Platonism has to be understood in its irony

I dont think this makes any sense. Microtubules are interesting, but theres no evidence they have anything to do with consciousness, you could as well say that consciousness comes from anything else… electromagnetic waves, spin, whatever, with no evidence, without even defining consciousness! Penrose was very smart and an admirable person, but he was wrong many times, for example when he claimed to have proven the Riemann hypothesis.

This shit is getting better and better. Waiting for the next plot twist!

As a semi student of Penrose and Hamerroff I've been onto there theory for quite some time .. I found this video the first one I've seen of yours to be pretty darn accurate and useful in its furtherance of my own understanding... great job

Nick lame has a great lecture on the Krebs cycle that gives a lot of insights into the nature of origin of life as we know it. Second Michael Levin has discovered a knew level of information. Retention in the boielctrical network that every cell has and uses to comincate with other cels

Single cels 3.5 to 4 billion. Bacteria and Archana were around far longer and neither possess microtubalas .. the eukaraitic cell was most likely a bacterial cellswolig am Archana cell Anda symbotic relationship devolved Abdallah eukarit. Cell was born.....No, Archaea and Bacteria (both prokaryotes) generally do not have microtubules. Microtubules are a component of the cytoskeleton found primarily in eukaryotic cells. They are made of tubulin proteins and are involved in maintaining cell shape, enabling cellular movement, and facilitating cell division and intracellular transport. Prokaryotic cells, such as those of Archaea and Bacteria, have simpler structures and lack the complex cytoskeletal elements found in eukaryotic cells. Instead, they may have other protein structures that perform similar functions, such as the FtsZ protein, which is involved in cell division and is considered a homolog of tubulin, the protein that makes up microtubules in eukaryotes. In summary, while Archaea and Bacteria do not have microtubules, they have other proteins and structures that fulfill some of the roles played by microtubules in eukaryotic cells.

I dont like Ray kurweil.

One thing you're getting wrong here, is that in Hoffman's view, consciousness is most definitely *not* a quantum computer. In fact quantum mechanics, along with space-time, are *both* emergent properties of consciousness; as per Dr. Nima Arkani-Hamed's theories, which Hoffman is working off and indeed are worth studying in and of themselves.

What a load of BS

Gematria444:360=1.23*MONAD

The universality of geometry is only when it's Euclidean right? Maybe there's some grand unifying geometry that incorporates all of it, but the universality we can find in geometry isn't that. As in, we find universal properties of a triangle (the sum of its angles = 180 degrees), but this only takes place within Euclidean space. This leads me to a geometric mysticism, where universality is unknowable for good reason, and so it's to be put aside.

@24:33 Could you not then; entangle two photons in a crystal as mentioned and send one to a monitor on a planet in a distant stable orbit, and send the other one into a black hole. The particle in the BH either hits a singularity or enters into a perpetually accellerating orbit in a MECO. By studying the population by repeated experiments you can verify which states those populations exist in and study the interior state. Orbiting photons would then leave a highly biased population of correlative photons in the experiment. Uncorrelative population would support singularity encounter and timing data.

Its amazing how the combined alpha and beta of the tubulin protein is 8nm. That means the alpha and beta can do what Einstein eloquently called 'spooky action at a distance' as quantum coherence has been estimated at 7nm. So the alpha and beta can have quantum superposition as it cycles an effective 1 and 0. Also interesting how these bit patterns also match the fibonacci sequence.

Gematria444:360=1.23*MONAD

Gematria444:360=1.23*MONAD

10:30 Wait, the part that a single photon still does create an interference pattern is clearly false, isn't it? I mean, from reading physics I remember that it was stated clearly that a single photon lands to the single position, it's just the probabilities of where exactly we could find it are bizzare.

It's God. God animates all things.

RAPTURE444:360=1.23*MONAD

Your image is misunderstood. As I know, human do not evolve from monkeys/chimps

Plot twist: this isn't a normal scientific presentation, this is indeed the meaning of life. P/S: I have the fucking EXISTENTIAL crisis recently, so I really appreciate your video.

Gematria444:360=1.23*Monad

Gematria444:360=1.23*Monad

quantum entanglement

it's easy: the force is SEX , try to find better looking female spiecies🐰🐇🍓🥒♥ where's my nobile prize ? :)

wow. Looks like this is where religion and science cross. I have EXISTENSITAL Crisis recently. Hope your channel will introduce more future research

Are We In A Simulation? Cosmos is a computer ,making our life. in the Ads/CFT Correspondence,Deep Learning Relies on Renormalization. we see the Organizational form of "Simulation" an emergent universal mind...in the sight of God，just like the description in dali‘s painting "The Disintegration of the Persistence of Memory"~~ in a flat country, like a brain in a two-dimensional VAT. Obtain the infromation-detail of life in this generation adversarial network，to Complete the panorama of yourself

Thank you for sharing your personal experience of synchronicity. You’re right, it’s hard to express the personal significance of these experiences but it’s so helpful when we are able to share our experiences of creating meaning from synchronicity.

👍👍

👍👍

Great fun to listen to, I'm not well-versed on these topics so take these comments with a large grain of 'this guy has no idea what he's talking about' salt: The argument at 27:31 assumes that you *aren't* those ones in the universes being destroyed - as far as i can tell, your reasoning is because you don't *feel* like you're in a branch where the universe is being destroyed? If your argument, through negation or affirmation relies on assigning probability to the likelihood of you being right here and now, you'll need to give me a vague jist as to what you consider *not* you. The quantum computation point I didn't follow - it also seems to invoke the above of 'so you're telling me i just so happen to find myself where i find myself? what about where i don't find myself' and that it would not be a 'computationally effective solution', again I'm not sure what is meant by this _'From a human outlook, the multiverse is another tenant of nihilism that challenges the idea that your choices matter, you are real, and there is something meaningful occurring in the universe.'_ Please hear the following out even if it seems like woo at first: notice that you can experience multiple senses at once. Like sight and sound, the multiple somatic sensations in parallel. Now think a happy thought and notice there are corresponding sensations. It might be hard to notice at first. Now a sad one, and that also has corresponding sensations. Now, this is really quite tricky, but try thinking a thought and seeing if that thought is being processed in sensations. To get right to the punchline, every single thing you experience is in the language of these sensations, including conceptual notions such as what is real and what is not, what is you and what is not (yes, they're all just 'feelings'!). It is, in some sense, an information synaesthesia - in which you become markedly good at causal inference because you clump together things that are causal as singular things in and of themselves, and then clump those into singular things, this is relevant because you can notice that you can detach the informational content from some expression of sensations and see the de-clumping in action - as a computational analogue you can think of a token of c++ as being a clump of asm, and a token of asm as a clump of binary, then hardware and so on, and you can run asm without c if desired. But an epistemic problem occurs when thinking about the functionality of an agent whose existence is entirely predicated on updating causal connections. If the agent has foundational erroneous beliefs that were assumed axiomatically for all other connections, will that agent be inclined to even consider the possibility of said beliefs being wrong? No, it (seemingly) holds no utility - it seems that if true, they break down on a fundamental level and thus they can reason that whatever they're experiencing right now, even if by some accounts is a delusion, can be compatiblistically taken as what it must require to be the epistemic agent they think they are but are too scared to inspect - some necessary naivety. Notice how the belief destroys itself, it contends some privileged freedom of movement so long as it does not move where its not allowed. The apex of meditation (Śūnyatā in buddhism) kindof reifies the resolution to this problem by holding the assembly process in awareness long enough to see the inherent silliness in thinking of models as a well-defined things that can simply prove themselves booleanically one way or the other, and hold some sort of privileged nature if the agent just refrains from decomposing their constituent parts. These guys are the happiest and most moral guys you'll ever meet and they'll seemingly mention that they don't feel like they're some singular epistemic agent but emote the feeling that would translate to your 'maximum agency'. Maximum agency and no agency are the same thing in the limit, you don't even need to predict and update on will happen next - you are what happens next. This is to say, if you are a causally-inferential agent that 'feels' information - you'll feel neg-value at prospected computationally expensive updates. Hence your prospected feeling towards the seemingly choiceless, epistemic agentless, multiverse being coupled with that of your feeling of meaning and operational conduct. [thoughts? is this jargon? would love other opinions on this]

I wonder - can you say something more about why the universal truth one is not connected to the relative chaos body? maybe I missed the reason they are not able to touch each other. Just curious

I congratulate you this channel, I have been interested in the topic and watched some lectures here and there, including penroes, but here I get really comprehensive information! I love the cross-functional character of the channel - physics, biology, philosophy, evolution, math... This microtubules theory is mind blowing, looking forward to continuing with next episodes

👍👍

👍👍

he cannot hold my attention

you're absolutely right 👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

😀 right 👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍

👍👍