I don't hear either man taking a viewpoint on the state of the world either good or bad. In actual fact there is nothing righteous or moral about their conversation. So what am I missing here?
I have always felt that 2 Samuel 24 was about the collapse of a wave function. People (I think rather mistakenly) think that the parable is all about pride and King David's folly being his own self-interest, but I think that's just a projection of insecurities onto the story. The real sin, in my view, is that mystical Judaism values alternative probabilities and the vastness of non-assumption. To measure something so extensively is to collapse the wave function. It is to define, and perhaps incorrectly at that. Anyway, brilliant conversation here. Wonderful discussion in the video. What a clear, comprehensive dialogue. One of the best I've heard to date. I'll leave you with this little bit of something from our old pal Chuang Tzu: "Why is the world the way that it is? Why are things the way that they are? Because we make them that way." Rather fascinating man, that Chuang Tzu. I hope everyone that reads this has a delightful day. Namaste~
wow i just got this wave function listening to this talk. My mind is blown!! My next question is.. if the wave function is possibilities that collapses given the dimensional restraints of the observer, then this would suggest nature in its purest form does not come from a single big bang because our investigations thus far are based in our observed results and theories based on our dimensional restraints and that any such investigations that have been or will ever be done will always be a small subset of a bigger series of sets that nature cannot show due to our limitations of existence or consciousness. If we get crazy on this and somewhat self indulgent then as we progress to an extent where we are able to communicate at some point to others in not only our universe but other universes, the truth of nature as it truly is an amalgamation of investigations and findings on such esoteric topics from various civilizations from here and other countless universes. If this is the case even somewhat plausible, the true nature of the universe and others is truly an epic journey and appreciating the effort put in by those individuals dedicated to these area's is certainly epic and deserves respect from generations past, now and to come.
Excellent! What neither can come to admit in words in their excellent discussion; is what the mythology of man and all cultures (except materialist modern science) have implied or flat out said...we are living, non-material beings, attempting in this space, to exist through matter.
I am familiar with henry's published works and papers, but this is the first time i have ever watched an interview of henry stapp. Gotta say, this was a pretty damn good interview :)
Seems to me that the fundamental choice is whether or not to ask the question; to not make any measurement. If the word "table" enters consciousness upon observation, then a separate, distinct phenomena appears to that observer. If no thought enters the consciousness of the observer, no separate, distinct phenomena appear. The uncollapsed wave function is analogy for the state of samahdi. When no cognitive measurements/distinctions are made, via conceptualization, there is no collapse of the wave function. The result is an experience of choiceless, unified physical action with the rest of the universe, where there exists no separate "I", but only a singular consciousness. Experience reality in the thought-free state and you will come to REALIZE this in/as your own life.
If we assume that we are separate observers, It seems to me there would be chaos as we would all be collapsing the universe into separate realities. Yet we all seem to experience the same reality as far as the physical world around us. What if there is only one observer in our universe? What if this observer is experiencing life through all life forms and matter simultaneously, everywhere? What if life (the mind) is a kind of antenna that channels this universal consciousness? That might help explain why the chimp or the dog or the cat would also see the same green desk as we are all part of the one. Great stuff! Thanks for this awesome video.
Michael K. Field, P.E. I hadn't thought of this V interesting. it would seem to point to a unified consciousness in order to avoid chaotic or contradictory wave function collapses. also if I remember correctly that was a rebuttal of schrodingers paradox - we overlook that the cat also imbued with consciousness would surely have already collapsed the wave function. but as a mind experiment it works to demonstrate the paradox of reality
Mike Field: It's not an uncommon proposition, but it fails to answer several fundamental questions, most notably why I (who am then identified with this universal consciousness) do not have access to the perceptions of others, or of the universal consciousness at large; if I really am this consciousness, then I should have this access. It seems to be no different from Berkeley's ad hoc explanation for the exact thing you're trying to address, which was to posit God as a universal observer in order to "collapse the wave function" (he did not know this term obviously, but that was what he was describing) globally and make sure things existed even when they were not observed by anything else.
@@hoon_sol because you’re dissociated from it. We already know this is a process in mentation (Dissociative identity disorder). Mind can separate itself to different points of awareness. Our brains are what this process looks like. But that doesn’t mean you can’t access universal consciousness. If the brain is just a filter which keeps you dissociated from mind at large, then the lack/absence of brain activity should damage the dissociation. And that’s exactly what happens. You can experience universal consciousness through a high dose of psychedelics which significantly reduce brain activity. You can read about near death experiences where people’s brains were dead, but they experienced profound imagery and the sensation of being one with everything (universal consciousness).
@@Ppstate32: No, that doesn't work at all, and it's quite hilarious when your purported explanation has to start off by assuming something so ridiculous. You're making baseless assertion one after the other and stating them all as fact; until you can demonstrate the ability to be more reasonable this won't be going anywhere.
@@hoon_sol What are you talking about? I'm proposing a theory. Materialism is the metaphysics that makes assumptions. When materialism is proven to be wrong, we need to search for an alternative. The most parsimonious conclusion is idealism - that consciosness is fundamental. All I did is described phenomena which suggest that the "brain as a filter " hypothesis is valid. We can talk about this all day long if you want to.
What about the wave function collapse with multiple quantum observers? They would all have differing subjective experiences, But the information is already "saved" in a digital wave of objective EXPERIENCE we are currently watching as a TH-cam video. My question? Does the information itself have potential to collapse in a completely different formation? For example, while we all observe we notice things like Dr.Hagelin sitting in a chair, now that man and chair are already collapsed in his experience, but what about us observing and re-collapsing already collapsed information? Does it change?
Oh man, "regular" scientists would absolutely vomit over some of this, but I like it quite a lot. It fits right in with the kind of stuff my mind's been "circling around" for years.
Mind has access to immediate knowledge! The physical brain employs logical processes to come to knowledge! This is the main difference between the two! There is an "infinite" field of knowledge which pure mind draws on! Put another way, the mind knows things A-Priori, while the Brain knows things A-Posteriori!!
Just curious; is the collapse of the wave function that Q physicists talk about in describing QR the same as cosmic consequences or higher brain functions experience during TM?
So maybe the fact that superposition of states and the quantum theory laws only apply at a micro scale has to do with that conscious observation has certain limitations as our perception is limited to macro scale. However I don't understand where does this assumption come from that it's the conscious observer, not the measurment device, what causes the wave function to collapse.
Both were tried, conscious observer and a measuring device, the wave function collapses either way. Indirect observation. The discussion between Einstein and Bohr about the moon is a good example. If we aimed a laser at the mirror and everyone collectively turned away from the moon and fired the beam we'd find the moon is still there because it shares a relationship with Earth. The moment it flittered out of existence our tides would feel the effect. Any microscopic and sub-atomic particle composing the moon is in a relationship with other particles. Whereas an singular photon or electron being fired has minimal passing relationships with air atoms until hitting the back wall. With atoms composing a large object, maybe only one atom needs to be observed giving it a set value that is then matched with all other atoms in that enclosed system, otherwise half an object could exist in this universe, the other half in another universe. Observation or not if we try the 2x slit experiment with a tennis ball it doesn't work because those particles are in a set relationship composing an object.
Tomek Samcik the real problem in quantum mechanics is that quanta can not be observed at all. Only events that occur as a result of forced interactions with particles can be observed, and these don’t involve the particle because it has been destroyed. So only assumptions regarding quanta can ever be made. I suppose that’s why it’s called « theoretical » physics
This stuff that Stapp is on about is perfectly simple and straightforward to anyone who understands the samhita. Perception is either subjective or objective: perceiver sees the object of perception as it actually is, or through the subjective prejudices that it already has So a white racist will perceive a black person as inferior, stupid, conniving etc etc whilst perceiving itself to be entirely free of all such defects . This is subjective perception. A balanced white person will see the black person as a human being with the same potential as anyone else, good or bad, and ditto itself . This is objective perception. So in practical terms (the observer, the quanta): when the black man makes a statement, you have subjective or objective positions. You have the objective fact of whether the statement is true or false. This is unalterable You have a balanced white man with the need to ascertain the truth or otherwise of the black man’s statement, plus the tools and methods he uses. This is objective perception. Then you have the racist white man’s presumption that the statement is false because it is made by a black man. This is subjective perception At quantum level objective perception is not possible because the quantum cannot be observed. All deductions concerning its nature are therefore subjective because they result from prejudice and observation of events connected to the quantum. “Probability” only exists at quantum level because of the impossibility to observe quanta, so a whole culture to justify unscientific assumptions and deductions has had to be developed. In quantum mechanical terms the statement is the quantum, which cannot be observed because it has no objective existence, the black man and the white man represent the environment in which events concerning the statement may be induced to ascertain its nature and the white nan represents the observer with three sets of probabilities; his own degree of objectivity, the truth or falsity of the statement, the extent to which perception of the black man plus data to which the statement refers can be accurately assessed. These are real potentialities in the real world. There is no need to invoke the limitations of the laws of classical physics to describe the difficulties of quantum physics. Science never ceases to emphasise it’s character as a pure, conscientious and professional objective perceiver, but 90% of the time fails to live up to its perception of itself, like the whites racist. The 10% who do contrive to fulfil their integrity suffer marginalisation and suppression and are blocked from access to funds through refusing to subscribe to the hyperbole used by the 90% It’s a bad world we live in, and the good that remains now seems to be trapped in a vicious circle of corruption.
John, I didn't hear any discussion about race, or perceptions of race. The quantum world is completely devoid of any moral or righteous standing in the world imo.
Joe, check out the writings and research of Bernardo Kastrup. He proposes that the only fundamental thing is a single universal consciousness, and that all of us are "dissociated alters" of that mind, precisely as in the sense of split personalities. He cites clinical evidence that some patients with dissociated personality disorder have had dreams in which multiple of their personalities show up and interact. FASCINATING. It seems like a completely plausible scenario to me. What we really need to make an idea like this stick is exactly what Donald Hoffman is working on - a full derivation of observational physics starting from the base consciousness level. Hoffman has succeeded in producing the quantum equation of a free particle from his mathematics of conscious agents - long way to go, but it's a start.
@@joehinojosa8314 It wouldn't surprise me at all. Of course, most of the mainstream has just "cast out" all such options from their mindset, in spite of the fact that they really don't have any basis upon which to do so. They just "don't like it." So we need bold outside the box thinkers if we're ever going to get there.
@@KipIngram The education system prides itself on being intellectually libertine and rationally open-minded. However IF you try to introduce any alternative hypothesis than their standard, accepted,world view ,they will ATTACK you verbally as "fringe" "pseudo science". It almost seems that they are responding from psychological insecurity and FEAR. If the cosmos is MORE than just "atoms, molecules,vibrating in space" this would threaten their monopoly on defining "Reality" for the rest of us.
@@joehinojosa8314 Yes - you will be "cast out," pretty much literally. Modern science has all the traits of a religious faith. It is the 21st century "Catholic Church."
It's the Oversoul which you are talking about and it cannot be put into form because it holds all of its soul fragments as a singular unit, and not as separate particle fragment..
Two things stand out for me. 1) why are particles only able to be in two places at once? It seems like they should have any number of positions along it's wave pattern. 2) the "mixture" theory just sounds like science trying to hold on to the premise that matter's position pre-exists observation. As if to say: "okay we'll admit you were right about the "thought creates" thing all along, but we were right too!" ...and maybe both are right.
You'd need to expand the definition of "observer" to include non-life stuff, otherwise there would be no wave function collapse in a pre-life stage of a universe. If we are to assume that wave function collapse must be possible in order for the first instance of a lifeform to emerge in a universe, we also need to assume that the fundamental/primordial particles themselves must be able to perform the collapse-causing role of the "observer" in order to carry a universe from its "big bang" into that moment of the emergence of life.
We are participants into being not only the near and here, but the far away and long ago....there is no out there out there.....no phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon...3quotes by John wheeler.
Here's my problem. The way we choose to measure a wavefunction is already decided by the mind, before we become conscious of it. It takes a few nanoseconds for the mind to be made up and become conscious of. So effectively are we just observers without free will?
That is what we call a "non sequitur"; it does not follow. What you are is an entity, popularly called a self, which has both consciousness and free will. Consciousness lagging a bit behind the will is to be expected, just as if you kick a ball towards a goal, it will take some time for the ball to fly through the air and end up inside the goal. It is still the will which initiates the action. The identity of the knowing subject and the willing subject was very thoroughly explained by Schopenhauer; I recommend starting with On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, and then The World as Will and Representation, he assumes you to be familiar with the former before embarking upon the latter.
If two different observers simultaneously "ask" nature the same question, do they both get the same answer? Does the wave function collapse the same for both observers?
I find interesting the idea of the "Observer", let us remember from the double split experiment with the observation at what slit the (Photon, electron, or buckyball) went thru was dependent on the knowledge the observer was going to gain later. Find this point interesting because it doesn't obey the concept of time. Either the photon knew the observation was collecting data for knowledge or it wasn't. I also take that everything in reality that will be viewed in future, has already collapsed its wave function. What is going thru my mind is the concept of emergent time and the entangled photon experiments. Maybe someone can comment on my thoughts and explain my error or add onto the thought.
I agree Trevor Martin with your idea of two different times, our space time and another. I am not sure if it is a cause and effect(I guess that can be considered deterministic) or to effect that there isn't free will( which is a very awkward logical assumption on my part).
That is to assume that this reality is real, which is not real; and a competent observer is one which looks within their own consciousness and sees their own deeper nature in its most subtle form.
@@moonsod1113: Self-contradictory nonsense. Reality by definition is real. Thus saying that reality is not real is by definition false. It's akin to saying that the shadows on the walls in Plato's cave are not real, which is also false; they might indeed be shadows cast by objects in a higher dimension (which indeed they are in that case, 2-dimensional shadows being cast by 3-dimensional objects), but they are still real. All levels of existence are ultimately real, and there must be a correspondence between them. Thus saying that "this reality is not real" is, like I opened with, total nonsense. The reality you observe must ultimately have a direct correspondence with whatever reality you posit to lie beyond, and they are all real. «On the other hand, might cognitive syntax reside in an external "ideal" realm analogous to Plato's world of Parmenidean forms? Plato’s ideal abstract reality is explicitly set apart from actual concrete reality, the former being an eternal world of pure form and light, and the latter consisting of a cave on whose dirty walls shift murky, contaminated shadows of the ideal world above. However, if they are both separate and in mutual correspondence, these two realities both occupy a more basic joint reality enforcing the correspondence and providing the metric of separation. If this more basic reality is then juxtaposed to another, then there must be a more basic reality still, and so on until finally we reach the most basic level of all. At this level, there will (by definition) be no separation between the abstract and concrete phases, because there will be no more basic reality to provide it or enforce a remote correspondence across it. This is the inevitable logical terminus of "Plato’s regress".» It's really just another form of the simulation hypothesis, but failing to recognize that any simulation must necessarily have its basis in a common ground state between simulator and simulee. «As the term “reality” is undefined beyond this hypothetical relationship, the Simulation Hypothesis is indifferent to the details, e.g., where the host system is located, how the host system works, who or what created and/or controls the host system, and in what respects the simulation resembles the higher reality containing it. But in any case, there must be an ultimate all-inclusive reality or “ontic ground state” that contains and supports whatever reality-simulations may exist, and it is natural to ask whether some aspects of the simulation concept may apply to it. The Reality Self-Simulation Principle states that ultimate reality is itself a natural reflexive self-simulation in which all intelligible levels of reality must exist whether simulated or not.»
There seems to be 2 parallel processes in the observer efeect : 1) The incident beam of electrons has a wave function which collapses (due to mind ?) when the beam reaches the slits 2) There is a wave function of potentialities inside the brain , which collapses inside the brain by influence of mind Is the wave function in the brain the only one ? What kind of signal the mind sends to the physical process in 1) when observer makes his questiions and at the time of collapse (to cause this collapse) ??? Can someone expain to me those two processes and how they integrate ? Thanks a lot.
Brill. Just like to add that if we throw a ball for a dog the dog might not know it to be a ball but will chase and leap into the air to catch the ball. Only I exist or the dog must be an conscious observer. I think we are all one.
Aloha, John - you may not remember me from Phi Tau, but it would be very valuable to consider the role of condensates as the non-ordinary material substrate of the mind.
That also brings up a question wheather an insect can collapse a wave function ? What I would propose is a double slit experiment with a measurement interpreted by some third party cockroaches.
Tomek Samcik Let me clear your cluttered mind in simple words without going to technical jargon. What Double slit quantum experiment did was to validate Hindu/vedic high philosophies of ageless Vedas. In other words, according to Hindu/vedic philosophy like Advaita - every atom is encompassed by consciousness. without which you cannot perceive matter in its current form. According to Sankhya philosophy of hinduism which combined both dual and non dual high philosophies - Observed (matter) cannot be perceived without the observer (consciousness). So it doesn't matter whether it is you or some insect or cockroach, matter in its current form cannot be perceived without consciousness. It is also the basis for Karma (ancient hindu science of cause and effect) and re-incarnation
kashsoldier Double slit quantum experiment doesn't validate any philosophies, it merely shows that light displays characteristics of both waves and particles, but cannot be observed as both at the same time. Copenhagen Interpretation that assumes role of consciousness in wave function collapse is only one of the possible explanations of this phenomenon. It may as well be that the wave function collapse happens the moment information about the particle position is being "recorded" - forced to leave some trace. In this explanation you provided you use the term observer and you assume that is has to be associated with conscioussness, so what makes the observer conscious, is a video camera also a conscious observer ?
@@TomekSamcik69 So how does the particle know that ''the particle position is being "recorded" - forced to leave some trace.'' So then it can then revert to it's previous atribute. How does the ''wave'' return to being ''a particle'' upon ''being "recorded" - forced to leave some trace''?
@@nareshlathia5334 I'm not sure if it's the right question to ask, how does the particle know it's in the gravitational field ? It's just how the nature works. How would the particle know if it's a conscious observer or not ?
@@TomekSamcik69: No offense, but you are still trapped deep within the materialist paradigm when you ask a question like "what makes the observer conscious?"; by asking such a question, you are still implicitly making the assumption that there is such a thing as a material observer, and that consciousness is a quality this observer "has", but this is not true. It is rather the other way around: consciousness itself is the observer, anything it observes, including material objects like the body, only exist inside consciousness. I could go on at length about this, but if you haven't already, I suggest your read Monadology by Leibniz, Critique of Pure Reason by Kant, and The World as Will and Representation by Schopenhauer; I suspect plowing through these works (with Monadology being a mere minor appetizer compared to the other two works) will answer a lot of questions you've been having, but which you have hitherto not been able to resolve due to not having been able to fully let go of metaphysical materialism.
At last the greatest of minds at the very forefront of science have begun to break down the shackles of physicality in science. This is where the quests of a true hindu and his self realization on conciousness find consonance with quantum theories' findings. One will find that in Hinduism (Sanatana Dharma actually) morality is not a human tenet that is reinforced with dire consequences on transgression but rather there is a law of Cause & Effect which is in harmony with the cosmic cycle. The Advaita Veda says "Brahma satyam Jagat Mithya" which means Brahman is real, the universe is mithya (it cannot be categorized as either real or unreal). The cosmos is Brahman itself and not different..(Brahman is eternal, conscious, irreducible, infinite, omnipresent, and the spiritual core of the universe of finiteness and change). John Hagelin and Henry actually embody the original spirit of quest for truth which is enshrined in the basis of Sanatana Dharma where traditionally the seeker acquires self realization through experience of conciousness, whereas phycisists approach through hypothesis and mathematical approaches. A great conversation indeed!
Wow - would really like these gentlemen to look at my theory. An introduction can be found by clicking on the channel link above. Amazing history - Thank you.
Okay, completely untrained mind here. Would the wave/particle-- function/collapse describe the same two states as the case with a tree falling where there is an observer, or isn't? The simile requires there's the event of the tree falling, but it still questions whether the sound waves are collapsed by the hearing functions of the observer. Is it metaphorical, or literal?
Isn't our mind simply our conceptual framework and might this be somewhat independent of neural connectivity in the sense that the same conceptual relationships can be implemented in various ways in terms of the underlying neural structures? So if two people have the same concepts and these concepts are related in the same way, they might still differ in their neural structure that gives rise to these conceptual relationships, but perhaps we could still identify this correspondence in the way they relate the concepts based on an analysis of the underlying neural structures? It seems somewhat similar to the way humans identify patterns as information. For instance, a particular pattern of photons in a fiber-optic cable might constitute a particular image (say a jpg file), but the same image might also be constituted by a particular pattern of electrons on a memory stick. So there is a kind of dualism between empirically observable patterns in energy or matter on the one hand and abstract information on a conceptual level like a bitstring, regardless of how it's constituted in some empirically observable form (like we might store a jpg file in a DNA molecule).
( in order to get that knowledge ) you still have to measure its outcome either by looking at it with eyes or some kind of recording device ... its this act of observance that produces an electrical form of stimuli that interferes with the photons ?
tactical plunger you cant see stuff on the subatomic level anyways ... but these things can exist and not exist at the same time or can be in two places at once and sometimes there and not there at the same time ... like a wave of potential ...sort of like Schrodinger's cat
Stevie Foster Well looking with eyes is inaccurate, you can set up a quantum experiment and the results will stay the same even if you leave the room Thats because the detector which is a computer processed the information Quantum mechanics makes more sense if you look at the world as a simulation not as a real world
Stevie Foster However if we wanna discuss this matter philosophically, we would conclude that space time emerges from consciousness Because we have to ask the question "what processed the first particle in the universe?" The answer is something that is immaterial and can process information, and that is the mind (consciousness)
I can't tell for sure - as far as I can tell the things he's saying would work either in a "consciousness fundamental" or a "dualism" model. He's definitely saying that there are minds independent of brains - some completely different type of entity.
@@williamolenchenko5772 Not really. The term ‘god’ is loaded, has a certain amount of semantic baggage to do with omniscience, intention, benevolence etc - nature is a more neutral term referring simply to how the universe presents in it’s unaltered (by humans) state.
'Nature' has a mind of its own; Sets Up Rules? hmmm.. I wonder WHO left the Quantum AI Supercomputer Terraforming Earth And Social & Bio-Engineering its inhabitants and Geo-Engineering Its Atmosphere; /* Anunnaki */ end; someone from the future
its quantum bullshit. the wave didn't collapse. it was not formed in the first place. the detector prevented the interference pattern from forming. if you understand holograms you will understand how a beam of particles or light or electrons create interference pattern. the beam must interfere with itself to to create a interference pattern. if the self interference does not happend, the beam will create nothing. the detector electron absorber caused electrons to be attracted to the detector and bend the path away from the center between the slits and prevented the mirred beam from interfering with itself. if you have a positive charged body in a vacuum, you can cause the path of electrons to bend toward that body instead of going straight. that means when the detector was off the beam hit the center between the slits and reflected back to itself. when the detector was on the beam bendt and went trough one of the slits. not sure exactly but if a laser interfer with itself int create multiple bands and fewer it its is slightly off the 180 degree perpendicular path with itself.
Consciousness is something that is experienced but cannot be measured with instruments so what is the point of trying to analyse it with physics? Perhaps psychology is a better tool?
+Trevor Martin What I meant was that consciousness by itself is not matter or energy so there is no way for physicists to know what it is using scientific measurements. Psychology uses measurements of brain function but also verbal testimony and visual observation of people to try to know more about what consciousness is. But neither science can really explain what consciousness is in my opinion. It is something that can only be experienced and it's full potential abilities and limitations realized over time.
Yet all semiconductors and every computer works because of ''Quantum Tunneling'' by the electrons within the semiconductors. All Transistors are semiconductors and all Computer Chips are millions of Transistors. Ask any Electronics Engineer about this!
Well.... From Matthew 7, quoting Jesus, "7. Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: 8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened."
In ancient times there were prophets in them the one who said perfection and that perfection came true people concedered that person called prophet. In our times John Hagelin is the prophet of GOD because he is phD physics and he is also Master in VEDEK knowledge may GOD bless him
Fortune cookies are real. The ripples they cause in space and time depends on the observer. The observer's power to find any synchronicity to focus on is a matter of faith. To most observers a fortune cookie is meaningless and random because people don't see the same things. The contents of all fortune cookies is the same until read by an observer. If two or more observers open and read the same fortune cookie their synchronicity may become entangled. Flipping coins does the same thing. They create order out of chase narrowing probability into something that makes sense.
Sky Darmos: You are right. The space/time continuum is a single dynamic flow. Einstein was right, and I believe that Fluid Dynamics/Theory encompasses relativity and quantum mechanics without the hocus pocus.
Well Actually You make me think again !!! Thanks for that !!! So we get written on a quantum wave function once we die or we are already a quantum dataset existenin in that way but than maybe all is already quantum data to and that does not decay but then the dataset only grows ??? So once we differ enormously from our once owner matter we do become a kind of separate entity ??? Some scientists think so ??? So the grandfather paradox is actually resolving mathematical into a schrödinger’s cat like situation and so does the terminator paradox ?? And than if we see the world as a way of perception than we make things exits but does this nice car also have a conscious mind as long as the box does not kill it ? cognito ergo sum ??? by the cat ??? Well as we do believe in a God that exists forever than an always existing multiverse and a quantum data set is a way of seeing things ??? And mister Rupert Sheldrake might actually describe some kind of quantum data field than the reverse is also treu ??? Would quatsch data cause the existence of certain matter configuration??? Is the only life the life in carbon and oxygen or is there life other chemistry’s like silica and nitrogen ??? like the chemical factory incident in bhopal proved if I remember correctly ??? is life in a way between order and chaos almost like fire is almost alive ask a firefigther could there also be life in power fields and such if enough different energy states ?? In quantum data fields perhaps ?? other time scale than ??? Who says we are the only life possible??? So why limit things ??? Why not keep an open mind ??? A Crazy man can ask more questions than a wise man can answer ?? So a last if we can change the memory of the matter so we add energy but change the memory below the heisenberg thingy the lowest level and we add energy or we take a heavy atom and change it can it become a basis for the replicator of star trek ? Can we use something like electrochemical printing and a guiding energy like a magnetic field or a high frequency field beyond x-rays and also electrostatics to get a printer of material any material ??? And if we are actually the observer can we than prove if we have a scientific correct experiment that proves past life that the brain is only our thinking organ ??? If the brain works to quantum levels is it than more than a neural network and also a quantum computer perhaps ??? Than are we in a way more interstellar and more than the sum of nature and nurture ??? so a nice way of seeing things is caused by this kind of thought you proposed???
How did the Hindu manage to say that the ''Universe is an Illusion''? They referred to it as ''Maya of GOD''. The word ''maya'' is of Sanskrit origing and means ''illusion'' or UNREAL. Thus reality is UNREAL. My question is how did the Hindu's realise this many many years ago?
David Bohm was the best. He and Krishnamurti were very concerned with the pitiful state of humanity due to its mechanical ego. Most other theoretical physicists merely pose as intellectuals.
@@TokyoShemp Unlike David Bohm I have actually done trillions of quantum measurements. Guess what I have never seen? A guide wave. I haven't seen a single particle, either. All I have ever seen was irreversible energy transfers. I kind of doubt Bohm understood that quantum mechanics was about energy. He was one of the old guys who still thought that it was about objects. ;-)
Wave function collapse does not exist in reality. Wave function collapse is technique used in a mathematical problem solving in physics theory. Many things some people assume exist in physics theory do not exist in reality. Much of the confusion comes from trying to explain the surprising results of particle 2 slit experiments. For the most logical explanation of these results, you can view my video, "Particle 2 Slit Experiments Explained By Paul Marostica". If you are still interested after that, I have 1 other video about quantum theory, which will help you even more. After you've understood what I've explained, you should have a much easier time determining what exists, and what does not exist, in reality. I also have a video about what's wrong with relativity theory. Search keywords: matter theory marostica.
Wave function collapse doesn't even exist in theory. You will be hard pressed to find a theory textbook that even defines what the term supposed to mean. ;-)
You know, John Hagelin list all of my respect when he was in that social darwinistic abomination of The Secret. Henry stapp seems to have his head together but I cannot lend much credibility to Hagelin.
Anybody want to take a stab at that hand-wringing Dr. Stapp is doing? Something is being strongly communicated there. Is he thrilled to be engaged in his favorite topic? Does he have guilt he's washing away? Does he have arthritis that's bothering him?
Not really, the Greeks just theorized their could be a particular that could not be divided into smaller particles, ( thus the premature and unfortunate naming of the atom before we discovered it could be split). the Greeks said nothing about wave functions, probabilities, dipoles, EPR, quantum tunneling, wave particle duality, uncertainty principles, entanglement, Bell inequalities, wave function collapse, etc nor did they even imagine the possibility of computers, the internet, mobile phones etc.
Wow, we have come so far. Quantum mechanics! But, we still have not figured out how to create microphones that don't pick up a grown mans every single sound. You'd think an animal was in the mix with all the panting and huffing. Matter does not exist outside of perception. So this is it for me. Perception out. Are they still making noise when I'm gone?
You have to respect John, he’s someone well educated but also keeps his mind open & doesn’t let the old school materialist paradigms bother him
I would like to meet Henry Stapp someday. What a treasure and gift for humanity.
I wish there were more discussions like these... thank s for having and sharing this one. Amazing questions, amazing answers.
Absolutely wonderfull interview. Thank you Henry and John for sharing your thoughts.
Prof. Stapp was 86 yrs. old when this interview was taped. He is 91 this year (2019.)
Wow - he looks GREAT!
Well, 95 now
These two are such a force for good in the world.
I don't hear either man taking a viewpoint on the state of the world either good or bad. In actual fact there is nothing righteous or moral about their conversation. So what am I missing here?
@@jamesdolan4042 / their objectivity, and unbiased assessment is the gift.
I have always felt that 2 Samuel 24 was about the collapse of a wave function. People (I think rather mistakenly) think that the parable is all about pride and King David's folly being his own self-interest, but I think that's just a projection of insecurities onto the story. The real sin, in my view, is that mystical Judaism values alternative probabilities and the vastness of non-assumption. To measure something so extensively is to collapse the wave function. It is to define, and perhaps incorrectly at that.
Anyway, brilliant conversation here. Wonderful discussion in the video. What a clear, comprehensive dialogue. One of the best I've heard to date. I'll leave you with this little bit of something from our old pal Chuang Tzu: "Why is the world the way that it is? Why are things the way that they are? Because we make them that way." Rather fascinating man, that Chuang Tzu. I hope everyone that reads this has a delightful day. Namaste~
wow i just got this wave function listening to this talk. My mind is blown!! My next question is.. if the wave function is possibilities that collapses given the dimensional restraints of the observer, then this would suggest nature in its purest form does not come from a single big bang because our investigations thus far are based in our observed results and theories based on our dimensional restraints and that any such investigations that have been or will ever be done will always be a small subset of a bigger series of sets that nature cannot show due to our limitations of existence or consciousness. If we get crazy on this and somewhat self indulgent then as we progress to an extent where we are able to communicate at some point to others in not only our universe but other universes, the truth of nature as it truly is an amalgamation of investigations and findings on such esoteric topics from various civilizations from here and other countless universes. If this is the case even somewhat plausible, the true nature of the universe and others is truly an epic journey and appreciating the effort put in by those individuals dedicated to these area's is certainly epic and deserves respect from generations past, now and to come.
Excellent! What neither can come to admit in words in their excellent discussion; is what the mythology of man and all cultures (except materialist modern science) have implied or flat out said...we are living, non-material beings, attempting in this space, to exist through matter.
“All is mind, the universe is mental.”
The universe is _conceptual_
thats wondeful conversation thankful greatful john hagelin and henry stapp for showing somelight on quantem physics and collapse of wave fnctn.
I am familiar with henry's published works and papers, but this is the first time i have ever watched an interview of henry stapp. Gotta say, this was a pretty damn good interview :)
I like how Henry claps his hands every now and then.
Thank you both for such a wonderful conversation / discussion. Brilliance!
Seems to me that the fundamental choice is whether or not to ask the question; to not make any measurement. If the word "table" enters consciousness upon observation, then a separate, distinct phenomena appears to that observer. If no thought enters the consciousness of the observer, no separate, distinct phenomena appear.
The uncollapsed wave function is analogy for the state of samahdi. When no cognitive measurements/distinctions are made, via conceptualization, there is no collapse of the wave function. The result is an experience of choiceless, unified physical action with the rest of the universe, where there exists no separate "I", but only a singular consciousness.
Experience reality in the thought-free state and you will come to REALIZE this in/as your own life.
Roy Dopson very nice hypothesis, but very incorrect at the same time
Thanks Henry and thanks John for such a wonderful insights
God bless dr. John Hagellen a great scientist in truth knowing Vedas physics
If we assume that we are separate observers, It seems to me there would be chaos as we would all be collapsing the universe into separate realities. Yet we all seem to experience the same reality as far as the physical world around us. What if there is only one observer in our universe? What if this observer is experiencing life through all life forms and matter simultaneously, everywhere? What if life (the mind) is a kind of antenna that channels this universal consciousness? That might help explain why the chimp or the dog or the cat would also see the same green desk as we are all part of the one. Great stuff! Thanks for this awesome video.
Michael K. Field, P.E. I hadn't thought of this V interesting. it would seem to point to a unified consciousness in order to avoid chaotic or contradictory wave function collapses. also if I remember correctly that was a rebuttal of schrodingers paradox - we overlook that the cat also imbued with consciousness would surely have already collapsed the wave function. but as a mind experiment it works to demonstrate the paradox of reality
Mike Field:
It's not an uncommon proposition, but it fails to answer several fundamental questions, most notably why I (who am then identified with this universal consciousness) do not have access to the perceptions of others, or of the universal consciousness at large; if I really am this consciousness, then I should have this access. It seems to be no different from Berkeley's ad hoc explanation for the exact thing you're trying to address, which was to posit God as a universal observer in order to "collapse the wave function" (he did not know this term obviously, but that was what he was describing) globally and make sure things existed even when they were not observed by anything else.
@@hoon_sol because you’re dissociated from it. We already know this is a process in mentation (Dissociative identity disorder). Mind can separate itself to different points of awareness. Our brains are what this process looks like. But that doesn’t mean you can’t access universal consciousness. If the brain is just a filter which keeps you dissociated from mind at large, then the lack/absence of brain activity should damage the dissociation. And that’s exactly what happens. You can experience universal consciousness through a high dose of psychedelics which significantly reduce brain activity. You can read about near death experiences where people’s brains were dead, but they experienced profound imagery and the sensation of being one with everything (universal consciousness).
@@Ppstate32:
No, that doesn't work at all, and it's quite hilarious when your purported explanation has to start off by assuming something so ridiculous. You're making baseless assertion one after the other and stating them all as fact; until you can demonstrate the ability to be more reasonable this won't be going anywhere.
@@hoon_sol What are you talking about? I'm proposing a theory. Materialism is the metaphysics that makes assumptions. When materialism is proven to be wrong, we need to search for an alternative. The most parsimonious conclusion is idealism - that consciosness is fundamental. All I did is described phenomena which suggest that the "brain as a filter " hypothesis is valid. We can talk about this all day long if you want to.
Professeur John...une merveille..beau comme un ange...la mecanique quantique fait aussi des merveilles .
These physicsest are telling the truth about future like Michio Kaku thank you
" In the Wave lies the Secret of Creation ! " Dr. Walter Russell
Really valuable conversation. Thank you
Thank you. This is a really good discussion that makes sense.
What about the wave function collapse with multiple quantum observers? They would all have differing subjective experiences, But the information is already "saved" in a digital wave of objective EXPERIENCE we are currently watching as a TH-cam video. My question? Does the information itself have potential to collapse in a completely different formation? For example, while we all observe we notice things like Dr.Hagelin sitting in a chair, now that man and chair are already collapsed in his experience, but what about us observing and re-collapsing already collapsed information? Does it change?
if everything is one, then consciousness is to , this makes your statement wrong.
Wigner's friend.
That is why we are the "guardians of the world"
Finally, a perspective of the role of mind that's not mixed up with a bunch of woo.
I didn't think id ever see that.
Oh man, "regular" scientists would absolutely vomit over some of this, but I like it quite a lot. It fits right in with the kind of stuff my mind's been "circling around" for years.
Beautiful conversation full of wisdom
Mind has access to immediate knowledge! The physical brain employs logical processes to come to knowledge! This is the main difference between the two! There is an "infinite" field of knowledge which pure mind draws on! Put another way, the mind knows things A-Priori, while the Brain knows things A-Posteriori!!
Just curious; is the collapse of the wave function that Q physicists talk about in describing QR the same as cosmic consequences or higher brain functions experience during TM?
So maybe the fact that superposition of states and the quantum theory laws only apply at a micro scale has to do with that conscious observation has certain limitations as our perception is limited to macro scale. However I don't understand where does this assumption come from that it's the conscious observer, not the measurment device, what causes the wave function to collapse.
Both were tried, conscious observer and a measuring device, the wave function collapses either way.
Indirect observation. The discussion between Einstein and Bohr about the moon is a good example. If we aimed a laser at the mirror and everyone collectively turned away from the moon and fired the beam we'd find the moon is still there because it shares a relationship with Earth. The moment it flittered out of existence our tides would feel the effect. Any microscopic and sub-atomic particle composing the moon is in a relationship with other particles. Whereas an singular photon or electron being fired has minimal passing relationships with air atoms until hitting the back wall. With atoms composing a large object, maybe only one atom needs to be observed giving it a set value that is then matched with all other atoms in that enclosed system, otherwise half an object could exist in this universe, the other half in another universe. Observation or not if we try the 2x slit experiment with a tennis ball it doesn't work because those particles are in a set relationship composing an object.
Tomek Samcik the real problem in quantum mechanics is that quanta can not be observed at all. Only events that occur as a result of forced interactions with particles can be observed, and these don’t involve the particle because it has been destroyed. So only assumptions regarding quanta can ever be made. I suppose that’s why it’s called « theoretical » physics
This stuff that Stapp is on about is perfectly simple and straightforward to anyone who understands the samhita.
Perception is either subjective or objective: perceiver sees the object of perception as it actually is, or through the subjective prejudices that it already has
So a white racist will perceive a black person as inferior, stupid, conniving etc etc whilst perceiving itself to be entirely free of all such defects . This is subjective perception. A balanced white person will see the black person as a human being with the same potential as anyone else, good or bad, and ditto itself . This is objective perception.
So in practical terms (the observer, the quanta): when the black man makes a statement, you have subjective or objective positions.
You have the objective fact of whether the statement is true or false. This is unalterable
You have a balanced white man with the need to ascertain the truth or otherwise of the black man’s statement, plus the tools and methods he uses. This is objective perception. Then you have the racist white man’s presumption that the statement is false because it is made by a black man. This is subjective perception
At quantum level objective perception is not possible because the quantum cannot be observed. All deductions concerning its nature are therefore subjective because they result from prejudice and observation of events connected to the quantum.
“Probability” only exists at quantum level because of the impossibility to observe quanta, so a whole culture to justify unscientific assumptions and deductions has had to be developed.
In quantum mechanical terms the statement is the quantum, which cannot be observed because it has no objective existence, the black man and the white man represent the environment in which events concerning the statement may be induced to ascertain its nature and the white nan represents the observer with three sets of probabilities; his own degree of objectivity, the truth or falsity of the statement, the extent to which perception of the black man plus data to which the statement refers can be accurately assessed.
These are real potentialities in the real world. There is no need to invoke the limitations of the laws of classical physics to describe the difficulties of quantum physics.
Science never ceases to emphasise it’s character as a pure, conscientious and professional objective perceiver, but 90% of the time fails to live up to its perception of itself, like the whites racist.
The 10% who do contrive to fulfil their integrity suffer marginalisation and suppression and are blocked from access to funds through refusing to subscribe to the hyperbole used by the 90%
It’s a bad world we live in, and the good that remains now seems to be trapped in a vicious circle of corruption.
John, I didn't hear any discussion about race, or perceptions of race. The quantum world is completely devoid of any moral or righteous standing in the world imo.
We are dreams in the MIND of the universe💭🌌
Joe, check out the writings and research of Bernardo Kastrup. He proposes that the only fundamental thing is a single universal consciousness, and that all of us are "dissociated alters" of that mind, precisely as in the sense of split personalities. He cites clinical evidence that some patients with dissociated personality disorder have had dreams in which multiple of their personalities show up and interact. FASCINATING. It seems like a completely plausible scenario to me.
What we really need to make an idea like this stick is exactly what Donald Hoffman is working on - a full derivation of observational physics starting from the base consciousness level. Hoffman has succeeded in producing the quantum equation of a free particle from his mathematics of conscious agents - long way to go, but it's a start.
@@KipIngram Thanks. Maybe the GUT ( Grand Unified Theory) is based on a cosmic consciousness
@@joehinojosa8314 It wouldn't surprise me at all. Of course, most of the mainstream has just "cast out" all such options from their mindset, in spite of the fact that they really don't have any basis upon which to do so. They just "don't like it." So we need bold outside the box thinkers if we're ever going to get there.
@@KipIngram The education system prides itself on being intellectually libertine and rationally open-minded. However IF you try to introduce any alternative hypothesis than their standard, accepted,world view ,they will ATTACK you verbally as "fringe" "pseudo science". It almost seems that they are responding from psychological insecurity and FEAR. If the cosmos is MORE than just "atoms, molecules,vibrating in space" this would threaten their monopoly on defining "Reality" for the rest of us.
@@joehinojosa8314 Yes - you will be "cast out," pretty much literally. Modern science has all the traits of a religious faith. It is the 21st century "Catholic Church."
It's the Oversoul which you are talking about and it cannot be put into form because it holds all of its soul fragments as a singular unit, and not as separate particle fragment..
Two things stand out for me. 1) why are particles only able to be in two places at once? It seems like they should have any number of positions along it's wave pattern. 2) the "mixture" theory just sounds like science trying to hold on to the premise that matter's position pre-exists observation. As if to say: "okay we'll admit you were right about the "thought creates" thing all along, but we were right too!" ...and maybe both are right.
Dr. Stapp, he explained well but was very stressful. My goodness, his breathing......
The human brain does increase it's requirement of oxugen when ''working hard''.
Prof. Stapp was 86 yrs. old when this interview was taped. I bet your breathing will be a little rough when you reach that age, if you do.
You'd need to expand the definition of "observer" to include non-life stuff, otherwise there would be no wave function collapse in a pre-life stage of a universe. If we are to assume that wave function collapse must be possible in order for the first instance of a lifeform to emerge in a universe, we also need to assume that the fundamental/primordial particles themselves must be able to perform the collapse-causing role of the "observer" in order to carry a universe from its "big bang" into that moment of the emergence of life.
Miranda N why can't the universe evolve in a superposition until life evolves. in fact that would be the fastest possible way for life to evolve.
We are participants into being not only the near and here, but the far away and long ago....there is no out there out there.....no phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon...3quotes by John wheeler.
Here's my problem. The way we choose to measure a wavefunction is already decided by the mind, before we become conscious of it. It takes a few nanoseconds for the mind to be made up and become conscious of. So effectively are we just observers without free will?
No, I don't think that's what he's saying. Seems to me he's implying the mind definitely does have full free will.
That is what we call a "non sequitur"; it does not follow. What you are is an entity, popularly called a self, which has both consciousness and free will. Consciousness lagging a bit behind the will is to be expected, just as if you kick a ball towards a goal, it will take some time for the ball to fly through the air and end up inside the goal. It is still the will which initiates the action.
The identity of the knowing subject and the willing subject was very thoroughly explained by Schopenhauer; I recommend starting with On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, and then The World as Will and Representation, he assumes you to be familiar with the former before embarking upon the latter.
You miss the concept. There is free will.
If two different observers simultaneously "ask" nature the same question, do they both get the same answer? Does the wave function collapse the same for both observers?
How can I contact Henry Stapp?
I find interesting the idea of the "Observer", let us remember from the double split experiment with the observation at what slit the (Photon, electron, or buckyball) went thru was dependent on the knowledge the observer was going to gain later. Find this point interesting because it doesn't obey the concept of time. Either the photon knew the observation was collecting data for knowledge or it wasn't. I also take that everything in reality that will be viewed in future, has already collapsed its wave function. What is going thru my mind is the concept of emergent time and the entangled photon experiments. Maybe someone can comment on my thoughts and explain my error or add onto the thought.
I agree Trevor Martin with your idea of two different times, our space time and another. I am not sure if it is a cause and effect(I guess that can be considered deterministic) or to effect that there isn't free will( which is a very awkward logical assumption on my part).
Excellent..... thanks 🙏
Would be highly intriguing to have John interview cognitive scientist and
CAT -Conscious Agent Theory -proponent, Donald Hoffman.
Over in the sidebar there is a panel discussion with Henry, Donald Hoffman, and Chris Fields. So, no John, but it does get Stapp and Hoffman together.
A competent observer is any being which can recognise what is (in this reality).
That is to assume that this reality is real, which is not real; and a competent observer is one which looks within their own consciousness and sees their own deeper nature in its most subtle form.
@@moonsod1113:
Self-contradictory nonsense. Reality by definition is real. Thus saying that reality is not real is by definition false. It's akin to saying that the shadows on the walls in Plato's cave are not real, which is also false; they might indeed be shadows cast by objects in a higher dimension (which indeed they are in that case, 2-dimensional shadows being cast by 3-dimensional objects), but they are still real. All levels of existence are ultimately real, and there must be a correspondence between them.
Thus saying that "this reality is not real" is, like I opened with, total nonsense. The reality you observe must ultimately have a direct correspondence with whatever reality you posit to lie beyond, and they are all real.
«On the other hand, might cognitive syntax reside in an external "ideal" realm analogous to Plato's world of Parmenidean forms? Plato’s ideal abstract reality is explicitly set apart from actual concrete reality, the former being an eternal world of pure form and light, and the latter consisting of a cave on whose dirty walls shift murky, contaminated shadows of the ideal world above. However, if they are both separate and in mutual correspondence, these two realities both occupy a more basic joint reality enforcing the correspondence and providing the metric of separation. If this more basic reality is then juxtaposed to another, then there must be a more basic reality still, and so on until finally we reach the most basic level of all. At this level, there will (by definition) be no separation between the abstract and concrete phases, because there will be no more basic reality to provide it or enforce a remote correspondence across it. This is the inevitable logical terminus of "Plato’s regress".»
It's really just another form of the simulation hypothesis, but failing to recognize that any simulation must necessarily have its basis in a common ground state between simulator and simulee.
«As the term “reality” is undefined beyond this hypothetical relationship, the Simulation Hypothesis is indifferent to the details, e.g., where the host system is located, how the host system works, who or what created and/or controls the host system, and in what respects the simulation resembles the higher reality containing it. But in any case, there must be an ultimate all-inclusive reality or “ontic ground state” that contains and supports whatever reality-simulations may exist, and it is natural to ask whether some aspects of the simulation concept may apply to it. The Reality Self-Simulation Principle states that ultimate reality is itself a natural reflexive self-simulation in which all intelligible levels of reality must exist whether simulated or not.»
There seems to be 2 parallel processes in the observer efeect :
1) The incident beam of electrons has a wave function which collapses (due to mind ?) when the beam reaches the slits
2) There is a wave function of potentialities inside the brain , which collapses inside the brain by influence of mind
Is the wave function in the brain the only one ? What kind of signal the mind sends to the physical process in 1) when observer makes his questiions and at the time of collapse (to cause this collapse) ???
Can someone expain to me those two processes and how they integrate ? Thanks a lot.
yes but what is your opinion on these two processes
Brill. Just like to add that if we throw a ball for a dog the dog might not know it to be a ball but will chase and leap into the air to catch the ball. Only I exist or the dog must be an conscious observer. I think we are all one.
Will of Nature. Mind of Nature.... Basically they are talking about common fundamental attributes attributed to God.
Aloha, John - you may not remember me from Phi Tau, but it would be very valuable to consider the role of condensates as the non-ordinary material substrate of the mind.
That also brings up a question wheather an insect can collapse a wave function ? What I would propose is a double slit experiment with a measurement interpreted by some third party cockroaches.
Tomek Samcik Let me clear your cluttered mind in simple words without going to technical jargon. What Double slit quantum experiment did was to validate Hindu/vedic high philosophies of ageless Vedas. In other words, according to Hindu/vedic philosophy like Advaita - every atom is encompassed by consciousness. without which you cannot perceive matter in its current form. According to Sankhya philosophy of hinduism which combined both dual and non dual high philosophies - Observed (matter) cannot be perceived without the observer (consciousness). So it doesn't matter whether it is you or some insect or cockroach, matter in its current form cannot be perceived without consciousness. It is also the basis for Karma (ancient hindu science of cause and effect) and re-incarnation
kashsoldier Double slit quantum experiment doesn't validate any philosophies, it merely shows that light displays characteristics of both waves and particles, but cannot be observed as both at the same time. Copenhagen Interpretation that assumes role of consciousness in wave function collapse is only one of the possible explanations of this phenomenon. It may as well be that the wave function collapse happens the moment information about the particle position is being "recorded" - forced to leave some trace.
In this explanation you provided you use the term observer and you assume that is has to be associated with conscioussness, so what makes the observer conscious, is a video camera also a conscious observer ?
@@TomekSamcik69 So how does the particle know that ''the particle position is being "recorded" - forced to leave some trace.'' So then it can then revert to it's previous atribute. How does the ''wave'' return to being ''a particle'' upon ''being "recorded" - forced to leave some trace''?
@@nareshlathia5334 I'm not sure if it's the right question to ask, how does the particle know it's in the gravitational field ? It's just how the nature works. How would the particle know if it's a conscious observer or not ?
@@TomekSamcik69:
No offense, but you are still trapped deep within the materialist paradigm when you ask a question like "what makes the observer conscious?"; by asking such a question, you are still implicitly making the assumption that there is such a thing as a material observer, and that consciousness is a quality this observer "has", but this is not true. It is rather the other way around: consciousness itself is the observer, anything it observes, including material objects like the body, only exist inside consciousness.
I could go on at length about this, but if you haven't already, I suggest your read Monadology by Leibniz, Critique of Pure Reason by Kant, and The World as Will and Representation by Schopenhauer; I suspect plowing through these works (with Monadology being a mere minor appetizer compared to the other two works) will answer a lot of questions you've been having, but which you have hitherto not been able to resolve due to not having been able to fully let go of metaphysical materialism.
At last the greatest of minds at the very forefront of science have begun to break down the shackles of physicality in science. This is where the quests of a true hindu and his self realization on conciousness find consonance with quantum theories' findings. One will find that in Hinduism (Sanatana Dharma actually) morality is not a human tenet that is reinforced with dire consequences on transgression but rather there is a law of Cause & Effect which is in harmony with the cosmic cycle. The Advaita Veda says "Brahma satyam Jagat Mithya" which means
Brahman is real, the universe is mithya (it cannot be categorized as either real or unreal). The cosmos is Brahman itself and not different..(Brahman is eternal, conscious, irreducible, infinite, omnipresent, and the spiritual core of the universe of finiteness and change).
John Hagelin and Henry actually embody the original spirit of quest for truth which is enshrined in the basis of Sanatana Dharma where traditionally the seeker acquires self realization through experience of conciousness, whereas phycisists approach through hypothesis and mathematical approaches.
A great conversation indeed!
wow he worked with wolfgang poli, heseinberg ?! and john wheeler who max tegmark looks up to. im impressed.
two intellectual titans!
Wow - would really like these gentlemen to look at my theory. An introduction can be found by clicking on the channel link above.
Amazing history - Thank you.
Okay, completely untrained mind here. Would the wave/particle-- function/collapse describe the same two states as the case with a tree falling where there is an observer, or isn't? The simile requires there's the event of the tree falling, but it still questions whether the sound waves are collapsed by the hearing functions of the observer. Is it metaphorical, or literal?
mindblowing
Isn't our mind simply our conceptual framework and might this be somewhat independent of neural connectivity in the sense that the same conceptual relationships can be implemented in various ways in terms of the underlying neural structures? So if two people have the same concepts and these concepts are related in the same way, they might still differ in their neural structure that gives rise to these conceptual relationships, but perhaps we could still identify this correspondence in the way they relate the concepts based on an analysis of the underlying neural structures?
It seems somewhat similar to the way humans identify patterns as information. For instance, a particular pattern of photons in a fiber-optic cable might constitute a particular image (say a jpg file), but the same image might also be constituted by a particular pattern of electrons on a memory stick. So there is a kind of dualism between empirically observable patterns in energy or matter on the one hand and abstract information on a conceptual level like a bitstring, regardless of how it's constituted in some empirically observable form (like we might store a jpg file in a DNA molecule).
Possibel😊
the act of observance from a cam or from eyes inputs an electrical signal that changes the matter into a wave?
Stevie Foster
Observations in quantum mechanics is not looking with your eyes, it's having knowledge of the particle
( in order to get that knowledge ) you still have to measure its outcome either by looking at it with eyes or some kind of recording device ... its this act of observance that produces an electrical form of stimuli that interferes with the photons ?
tactical plunger you cant see stuff on the subatomic level anyways ... but these things can exist and not exist at the same time or can be in two places at once and sometimes there and not there at the same time ... like a wave of potential ...sort of like Schrodinger's cat
Stevie Foster
Well looking with eyes is inaccurate, you can set up a quantum experiment and the results will stay the same even if you leave the room
Thats because the detector which is a computer processed the information
Quantum mechanics makes more sense if you look at the world as a simulation not as a real world
Stevie Foster
However if we wanna discuss this matter philosophically, we would conclude that space time emerges from consciousness
Because we have to ask the question "what processed the first particle in the universe?"
The answer is something that is immaterial and can process information, and that is the mind (consciousness)
Does Stapp seem to making human consciousness fundamental to the existence of the universe?
I can't tell for sure - as far as I can tell the things he's saying would work either in a "consciousness fundamental" or a "dualism" model. He's definitely saying that there are minds independent of brains - some completely different type of entity.
No, not human consciousness in particular; consciousness in general. Consciousness goes beyond humanity.
@@hoon_sol Yes I fully agree with that statement.
5:40 The universe is conceptual. Whichever way you cut it, that seems to be the case. This has implications.
Isn't the word "nature" just another way of referring to God?
Dave S basically yes
Isn't "God" just another way of referring to "nature?"
@@williamolenchenko5772 Not really. The term ‘god’ is loaded, has a certain amount of semantic baggage to do with omniscience, intention, benevolence etc - nature is a more neutral term referring simply to how the universe presents in it’s unaltered (by humans) state.
'Nature' has a mind of its own; Sets Up Rules?
hmmm.. I wonder WHO left the Quantum AI Supercomputer
Terraforming Earth And Social & Bio-Engineering its inhabitants
and Geo-Engineering Its Atmosphere;
/* Anunnaki */ end; someone from the future
its quantum bullshit. the wave didn't collapse. it was not formed in the first place. the detector prevented the interference pattern from forming. if you understand holograms you will understand how a beam of particles or light or electrons create interference pattern. the beam must interfere with itself to to create a interference pattern. if the self interference does not happend, the beam will create nothing. the detector electron absorber caused electrons to be attracted to the detector and bend the path away from the center between the slits and prevented the mirred beam from interfering with itself. if you have a positive charged body in a vacuum, you can cause the path of electrons to bend toward that body instead of going straight. that means when the detector was off the beam hit the center between the slits and reflected back to itself. when the detector was on the beam bendt and went trough one of the slits. not sure exactly but if a laser interfer with itself int create multiple bands and fewer it its is slightly off the 180 degree perpendicular path with itself.
Consciousness is something that is experienced but cannot be measured with instruments so what is the point of trying to analyse it with physics? Perhaps psychology is a better tool?
+Trevor Martin What I meant was that consciousness by itself is not matter or energy so there is no way for physicists to know what it is using scientific measurements. Psychology uses measurements of brain function but also verbal testimony and visual observation of people to try to know more about what consciousness is. But neither science can really explain what consciousness is in my opinion. It is something that can only be experienced and it's full potential abilities and limitations realized over time.
+Trevor Martin Any good books on this subject? I want to learn more about what you said
Trevor Martin Thanks!
Yet all semiconductors and every computer works because of ''Quantum Tunneling'' by the electrons within the semiconductors. All Transistors are semiconductors and all Computer Chips are millions of Transistors. Ask any Electronics Engineer about this!
Well.... From Matthew 7, quoting Jesus, "7. Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened."
😊❤
I just can't think of a coherent explanation of the double slit experiment with the single photon. It just does not make sense.
Incomprehensible
Bullshit always is. ;-)
In ancient times there were prophets in them the one who said perfection and that perfection came true people concedered that person called prophet. In our times John Hagelin is the prophet of GOD because he is phD physics and he is also Master in VEDEK knowledge may GOD bless him
John Hagelin is the prophet of GOD in our times
Fortune cookies are real. The ripples they cause in space and time depends on the observer. The observer's power to find any synchronicity to focus on is a matter of faith. To most observers a fortune cookie is meaningless and random because people don't see the same things. The contents of all fortune cookies is the same until read by an observer. If two or more observers open and read the same fortune cookie their synchronicity may become entangled. Flipping coins does the same thing. They create order out of chase narrowing probability into something that makes sense.
Stapp is right, Stringtheory is wrong.
Sky Darmos: You are right. The space/time continuum is a single dynamic flow. Einstein was right, and I believe that Fluid Dynamics/Theory encompasses relativity and quantum mechanics without the hocus pocus.
Two higher order experts revealing their years of knowledge about the nature of reality...
The wave function is made of what's mind is made of? Whose mind? An alligator's? Worm's?
"What is mind? No matter. What is matter? Never mind." hahaha. xD ~George Berkeley
Well Actually You make me think again !!!
Thanks for that !!!
So we get written on a quantum wave function once we die or we are already a quantum dataset existenin in that way but than maybe all is already quantum data to and that does not decay but then the dataset only grows ???
So once we differ enormously from our once owner matter we do become a kind of separate entity ??? Some scientists think so ???
So the grandfather paradox is actually resolving mathematical into a schrödinger’s cat like situation and so does the terminator paradox ??
And than if we see the world as a way of perception than we make things exits but does this nice car also have a conscious mind as long as the box does not kill it ? cognito ergo sum ??? by the cat ???
Well as we do believe in a God that exists forever than an always existing multiverse and a quantum data set is a way of seeing things ???
And mister Rupert Sheldrake might actually describe some kind of quantum data field than the reverse is also treu ???
Would quatsch data cause the existence of certain matter configuration???
Is the only life the life in carbon and oxygen or is there life other chemistry’s like silica and nitrogen ???
like the chemical factory incident in bhopal proved if I remember correctly ???
is life in a way between order and chaos almost like fire is almost alive ask a firefigther could there also be life in power fields and such if enough different energy states ??
In quantum data fields perhaps ?? other time scale than ???
Who says we are the only life possible???
So why limit things ???
Why not keep an open mind ???
A Crazy man can ask more questions than a wise man can answer ??
So a last if we can change the memory of the matter so we add energy but change the memory below the heisenberg thingy the lowest level and we add energy or we take a heavy atom and change it can it become a basis for the replicator of star trek ?
Can we use something like electrochemical printing and a guiding energy like a magnetic field or a high frequency field beyond x-rays and also electrostatics to get a printer of material any material ???
And if we are actually the observer can we than prove if we have a scientific correct experiment that proves past life that the brain is only our thinking organ ???
If the brain works to quantum levels is it than more than a neural network and also a quantum computer perhaps ???
Than are we in a way more interstellar and more than the sum of nature and nurture ???
so a nice way of seeing things is caused by this kind of thought you proposed???
How did the Hindu manage to say that the ''Universe is an Illusion''? They referred to it as ''Maya of GOD''. The word ''maya'' is of Sanskrit origing and means ''illusion'' or UNREAL. Thus reality is UNREAL. My question is how did the Hindu's realise this many many years ago?
Anyone here think he sounds somewhat DeForest Kelly?
31:00
David Bohm was the best. He and Krishnamurti were very concerned with the pitiful state of humanity due to its mechanical ego. Most other theoretical physicists merely pose as intellectuals.
Bohm was also completely wrong. That's why he appeals to people who can't do physics. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 You certainly have much more credibility than David Bohm and couldn't possibly be anon coward cointelpro trash.
@@TokyoShemp Unlike David Bohm I have actually done trillions of quantum measurements. Guess what I have never seen? A guide wave. I haven't seen a single particle, either. All I have ever seen was irreversible energy transfers. I kind of doubt Bohm understood that quantum mechanics was about energy. He was one of the old guys who still thought that it was about objects. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 You're a nameless troll working out of a cointelpro cubicle. You're less than nothing because you're so fake.
Maybe the f-stops of your mind aren't fast enough,,,,
Wave function collapse does not exist in reality. Wave function collapse is technique used in a mathematical problem solving in physics theory. Many things some people assume exist in physics theory do not exist in reality. Much of the confusion comes from trying to explain the surprising results of particle 2 slit experiments. For the most logical explanation of these results, you can view my video, "Particle 2 Slit Experiments Explained By Paul Marostica". If you are still interested after that, I have 1 other video about quantum theory, which will help you even more. After you've understood what I've explained, you should have a much easier time determining what exists, and what does not exist, in reality. I also have a video about what's wrong with relativity theory. Search keywords: matter theory marostica.
Wave function collapse doesn't even exist in theory. You will be hard pressed to find a theory textbook that even defines what the term supposed to mean. ;-)
Shift happens
Lol
The mind is made up of "information"..
Brain collapses with age ;)
Only mindless people who weren't paying attention in science class are talking about wave function collapse. ;-)
You know, John Hagelin list all of my respect when he was in that social darwinistic abomination of The Secret. Henry stapp seems to have his head together but I cannot lend much credibility to Hagelin.
It appears,,one day,,science and religion will get married and quantum will be the priest,,,but who will ware the pants ?,,
both and neither at the same time?
Anybody want to take a stab at that hand-wringing Dr. Stapp is doing? Something is being strongly communicated there. Is he thrilled to be engaged in his favorite topic? Does he have guilt he's washing away? Does he have arthritis that's bothering him?
He's protecting himself from the 'string theorist'...
hell, quantum mechanics aint nothing but glorified ancient greek atomism.
Not really, the Greeks just theorized their could be a particular that could not be divided into smaller particles, ( thus the premature and unfortunate naming of the atom before we discovered it could be split). the Greeks said nothing about wave functions, probabilities, dipoles, EPR, quantum tunneling, wave particle duality, uncertainty principles, entanglement, Bell inequalities, wave function collapse, etc nor did they even imagine the possibility of computers, the internet, mobile phones etc.
Hellooooooooooo neuroplasticity.....
oh no, they're dualists...
What does that mean? Explain
How did you reach that conclusion?
Wow, we have come so far. Quantum mechanics! But, we still have not figured out how to create microphones that don't pick up a grown mans every single sound. You'd think an animal was in the mix with all the panting and huffing. Matter does not exist outside of perception. So this is it for me. Perception out. Are they still making noise when I'm gone?
But that doesn't work!! HAha. I'm compete over collapsed wave Theory. Hagelin....The Big and SMall require competion. Shain Patrick!!
Wrong, the big and small do nor require competition; they require integration, and in spirituality this is called unity.
I want to hear what they think but they spend to much time deciding the question and being polite !
interesting video, but the older guy sounds like darth vader...
Excellent.... thanks 🙏.