the whole package seemingly anologeous and identical in basic principles of operations and mechanisms,in otherwords what happens in space in terms of action of eather,or interconnection of all different
elements of informations and datas all taking place almost instantaneously and simultaneously,with sw is the main
contrubuting factor being active and in operation ,a replica operation of the same mechanisms, could well be what actualy takes place in within the brain structure,in otherwords,the human consciousness and universal consciousness seemingly could have extremely similar mechanisms of action,and further details simply can follow by further studies into different hypothetical mechanisms of consciousness also associated with creation of an alternative dimensional media,where huge and unlimited amounts of datas and informations could be stored
And also an empowered state of quantum superposition ,where physical muscles may come into action,and again the derivation of material from the fabric of dark matter and dark energy from within the emty space,these are the topic technologies in action which could be active to explain the ongoing mechanisms and also analogies In between the universal and human brain consciousness, as well as supper human brain qualities such as telekinitics,
Or , resonance cooperated coherence operations of brain mucrotubilulars creating and magnifying the collapse of waveforms phenomenas,also in cooperated with actions of crystaline structures at the surface of the pinial gland once activated,decalsified and operational,
Which again Could function having an active role to higher the levels of amplification and magnification needed for the collapse of waveforms. ,once applied to the pinial gland,
Hence from the said above ,also the basic hypothesises for interconnection in between spirituality and materialism,as well as possible extraction of materials derivatives from empty space ,and the mechanisms for the universal and human brain consciousness basic principles have been hypothesised.
Penrose relies on noncommutativity. Study noncommutativity to find out the answer. thanks
To utube,
Why my access to my uploaded articles are deleted,and why my uploads cant be viewed on my utube page?
@@sohraballahyari2396 your youtube channel has nothing on it. Just so you know.
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 I mean my comments must be accessible to me and also contents protected,
Free will might be the advantage of consciousness. I can’t imagine any other reason the brain would spend precious resources maintaining consciousness other than if it provided free will
Agreed, free will is possible; though most humans struggle to attain free will. There is limited space for free will to take place - free requires consciousness.
He's only got one eye??! Wow I'd never have guessed
For coonsciesnes we need at least two pairs of subject like humans in a susy multiverse connected by entanglement. See John Cramer .an benjamin Libet on Q.FFF THEORY. NO MICROTUBULARS NEEDED.
dogs are 100% conscious!
26:20 yeah 100% that the two thief irrational apes have coordinated between themselves)
it is about how consciousness type one is triggered by an action,……etc
Qualities cannot be generated out of Quantities WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO STOMACH? You could lock in a room for eternity the universes best mathematicians and they will never generate qualities from quantities:)
Conscious beings only come from conscious beings. Now follow that all the way backwards.
You have a chicken and the egg problem with what created helium the stars to fuse it or the hydrogen that became stars
According to who? You?
@@rohin1432 Intelligence did. God. God is described in the Bible as the Alpha and the Omega. As I AM. Meaning he didn’t have a beginning. He’s ALWAYS existed therefore He doesn’t need a cause. You need an ultimate reality from which EVERYTHING comes or you’ll get into an infinite regress. The ultimate reality is God.
@@wthomas5697 it’s called logic
That’s the opposite of logic😂. Nice try. That’s known as “belief”. And to quote Fran Leibovitz “I don’t believe in anything that you have to ‘believe’ in”. For all the obvious reasons.
Sir Roger is a national treasure.
A world one!
I don't quite see why Kuhn said that ORCH OR doesn't articulate with Idealism?:
If you define Idealism as "Consciousness causes the Cosmos and is Everything" then I dare say Penrose-Hameroff Theory is precisely Idealistic (it's just NOT subjective Idealism)! It's NO Deepak Chopra Woo Woo on the contrary it is just as physicalist and common sense as loophole Free Bell Tests allow us to believe. It is Idealism or may be articulated as Idealist creed it's just that because consciousness causes the Cosmos it DOESN'T mean that it's "human consciousness" that does it. And unlike in Donald Hoffmans philosophy it's not unreasonable if Objective Reduction is correct to suppose that the Laws of Physics are the same for all beings no matter how different from humans in the Universe.
I don't quite understand people like Bernardo Kastrups followers:
They are biting Sir Roger Penrose just as bad as Tegmark people.
Why don't they understand that Orch Or is precisely what Kastrup teaches but just unlike his teachings gives you meaning in the world that can be explored independent of human consciousness and were are ways to objectively confirm that you are not Solitarily mind and that there are solid pieces of reality that no one questions! Not to mention that although I don't know why people came to associate Berkeley's Idealism with things like Telepathy or synchronicities... Copenhagen nor Relational QM that Kastrup proposed gives you no possibility of such things Unlike Objective Collapse with Wave Function being real physical object.
At last not only does Penrose-Hameroff Theory if correct falsify Simulation on any conceivable device (Quantum or clasical alike), but if CCC is correct it also potentially may refute more sophisticated versions of "Simulation Hypothesis" such as Universe being created in a "Black Hole computer".
1 Indirect Discovery of Hawking Radiation in 2019 already undermined this possibility and 2 even before that observations of Back Holes didn't quite fit Lee Smolins predictions..
3 Lee Smolins Cosmology assumes that Einsteins GR is an ultimate description of Black Holes with it's Singularity and White Hole reverse. But the very idea of Singularity pooping supposedy at Big Bang and in Black Holes mamy be just a coincidence and misunderstanding of some deeper Theory.
Anyway Sir Roger Penrose is the greatest mind alive!
@@alexanderpeca7080
Sir Roger Penrose is the Greatest Mind Alive (if not of all the human history so far)!
Universe is without Beginning nor End , Non-local yet Real yet driver by Consciousness! And Microtubules in Our Brains give us Consciousness descending out of Platonic Realm linking us with Each other!
@@jimmyjasi- protoconsciousness is noncommutative math
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 Well I'm agnostic. But how does this relate to FTL Non-locality and Relativity /Quantum problems?
He is an international treasure. He is modest and humble, but he has a lot more to say . I hope he lives for many years to come to enlighten us more and more
I'd love to peruse both of those bookshelves!
Can y’all believe this man is 91 years old?
not really but at same the same time their is scope for the extraordinary ,its a blessing as far as i am concerned Roger is here and i hope this remains the case for as long as healthily possible
Such a pleasure to have the two of you engaging each other for 35 minutes!
How do you follow that backwards?
It would be surprising if human beings, who are capable of contemplating both the quantum and the cosmic, and whose life is lived almost exactly midway between these two, did not have a selfhood that also participated somehow in the entire spectrum of existence. It would be strange if our consciousness were entirely uninvolved in the quantum world. How do we "understand" the universe if not by feeling a resonance with it within our selves? Is not selfhood a prerequisite for consciousness? A computer cannot make an autonomous decision as to the "rightness" of a solution without a self-interested agent programming into it the criterion for success. A computer cannot direct the process of scientific research, because it has no autonomy, no self.
Except 'self' is a construct in consciousness. If you examine it and break it apart, there's nothing there.
Awareness is your ultimate essence, and it does nothing in and of itself but is everpresent and unchanging.
You can't examine it because the examiner is within it. Advaita Vedanta covers the subtle distinctions of existence in more detail than 99% of humanity will ever bother to learn
I suspect AI will be able to exhibit behaviors perfectly mimicking those behaviors we associate with "selves" within the next few decades, if not within this decade.
Makes me wonder: Will they automatically become conscious, or what? 🤔
Wtf is wrong with this „Amin Omar" guy, spamming the comment section with his aggressive nonsense?
I am guessing he is a sad lonely fellow looking for a virtual hug. Somebody give that poor guy a hug.
I love to listen to Roger's ideas ❤️ more power to our (truly) smart ppl
“Consciousness is an ingredient of understanding “ , I liked that
That makes no sense. It is consciousness that makes understanding possible.
Nothing is doing the understanding otherwise.
@@yourlogicalnightmare1014 Tell us more. You seem to have figured it out!
@@yourlogicalnightmare1014 Living up to your name again I see. SMH
@@tomjackson7755
You're welcome to embarrass yourself again Tommie. You couldn't even understand my last post, conflating a critique of the video title with a critique of the content of the video 😄👍
@@yourlogicalnightmare1014 That's funny. What last post are you talking about? I am talking about how you embarrassed yourself with your total misunderstanding and complete lack of logic in this thread.
Why doesn't this channel have more than 10 million subscribers?
People are too busy watching reruns of The Kardashians, and talking about what Tom Cruise had for lunch last week.
I didn't like Penrose's book; still vague: assumptions, conjectures, and sophistry; bandying about words only vaguely understaood by everyone, as Penrose himself admits; I suppose one has to start somewhere? I'm still sceptical about "collaps of the wave function" and micro-tubules;
Hegel- consciousness is Spirit becoming God (cosmos)
Robert questions why the collapse of the wave function "causes" consciousness in biological systems whereas it does not in inorganic matter. Or, does it? If we have a layer of abstraction below the physical world, call it "awareness", we can imagine how such world emerges from awareness, not the other way around. This has been suggested and studied by Dean Radin and Don Hoffman in Closer to Truth, among others.
In the cerebellum, I venture, awareness causes control of the human body, for instance in babies, which is then analyzed and understood (in the Penrose sense of the word), "maturing" into consciousness.
If this process is keyed off gravity, as Sir Roger Penrose ventures, it must be tied to evolution, which requires, most of all, the existence of time. Physics needs to work seriously on time. It has plenty to say about space but reduces time as a unidirectional and linear pseudo dimension of space, and that's not it! Time is cyclical, as marked by the movements of the celestial bodies. Time and gravity cause evolution by generating diversity (Dyson's words), over the multiple "incantations" of our universe, following something akin to Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology.
What about the idea that it's all an appearance in consciousness?
@@dare-er7sw Yes, that is a "logical" conclusion if one insists on the emergence of consciousness, because the empirical data punches many holes through that theory. Thus, a way to concile the data is simply to dismiss consciousness. I urge you to find a presentation (complete) by Prof. Donald Hoffman to see the evolutionary evidence that consciousness (or, rather, awareness) is everywhere.
They are just saying that complex life evolves out of the microtubules with the tubulin enabling quantum coherence that "delays" the collapse of the wavefunction, thereby creating Sentient Consciousness instead of protoconsciousness. The rest of matter still has protoconsciousness since all matter is made of light. thanks
In a non-creepy way I want to what Roger's dreams look like!
Conscious in in 100% anti-correlation with unconscious. Deal with it and ditch this ultra-discriminative word. And always improve your health and live in absolute anarchy
Thank you, Sir Roger Penrose !
In the early days of Evolution that is how they found things. Sensory breathing and living. Human collectively has changed so much since then, now it is about technology? Birds don't go to college to make nest and lay eggs let alone "the skill" of warming it up! 🤣
If the universe always existed, then consciousness always existed.
Key understand phich though Universe are conscieness has roses two questions . One conscieness are unpredicted figuret out reality lack math phich proceedings . Secound conscieness keep out true evidence when observation phich reality.
Comprehension and computation are quite different.
Let’s hear Sabine Hossenfelder and Roger discuss this
Roger Penrose has a Nobel Prize. Sabine Hossenfelder is a youtuber. They just are not comparable. Sorry. Although I do agree that Truth is a Popularity Contest on the interwebs.
Roger not shows definitive conscieness principles? No he figuret out conscieness are blur evidence.
Amazing person. True brilliant mind.
Just watched all three parts with Sir Roger, wonderful, I learn so much every chance I get to know this good man, this great teacher & theorist. 🙏 Can't wait for the 100th birthday interview!
These are all interesting views, but here’s my take. First off, let’s define consciousness. I view it as being unified subjective qualitative experience. It’s the awareness that “the lights are on” from the inner perspective of an agent.
My view is that consciousness is fundamental, irreducible, and metaphysically simple for the following reasons.
Consciousness cannot be an emergent property that arises intrinsically from neurons themselves or from the propagation of action potentials amongst the vastly complex neural networks in the brain.
If it were an emergent property, than it would be rational to conclude that it would be ontologically epiphenomenal, thus being incongruent with the indisputable fact that we have knowledge of our consciousness and thus, are able to share its qualitative contents with other agents.
We have epistemic access to our own consciousness and to imply that it is a phenomenal emergent property, would require top-down causation which we have no evidence for in the natural world. A simple analogy for epiphenomenalism is how an emergent property, the color red from an apple, has no causal influence over the chemical composition that gives rise to it. The color red is an “effect” of the atoms that the Apple is composed of. A higher level “effect” cannot “affect” lower levels of structure in any material quantity or process we observe in nature.
Moving onwards, consciousness cannot be identical to brain states, or by extension, the neuronal correlates of consciousness. According to the Law of Identity, two quantities can be identical, if and only if, they share the exact same properties. To showcase how mental events are ontologically distinct from neuronal events, one can consider statements or beliefs that we view as being either true or false. If I think of something as being true, it’s correlated neuronal states are not representative of being “true” by themselves. If I subjectively experience the rich and sweet taste of vanilla ice cream, there is no associated brain state that can match up with the mental, qualitative experience of taste. It is a category error to equate mental states to neuronal states because the two are of separate ontologies. Material quantities cannot be representative of other qualities simply by themselves. A conscious mind is required to ascribe a relational, semantical meaning to a physical quantity.
Despite a wealth of empirical evidence that showcases material causation on conscious perceptions such as color, sound, and tactility, it is hasty to rule out a causative role for consciousness on material quantities. We, and by extension, our brains have knowledge of the existence of consciousness, which should dispel any epiphenomenal claims that consciousness is an emergent property with no causal power.
Moving onwards, consciousness is intrinsically intertwined with intentionality and semantics. The very relational aspect it ascribes towards certain subjects, forms the core of its ontology.
Consciousness cannot be an intrinsic or emergent property of computation. Computation deals solely within the domain of algorithms. Put simply, a computation matches an input to an output in accordance to an algorithm. In other words, computation is involved with the manipulation of syntax, not semantics.
Intellection, which can be described as the ability to comprehend abstract concepts such as mathematics, morality, and beauty, requires a distinct and separate ontology that is not congruent within the tenets of computation.
Regardless of how complex an artificial intelligence program becomes, it will never possess the qualities of intellection as it can only deal with syntax, not semantics. A good philosophical thought experiment showcasing how computation is incompatible with intellection is John Searle’s “Chinese Room.” An individual who does not speak or understand a single word of Chinese is placed inside an isolated room with many filing cabinets labeled with foreign Chinese characters. The only connection between him and the external world is through a small slit which another person can use to deliver papers with various Chinese symbols written on it and instructions on which filing cabinet symbols to match them with. After several hours of matching corresponding Chinese symbols from the filing cabinets to the symbols inserted in the room from the slit, the person inside the room slides the finished arrangements outside through the slit and the people outside start becoming convinced that the person inside the room is gaining a true semantical understanding of Chinese. Despite several months of manipulating syntax through the form of Chinese symbols, the person inside the Chinese Room does not gain a true comprehension of the semantics underlying the Chinese language. Thus, computation, being the matching of an input (Chinese symbols from the slit) to an output (filing cabinet Chinese symbols) in accordance with an algorithm (instructions on how to match the symbols in a language the person inside the room has semantical understanding of) showcases how computation is not ontologically equipped for semantics. No matter how good the person inside the Chinese room gets at executing the instructions on matching Chinese symbols, he will never gain a semantical understanding of Chinese.
This thought experiment can be applied to any biological or non-biological computational apparatus, such as neuronal circuits and silicon-based integrated circuits.
Thus, it is rational to conclude that the attribution of a relational quality to a given object/subject requires a non-computational entity to do so.
This is what I view as being the core function of consciousness.
Assuming the existence of conscious agents beyond one’s own subjective experience and avoiding any solipsistic notions, humans and other animals could have been non-conscious biological automata carrying out virtually identically tasks to their conscious counterparts. There is no reasonable evolutionary advantage for a complex multicellular organism to be conscious and comprehend semantics, although it does not mean that there necessarily has to be.
But, to state that consciousness itself evolved over the course of our evolutionary history seems to be at odds with its non-computational ontology. If consciousness is fundamental, irreducible, and metaphysically simple, it cannot be quantified, thus making its evolution over time seem rather implausible. Although you can increase or decrease the number of qualitative experiences being experienced by a conscious observer, such as through the evolution of new sensory organs, it does nothing to explain the ontological evolution of consciousness itself.
In conclusion, I think that it is a category mistake to label consciousness as an emergent property of the brain, as doing so would lead to an incongruent notion of epiphenomenalism, which contradicts our common sense, subjective notion of having knowledge of its own existence.
To claim phenomenal emergent consciousness, would indicate top-down causation which we have no evidence for existing in nature.
In addition, equating conscious states with brain states is equally as fallacious, since it fails to address how neurons themselves equate to semantical states of intellection or how computation enacted within the substrates of biological neuronal networks is compatible with semantics.
Computation itself is insufficient for explaining how abstract contents that possess relational attributes other than themselves ie. intentionality, can be encoded in individual neurons and their myriad of connections. As I’ve stated previously, computation involves the manipulation of syntax. It is not ontologically equipped for semantics.
As preposterous as this may sound, I believe that there may exist a fundamental mental reality that is abundant with semantic attributes that cannot be reduced to physical attributes. It’s as if mental attributes such as qualia, and abstract concepts seem to “wrap themselves” around physical substrates, such as neurons in the case of humans and other animals in some incomprehensible, non-spatial manner, whenever we see correlated neural activity in the cerebral cortex.
I acknowledge that the onus of proof falls upon me to be able to empirically validate this claim, in addition to addressing a bi-directional causal mechanism that can account for communication between the mental and the physical substrates, such as neurons. However, given my reasons for why consciousness is non-emergent, non-computational, and not equated with neurons and their connections, I remain unconvinced by materialist philosophical scenarios that can account for addressing the mind-body problem.
I find myself at a cross roads between substance-dualism and idealism. Either the mental realm and the physical realm are two separate ontological entities that interact with each other in some way that we have not yet discovered, or it is the case that consciousness is fundamental and “physical reality” as we know it is derivative.
The consciousness need not be epiphenominal, in the sense that there are physical/behavioral outcomes that are only achievable by creating a physical state that entails a corresponding experience… But I agree we need to add some kind of fundamental mental variable to existing physical theory: I agree there’s no way to derive or “emerge” experience from non-mental physical variables like mass, charge, position and velocity.
So I think we can still entertain a dual-aspect monism rather than resorting to the idea that the mind is not related to the brain, which is really not supportable.
So far I haven’t addressed how these physical states with mental properties are “about” other things-I.e. intentionality. I think they appear to refer to outside things by referring to different aspects of their own internal representation; and because we ground our internal model on sensory inputs it usually agrees with others’ internal model enough that we can communicate and agree about empirical results and the ‘real’ world. I don’t think this pushes us all the way to idealism but may be consistent with it.
Step one ---> Steal underpants.
Step two ---> Something to do with consciousness.
Step three---> Create Grand Unified Theory
Consciousness is that which causes the initial collapse of the quantum wave function which causes the universe to manifest. It is pure subjectivity-Isness awareness, not subject to being seen, known, studied, or objectified in any way. The primordial “I.”
Like if i could put the consciouscess of an insect into the internet of the earth. Then the earth would be a supercomputational insect in space which would be aware of itself. Far out scifi man.
why human could define "beauty vs ugliness"
Robert ! What happened to your nice frizzy Albert Einstein hair ?? This look does not suit you !!
Brain - Mind
-----
Our brain works on a dualistic basis:
usually consciousness and rarely subconsciousness.
------
1 - Consciousness of the brain works on various
electromagnetic energy fields (alpha, beta, . . . etc.)
An electroencephalogram (EEG) can record this ''normal logical'' electrical
activity of the brain (brain works as computer - "Turing Machine")
2 - Subconsciousness is process on micro-quantum-level
(brain suddenly takes a new decision / action - "eureka")
The reason of unconscious process is quantum particle .
Suggestion:
According to the Pauli Exclusion Principle, only one (1) electron
can manage an atom, molecule, cell, brain.
-----
a) Quantum process appears when all atoms of brain are
in Bose-Einstein state (superfluidity).
b) Then the electron gains strength to ''superconductivity'' and
can change the old brain's program to a new decision - "eureka".
New decision is result of - a "Self-quantum particle".
c) After a short moment- "eureka" the brain again works like a computer.
(but according to a new program)
d) In the brain Quantum mechanics is connected with the unconscious process.
=====.
''The laws of quantum mechanics itself cannot be formulated ...
without recourse to the concept of consciousness.''
- Eugene Wigner
#
Book: ‘'The Holographic Universe’'
''Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be the brain
that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness that creates
the appearance of the brain''
/ page 160, by Michael Talbot /
#
“… Indeed an understanding of psi phenomena and of
consciousness must provide the basis of an improved
understanding of quantum mechanics. ”
/ Evan Walker /
======.
My consciousness is little more than bad memories and worries. Sleep is a relief.
I don't quite see why Kuhn said that ORCH OR doesn't articulate with Idealism?:
If you define Idealism as "Consciousness causes the Cosmos and is Everything" then I dare say Penrose-Hameroff Theory is precisely Idealistic (it's just NOT subjective Idealism)! It's NO Deepak Chopra Woo Woo on the contrary it is just as physicalist and common sense as loophole Free Bell Tests allow us to believe. It is Idealism or may be articulated as Idealist creed it's just that because consciousness causes the Cosmos it DOESN'T mean that it's "human consciousness" that does it. And unlike in Donald Hoffmans philosophy it's not unreasonable if Objective Reduction is correct to suppose that the Laws of Physics are the same for all beings no matter how different from humans in the Universe.
I don't quite understand people like Bernardo Kastrups followers:
They are biting Sir Roger Penrose just as bad as Tegmark people.
Why don't they understand that Orch Or is precisely what Kastrup teaches but just unlike his teachings gives you meaning in the world that can be explored independent of human consciousness and were are ways to objectively confirm that you are not Solitarily mind and that there are solid pieces of reality that no one questions! Not to mention that although I don't know why people came to associate Berkeley's Idealism with things like Telepathy or synchronicities... Copenhagen nor Relational QM that Kastrup proposed gives you no possibility of such things Unlike Objective Collapse with Wave Function being real physical object.
At last not only does Penrose-Hameroff Theory if correct falsify Simulation on any conceivable device (Quantum or clasical alike), but if CCC is correct it also potentially may refute more sophisticated versions of "Simulation Hypothesis" such as Universe being created in a "Black Hole computer".
1 Indirect Discovery of Hawking Radiation in 2019 already undermined this possibility and 2 even before that observations of Back Holes didn't quite fit Lee Smolins predictions..
3 Lee Smolins Cosmology assumes that Einsteins GR is an ultimate description of Black Holes with it's Singularity and White Hole reverse. But the very idea of Singularity pooping supposedy at Big Bang and in Black Holes mamy be just a coincidence and misunderstanding of some deeper Theory.
Anyway Sir Roger Penrose is the greatest mind alive!
Consciousness, as I think about its purpose is that consciousness allows those that are, or become conscious, to own their minds, meaning that decision making is from within, instead of depending on others - such as mainstream "controlled" media, friends, or family. Discernment is rare these days. Consciousness is a bi-product of overcoming one's neurosis. I doubt those who are psychotic can become conscious, since there are perhaps organic reasons for their specific mental disturbances that are untreatable.
My understanding is unproven and unscientific, obviously. However it is Experiential. My remarks seem simplistic in comparison to the sophisticated level of ideas presented by Closer to Truth and Roger Penrose.
Why does no one else offer up their experiences and hypotheses? Could I be delusional? Possibly, but doubtful. I'm willing to be tested. Step up! Anyone? LOL...no takers yet!
Very poor audio quality... if your guests don't use microphones, they are difficult to understand
do anesthetics stop collapse of quantum wave function in microtubules, to take away consciousness? how might anesthetics stop collapse of quantum wave function in microtubules?
The big bang had extremely low entropy . Did it choose a conscious universe? To continue ? Then we are just the I/O of the universe.
I concede it's POSSIBLE that the collapse of the wave function has something to do with consciousness. It is in the nature of species to evolve ways to use the properties of physics to their advantage. Light, sound, odor are obviously all conditions of physics which species have evolved to use. .These conditions are, of course, understood, as are the sensory organs which gather their aspects.
We see noses, so we are accustomed to having ready answers to the question of how odor, for example, is perceived.. We see no specific organ sensing wave function collapse. This does not mean we don't possess any. The immune system perceives risks and responds to them without an obvious sensory organ planted on someone's face.
I guess I am, however, still skeptical at Penrose's claim that consciousnes is "not computational". This seems a tremendous leap given the fact we have not reached the limits of, for example, computer computation. We should, I think, have a fuller understanding of what computation alone can do before we declare what it cannot do.
Likely the self willed navigator still surfs the emperium from cosmic foundation to that of being. The neurological tubulin array and it's mnemonics may well be the platform, stage and imagination seat of the experiencer. In this universe the templates of life are platonically pre-existant. So also for the navigator.
it seems to me the first responsibility of the subconscious is to create & maintain a 3-D Euclidean space with a preferred anti-gravity direction ( up ). -- the totem orientation, the geometry of consciousness. the dark weightlessness of the womb without orientation is a crucial primordial purely physical experience i.e. unconscious that is contra to 'being" in the world. birth subjects the body to gravity a new and differentating purely physical ( unconscious) experience of a preferred orientaion. the first conscious 'worldly' thought must be that of up/down. in the first 10 months - 12 months or so the unconscious interact with the body to builds out the 3D Euclidean space ( adds a measure ), feels time ( hungry), creates a variety of clocks throughout the body, synchronizes them, bulids intuitions of causality/logic/physics/math & when ready instructs the body to standup ( actualuze in the body the 'totem orientation' built by the subconscious ). this process & actualization ( the success of standing experience ) is the birth of consciousness, i.e. "aware of being in the world/synchronized with rhe world" at this juncture the unconscious has completed its primary physical function -- fused the body to an unconscious abstract orientation compatible with the physical world. along with this it has built a collection of vague intuitive/unconscious tools that render the world more knowable & navigable. the subconscious now can relinquish its monopoly on the body to other faculties along with those vague seeds of 'knowledge' ( wave-collapse patterns ) now residing in the subconscious/intuition. so they may be actualized & refined in world. the idea here is that there are macroscopic & microscopic/quanttum wave-collapse patterns in the phtsical world related to this totem orientation that the subconscious must learn to select for & synchronize with. humans cannot cannot see other patterns of collapse as they were filtered by the subconscious and not allowed in the body long enough to be made conscious as were not useful or at worst 'disorienting'. indeed the subconscious may have noticed other patterns but are set aside as not suited for purpose and had a brief time ( if any ) actualized in the body. Note: there is indeed a profound nostalgia/fear for the primordial unconscious phase of existence. On the nostalgia side the weightless, without orientation & undifferentiated from the world for it is in these moments that the subconscious has access to the body & to synchronize it so can 'revisit' or investigate other curious & potentially useful wave-collapse patterns it has noticed. On the fear side this is the anxiety of death.
Understanding does NOT require consciousness, understanding can be implemented (in wetware or otherwise) as a set of heuristics (eg analogy, induction, abduction, other intuition pumps...) to create models at a lower logical level of a given set of phenomena, you don't need consciousness to apply those heuristics, and once you have the model you can say you have (relative) understanding, you can explain in terms of that model. Sad to see the old man recurring to metaphysics (the collapse of the WF) to justify his argument
once there is OR collapse, decoherence of quantum wave function results? conscious observers see decoherence, not quantum wave function?
Every discussion I see on "consciousness" starts by refusing to define the word, and then ends in confusion over why something that hasn't been defined can't be explained at all. You're not going to get any closer to understanding if you don't start with some strong, precise definitions first. You cannot understand a thing if you refuse to define it to the point that it can be analyzed. It also makes it impossible to have a meaningful conversation because for all you know the other person may be thinking of something completely different.
It's impossible to give a rigorous, non-circular definition of conscious experience, in the same way that it's impossible to do so for time. But many or most of us know _exactly_ what it is.
The best you can really do is to "point" at consciousness by, for example, "defining" it like this:
A thing is conscious when there's "something it's like" to _be_ that thing.
How much of consciousness actually maps to physical reality? Most people's sense of things compared to actual reality is rather misinformed and vague - note go back a few hundreds years and the world was awash with mysticism and ignorance. The only virtue that seems beyond doubt is that one's sense of reality is typically evolutionarily adequate enough to get them by in the world reggardless of the countless finer details of reality that elude us. That is, conscious experience seemingly can be mostly completely discordant of physical truth/wave function states.
With the way chatgpt maps knowledge more coherently than most humans in many domain, I can't see what is so special about human thought that it in itself is manifesting conscious experience somehow. Personally I wouldn't be surprised if there exist a parallel emotional/subjective realm - like say dark matter/dark sector but for something non-physical.outside time and space - and that physical complexity somehow perturbs this realm of subjective states which generates a sense of something that one associates with complex physical states that have no sense of such things, yet the process offers some very subtle feedback that perhaps can bias quantum properties towards some end.
The notion that every action has an equal and opposite reaction every where through out the totality of all realities is a bit presumptuous. Why not have domains which can affect other domains largely one way or some other setup without a noticeable balancing reaction yet conservation is not broken? Obviously It would be a bit metaphysical and surely not so scientifically amenable, but that's what "true" revolutions are made of....
THANKS FOR RESPECTING OCTOPUS ALSO SQUIDD
Cerebellum-Organic BIOS.
did both like ping pong scenes in Forrest Gump?
Hi guys! Thanks for all the great work, closer to truth has been a great resource for me over the last few years. All the best wishes!
Aren't Clathryn proteins at synapses present to from vesicles to store neurotransitter.
This is ideology, not science. Trying to shoe horn what is known into an unknown phenomenon. To a hammer everything is a nail
Microtubules and ping pong, only in concousness.
The intellect is not the tool to understand what Roger Penrose is touching on , at some point science is going to have to let go of material reductionism to explain these things , they will get there in the end but all roads lead to the same destination .
He is a brilliant physicist, but he is not a neuroscientist
Please - write his ideas to the stones! For the next generations.
You have to have steps that get you up there is the devil is in the details
OR may lead to a better understanding of the quantum brain but I doubt very much that it is the whole story. There is a lot of research being done now on the nuclear spin of phosphates and other molecules in the brain that act as qubits. One research team recently discovered such nuclear spins were entangled with molecules in the heart. It's early days but if these kind of findings are proven then they could go to explain the speed at which the brain acts on the body.
Penrose's model is relativistic quantum so it incorporates spin already yes.
Why can't I have any friends like Roger Penrose?
Me too the only friends I have don't read books to learn
as quantum probability becomes classic probability upon measurement; classic probability reverts to quantum probability when there is recoherence of quantum wave function? what happens when there is recoherence of quantum wave function?
there is no need for the wavefunction as Professor Basil J. Hiley explains. The math is noncommutative with the position and momentum arising out of time and freqeuncy. As Hiley explains classical physics is wrong - that's why our modern science has caused the ecological crisis with massive social injustice masquerading as "progress" etc.
Telekinesis as the basic action of quantum mechanics at a distance,simultaneous transfer of wave function to an object
at a distance as explained and work by superposition phenomena.
Consciousness mechanisms,explained in mirroring &projectile of data on a virtual hollograme plane.i route function analogies In within other dimensions .
Unconscious and subconscious brain parts receiving functions.
Basic requirements for creating a approachable database ,and questioning process.
Why record keepers pick up and process and assess questions in unconscios mind of eligibile people.
The extreme danger of access of unauthorised entities in tapping into the available data in the hive mind,in case of not being manually controled by the authorised angelic purposeful entities,and upgrade of AI.
The back part of brain acting as the phe 3d projectile reciever unconsciously.
Most probable possibility of transmission of 8nfos from front portal of the brain and only once the pineal gland could be activated at h8gher levels and frequencies detectable by the higher beings and entities.
Why the record keepers wont respond and provide reply to requested infos with the possibilities of missuse of infos ,and access of wrong people to such infos.
Angelic Control mechanisms by the angelic councils of 5&9 as the best protection mechanism for hijack of infos.
How the collapse of wave function at micro quantum level magnification and empowerment mechanisms to actual physical forms levels could become possible?
Does the collapse of micro level wave function incorporated with derivation of material out of the emty space?
Does the dark matter within the empty space contributing to 95% all material in the empty space, acting as tiny little blackholes incorporating the preservation and of data and infos at the surface of the little blackholes?
Is there an analogy and correlation on between the eye's retina projection mechanism with the plane of projection in the brain creating a virtual image and pattern if thoughts,imaginations and consciousness,also recorded in the same fashion and by the same mechanisms?
Could the crystaline structures at the surface of pineal glands act as energy magnifiers ,including the electrical charge creation and spread within the brain?
About possible brain memory function mechanisms ,could the huge volume of the data and information be stored 8in a certain transmission to a databank in other l9cations ,and be recalled back 9nce needed bh tapping to that databank hav8ng instaneous access?
the pineal gland is a transducer yes of this nonlocal protoconsciousness - so it "emanates" the nonlocal awareness energy-information. If you study noncommutativity - the quantum time-reversed negative frequency "balances out" the collapse of gravity so there is no singularity. Rather there is a nonlocal wormhole. Gerard 't Hooft explains this also. He and Penrose had a debate but in reality they agree - just describe things differently.
The metaphor of a scaffold where a quantum system supports a conscious state which collapses though entails personal identity over time as a social construction.
why would there be consciousness with correlates of neuron energy?
it's a resonance of different levels of spacetime via fundamental time as protoconsciousness
Consciousness is a tough nut to crack. Where does it come from and what happens to it after death?
Both good points/questions
We don't have consciousness. Consciousness has us.
there is a direct knowledge or formless awareness that is fundamental time. This is what Penrose calls protoconsciousness - it creates the universe.
might neuron firings at the same time produce consciousness?
there is synchronization through resonance at different levels of spacetime that arises out of what Penrose calls "fundamental time."
I can tell you now from personal experience that consciousness IS "secondary" to the brain, namely, is non-local. I have experienced various Out of Body states, and lucid dream states, whereby my awareness was not in my physical body, so to speak. I was able to travel away from my body and witness things which I could not have known whilst 'unconscious'. My awareness during these moments was CONSIDERABLY more lucid than my current waking consciousness - in fact things felt more real during my OBE than what I feel at this moment. So my theory is that consciousness is some sort of energy field which is neither created nor destroyed. I certainly don't think neurons produce awareness. I think its considerably more complex than that and something to do with quantum entanglement. And I am not remotely religious.
Even though I tend to avoid addressing anecdotes, I have to personally agree with much of what you say. I too have had such experiences and specifically tried to "scientifically" analyse my conscious state during lucid dream and OBE's and it is almost like there's some other aspect to reality not of time and space that coexists with normal physical process. I will just conclude that my "first memory" at a very young age was akin to those things in nature before I came to be in my body so to speak. I had always dismissed it as imagination until having lucid dreams and OBE's much later in life cause me to reappraise. Also like you I'm not remotely religious and at one point was a rabid athiest - Grew out of that distasteful phase though lol....
@@blengi good points. and very interesting to read your comment. it seems many skeptical people have OBEs and it seems to change their opinion on what reality and consciousness is. my own personal experiences have led me to believe that consciousness is MORE than brain. I do not need to include a spiritual aspect to this discussion , but instead I think there are different levels of reality or indeed consciousness which we will not understand until we "die". death itself is an illusion and just another version of reality in my opinion.
Dear if you're religious, you'll understand consciousness. It's a mechanism created. it's soul that lives for ever, even if the person dies . GOD created soul an everlasting being.
Temporal lobe stimulation also creates the so called 'spiritual experience'. Read Susan Blackmore. NDE, OBE all has been found to have no basis in reality.
@@slowdown7276 i am familiar with S.Blackmore, i've read 1 of her books, but her research is simply wrong.
Temporal lobe stimulation does not produce a full blown veridical OBE , and there are too many accounts of people being outside their body and witnessing things in other rooms, or other parts of the world, which were later verified as accurate. I would suggest reading Dr Pim Van Lommel's book Consciousness Beyond life.
what do microtubules do in the neuron?
they store memories and process the information through the tubulin and tryptophan type molecules having superradiance (superluminal quantum coherence via acoustic phonons).
I always enjoy your talks with Sir Roger Penrose!
How would "the collapse of the wave function" generate consciousness?
Mathematics, symmetries, quantumm coherence, biology and evolution, difficult to explain but so reasonable if you stop to think about it for a while. Emerging life/conciousness "emerges" from a complex being maybe by serendipity but from something rather than anything, you can try to follow the footsteps backwards and find the cause/origin/root of it
@@juancano4716 Thanks. As Roger Penrose said, physics as we know it does not explain consciousness. So why should the collapse of the wave function generate consciousness in organisms anymore than in any other physical system?
The mistery of life, maybe in the future we can get closer to the real answer, the path of science is open for anyone curious enough to unveil the foundations of life, maybe in the way we understand a little bit better ourselves
Whomsoever was here the longest has the computing all harnessing ability to manipulate the Environment would be sir GOD I presume😊
Microtubules are about 25 nanometers in diameter and an atom is about .1 nanometers in diameter.
So collapsing the wave function at that scale physically affects the microtubules, modifying it's structure or shape?
If you were not conscience, you would not be having this discussion.
neurons have something that when combined with collapse or measurement of wave function produces consciousness? could neuron energy have a way of measuring quantum wave function?
Not to be contrary, really, but we still haven't defined Consciousness and we and they here use the word constantly.
The whole universe is like a wave function and can’t be observed, but if you can be conscious a collapsing wave function like you have been observed the solar system.
Roger Penrose is a unique personality. Thanks for the talk that stimulates our minds. One request (may be you consider me strange or sort of this, any way)- if someone here knows the address, email, where i could send some articles (links to them) of a russian scientist Gennadiy Shipov, who proposed s theory of physical vacuum in which method of NP-formalism is applied to find solution of equations. In the theory as the author states General Relativity theory and Quantum Mechanics are united in one.
I wonder why an intellectual discussion can be beautiful. What makes thisvone attractive? Consciousness plays a role here.
Consciousness is built into the Very Fabric of the Universe
Even animals are Conscious of their surroundings
We are Conscious - So is the Universe
We mere mortals should consider the Universe as a Living , Thinking , Knowledgeable & a Concious Entity
2:50 - whoops. I like Roger, but nobody gets it all right. Not even me!
Could the “collapse of the wave function” be a measurement problem. And is consciousness the only current ‘technology’ able to compute/interpret these
sub-particle levels. Moreover, to be conscious requires a lot of energy, flow and focus. Thus, most of humans operate ‘unconsciously.’
Idk
The equation that really bends spacetime is G, when G coherence goes sqrt(r_0 × 0.5 au) to just object, to G bending 2D.
I'm inclined to agree with all his viewpoints. The Copenhagen interpretation is silly :)
I had come to a realization about the three-worlds paradigm (similar to that of Sir Penrose) on my own.
However, here I dare to disagree with Sir Penrose in two aspects of his paradigm (posted in the file the-theory-of-the-three-worlds-penrose). His paradigm claims...
1) As though each of the three worlds affects the two others.
2) As thought "undoubtedly, there are not three separate worlds in reality but only one" - which triggers an immediate question to Sir Penrose. If the "everything" is (or must be) just "one world" governed by some Unified Extended Physics, then everyone's conscience (or soul) must be also immersed into that Extended Physics! An idea as though our soul (or mind) were deterministic, governed by Physical laws (rather than being above them) seems abhorrent!
I dare to assume, however, that there are the three worlds, where ...
a) The Platonic world affects nothing and IS AFFECTED BY NOTHING. It "exists" eternally independent on the other two.
b) The Physical world perhaps was designed and created (by God) using the ideas of the Platonic world.
c) Mental world (conscience, soul) is beyond the Physical. By its very definition, conscience is an ability of free CONTEMPLATION of the reality in many ways: wrong or right. However, yes, the conscience (the mental world) may affect a part of the physical world, which is within a living body containing this conscience.
Great interview! Thanks so much for that. It's not so clear whether OrcOR is the process through which consciousness gets actually generated OR rather OrcOR simply activates something more fundamental in the brain.
Time is relative and the purpose of relativity is love. Bang. There you have it.
isn't it obvious what consciousness do? It gives meaning to the things. Attaching qualia to the things is just beginning of that process.
the fight for stability or rather, the fight for an equalibrium between two or more states is consciousness. Perception is the key difference between the conscious system, whether its the universe, the galaxy, the tree, the wolf, or mee.
Consciousness, the present, and infinity, are 3 aspects of the same thing, the same trinity.
Very, Very educational. Many scholars overlook the depth in the subjects that you are talking about. In which take many years of studying. The degree in the knowledge your discussing are very important for future discussions. 100%
Just sad really.
@ALEX LOPEZ
The depth of your ignorance is shining bright in your exaltation of 2 of the worst sources available on the nature of mind.
It demonstrates you know less than the nothing these two know about the topic.
Should be pretty obvious why that's sad.
In a similar act of schtoo pidity, you could go to the zoo and ask a chimpanzee to read you a book
@ALEX LOPEZ
Don't apologize for your ignorance.
You clearly have no interest in correcting it. When you want to know what the moon landing was like, you make the obvious choice and ask a kindergartener.
I hope you're working a job suitable to your intellect by picking fruit in the fields.
I do enjoy blackberries
The Bell's theorem was proven right last year. That is a start.