Turn on, Tune in, Observe with Karl Friston and Markus Müller

#consciousness #philosophy #physics #neuroscience #cognitivescience #theoreticalphysics #theorems #philosophyofmind #metaphysics #science
In Philosophy Babble - The Great Minds Series
In this instalment; We have two distinguish speakers, Professor Karl Friston, a leading neuroscientist known for his groundbreaking work in brain imaging and his development of the 'free-energy principle.’
On Spotify: tinyurl.com/wu6ebac4
On Acast: tinyurl.com/2yew3ecy
Dr. Markus Müeller, a physicist whose academic journey steeped in theoretical physics and mathematics. His work delves into the intriguing crossroads of information theory and quantum mechanics.
This conversation was recorded during a live session on Clubhouse @philosophybabble We step into the realms of theoretical neuroscience and quantum mechanics, as we dive into the 'Physics of the First Person Perspective'. If you want to stay updated on upcoming live sessions on Clubhouse, please subscribe to the channel. And, don't forget to share, mention, and like!
Topic of discussion : Physics of the First Person Perspective
1. Why, how and multiple observer states
Summary:
In this engaging dialogue between Karl Friston and Dr. Markus Müller, the duo delves into the intersection of physics and consciousness, with a particular focus on the first-person perspective. They explore emergent complexities in the world, the Free Energy Principle, the role of observers and meta-observers in cognition, and the philosophical and psychiatric implications of these concepts. Additionally, the dialogue includes questions and insights from the audience, touching on topics like the possibility of simulating consciousness, the future of AI and technology, and the intriguing concept of observer states. The conversation is punctuated by moments of speculation, humor, and references to the broader scientific community.
00:00 - Intro
02:07 - Preface by Dr Muller
06:25 - The physics of the first person perspective, question 1; Why?
11:01 - Question 2; How?
17:31 - Answer; An Emergence World
20:46 - The most sci fi and the fun part!
24:40 - Friston celebrating the point of contact with Free Energy Principle!
29:59 - The Natural Laws
36:18 - Statistical Complexity?
39:39 - Which Prof Wallace?
51:54 - How not to be a “Probabilistic Zombie”
01:01:26 - A modeller, and a modeller of modellers
01:08:14 - The observer, and the observer of the observer
01:14:22 - Knock out from the universe/simulation?
01:19:43 - Friston need a cigarette and a drink
01:20:19 - Can Consciousness be simulated?
01:27:57 - On Christof Koch lost his bet to David Chalmers
01:32:05 - Adam on Principle Less Action
01:37:06 - Prakash on the observer states
01:45:16 - Prakash on the psychology of the observer states
01:48:49 - Victoria on technology and AI
01:51:38 - Friston going under the Tube
01:52:40 - Kyle on meta awareness or meta cognition
01:56:37 - Hari on Free Will
01:57:37 - Andy’s question on the emergence of objectivity
01:59:11 - Bayesian Coherent
02:05:13 - Vinod was intrigued with Muller’s theory
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT THE CHANNEL BY DONATING TO - paypal.me/philosophybabble?co...
MASSIVE THANK YOU TO THE TEAM AND EVERYONE THAT JOINED US ON THAT DAY.
JOIN US AT: CLUBHOUSE FOR FUTURE LIVE SESSION
Clubhouse: @philosophybabble
Copyright © 2023 by Philosophy Babble. All rights reserved.

[@philosophybabble]

Timecode
00:00 - Intro
02:07 - Preface by Dr Muller
06:25 - The physics of the first person perspective, question 1; Why?
11:01 - Question 2; How?
17:31 - Answer; An Emergence World
20:46 - The most sci fi and the fun part!
24:40 - Friston celebrating the point of contact with Free Energy Principle!
29:59 - The Natural Laws
36:18 - Statistical Complexity?
39:39 - Which Prof Wallace?
51:54 - How not to be a “Probabilistic Zombie”
01:01:26 - A modeller, and a modeller of modellers
01:08:14 - The observer, and the observer of the observer
01:14:22 - Knock out from the universe/simulation?
01:19:43 - Friston need a cigarette and a drink
01:20:19 - Can Consciousness be simulated?
01:27:57 - On Christof Koch lost his bet to David Chalmers
01:32:05 - Adam on Principle Less Action
01:37:06 - Prakash on the observer states
01:45:16 - Prakash on the psychology of the observer states
01:48:49 - Victoria on technology and AI
01:51:38 - Friston going under the Tube
01:52:40 - Kyle on meta awareness or meta cognition
01:56:37 - Hari on Free Will
01:57:37 - Andy’s question on the emergence of objectivity
01:59:11 - Bayesian Coherent
02:05:13 - Vinod was intrigued with Muller’s theory
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT THE CHANNEL BY DONATING TO - paypal.me/philosophybabble?co...
MASSIVE THANK YOU TO THE TEAM AND EVERYONE THAT JOINED US ON THAT DAY.
JOIN US AT: CLUBHOUSE FOR FUTURE LIVE SESSION
Clubhouse: @philosophybabble

[@twinblessings2125]

Incredible gem. Baffled that this conversation exists. Cheers.

[@travisfitzwater8093]

This is fascinating.

[@williamjmccartan8879]

Thank you to the guests Markus and Karl, and the hosts who brought them together, it looks as though both are expanding their horizons. I'm 66 minutes in and I have to say that for a good part of this conversation I was treading water in the deep end of the pool, it has been very interesting to see two people who appreciate each other learn from each other. I would introduce the idea of a current perceptual environment, at this point of the conversation, at around 73 minutes. 122 minutes, Karl does his best version of, who's on 1st? Too many observer's in the 30 seconds. Peace

[@philosophybabble]

The depth was striking, and like you, I felt I was swimming in deep intellectual waters. And yes, Karl’s rapid section at 122 minutes was amusing! Cheers!

[@projectmalus]

Very interesting, especially at the end with the Bayesian Coherence. Thanks for the wonderful discussion.

[@philosophybabble]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@deselby2448]

The theory represented by Dr. Muller is very interesting, thank you. But I'm not sure I understand this theory fully. If nothing exists except for observers states, what exactly computes the next state for each observer?

[@philosophybabble]

The next state for each observer is theorized to be driven by a mathematical structure or algorithm that governs these transitions. This can be thought of as an abstract computational process where the relationships between different observer states determine the progression.

[@heinzgassner1057]

I have great respect with regards to what you are trying to do. My own experience is though, that our human mind can simply not cope with the weirdness when encountering ‘ultimate reality’. We can e.g. intellectually circle around the timeless time of ‘now’ and the spaceless space of ‘here’, talk about it, conceptualize it, discuss it. But due to being part of the space-time ‘conventual reality’, our mind will not be able to go through this magic gate, through which we symbolically can melt back into the ‘one-ness’ and ‘understand’ what meta-consciousness or ‘non-recursive-observing, knowing, understanding’ actually means. I admire your ambition to frame this into mathematics, but there are good reasons why ‘the vibrating pure silence’, or ‘the silence between the words of poems’ or ‘the explosion into gaps between sounds of music’ were preferred by ‘realized masters’ when trying to talk about the unspeakable. I doubt that ‘understanding’ that ‘meta-consciousness’ cannot be an emerging property arising from evolution in our space-time world will ever be ‘proof-able’ within the boundaries of mathematics, computation or even logics and philosophy. Once you ‘explode’ or experience the ‘melting’ back into the ‘one’, the ‘hard problem of consciousness’ is gone and you just wonder about ‘the hard problem of matter’. Nevertheless, my deep respect for your approach, which will definitely not be an easy one.

[@philosophybabble]

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I encourage you to subscribe to our channel. Your subscription will keep you updated, and I'd value your continued engagement. Thanks again!

[@Lindsaayyy]

What Are the stances of each speaker here?…are they saying consciousness is created in brain, or not?
(confused as to why people are sometimes ambiguous about this)
…then again, I’m only 12min in, so maybe I’ll learn! 😂

[@philosophybabble]

Markus's "Zero Worlds" theory offers a minimalist approach to quantum mechanics. It differs from the "Many Worlds" interpretation by starting with no pre-existing worlds or branches. Instead, it suggests that the complexity and branching observed in the universe are emergent properties derived from simpler fundamental rules. This theory aims to simplify the initial assumptions required to explain quantum phenomena, making it a unique and foundational perspective in quantum theory.
Friston's expertise in the Free Energy Principle could enhance Markus's "Zero Worlds" theory by providing insights on biological plausibility and refining the model's assumptions to align with empirical data and system behaviours. This collaboration could create a more robust framework by integrating neuroscience with quantum mechanics.

[@noreenquinn3844]

Thank you for this but too many adds to follow