This is brilliant! Is there a full video?

Bob Doyle is an amazing human

Great explanation, probably the only video on youtube which directly discusses the theory and creation of satyendra nath bose's "boson". So it seems like Bose simply used Maxwells theory of particle 3D motion and applied it to momentum of photons.

inaudible et illisible !!! dommages

Bohm and bell claimed hidden variables not Einstein. In 2022 nobel prize what is done is Einstein was correct thus bell inequality got vioalted meaning no local hidden variables preserving locality and bell did the suff inverse

The contents of this lecture are quite interesting, however the music is dreadful. Not only is it mildly distracting when you're trying to pay attention, but this kind of stock music that goes nowhere and sounds like it was made by AI is really distasteful.

This guy is great! just read "Einsteins greatest mistake" by Bodanis. This presentation really clarifies bunch key points in way that is understandable. I appreciate that. Thank you.

This creates the real problem of demarcating, the phenomenal and causal realms, my opinion. The issue is usually addressed or accommodated by making a distinction between "evidence" and "logic". Metaphysics is the stepchild of this fundamental split between these domains of reconciling, perhaps, the "imaginative" and "encountered" aspects of a received reality; it is ambiguous almost by definition. Not heretofore solved to any satisfactory degree.

Wonderful to see and hear the man himself❤

starts at 14.37

Very helpful Bob

No.

Bob, thanks for your talk. Btw, the background music is too repetitive and loud making it a bad distraction.

Information is contingent for sure

Thank you so much, fascinating stuff!

informative

Keep up the work you do. Great listening to you.

Could you do it over? Interesting topic. Enjoy your website

This is a hilarious video, he never talks about where information originates. Information predates our Universe and the source would be outside............God or Simulation take your pick

Great vid, although remember Wittgenstein was never a true member of the Circle!

What a sharp mind!

We are Life at large, experiencing itself as all of us, simultaneously.

Why use either/or logic? Why pit "particle physics vs wave"? Or, might there be, as of now, right now an innumerable host of hidden factors yet to be discovered about the nature of the universe? "Certainties" spell trouble. "Meaning" is time-bound. And though it is true we cannot change the past, it is equally true we can change was it means to us today. Sincerely, Rt. Rev. Charles V. Davis, A.T.O.M., Fellow Time Traveler and Pan Theists... and less than humble student of both Alfred Korzybski, Founder of the Inst. of General Semantics, and A. N. Whitehead.

Why background music? Why? It's not only useless but also making your speech like a meaningless, cheap TV show. Please, please, please remove the music (if you can).

You have no control over your thought life or your emotions, therefore, how can you say your will is free? Meditation exposes this.

What does some social utility of a belief have to do with its truth value? The fact that those who were primed that there is no free will cheated more in the experiment says absolutely nothing about the existence of free will. If we exposed kids to the harsh reality of human mortality and saw them performing worse than kids we showered with happy fairy tales, would that prove that we are immortal?

VERY interesting BUT, still none-the-wiser as to where/how/why non-physical "potential", order/information/matter (let alone the implicate order and complexity of Life + Energy) emerges from nothing/vacuum/void. Until learned minds unlearn the precepts of Scientism they will remain smart, not wise!

I would really like to see this video show up, unexpected, in the KZbin feed of ... . . Sam Harris

Thank you for this work, Bob! I have a question: What do you think that Whitehead would think of Mereotopology?

Not so much a discussion of Whitehead's philosophy but an acknowledgement that he identifies the continuous field vs discrete particles viewpoint back in 1925 in his book "Science and the Modern World" ... Bob is a materialist, thinking consciousness emerges from the physical elements that we currently know of verse consciousness preceding the physical and inhabiting it. He goes through the key points of his philosophy at the end of the video, quickly, Whitehead is critical of the materialist view and Bob does NOT address those arguments - - Not really sure the point of this video ....

Lecture Menu: www.informationphilosopher.com/lectures/

But lately they say that particles are through fields right? Quantum fields.

What are the sources used in this presentation. From where we deduct that these wete the end thoughts of Einstein?

William James: A man walking down a road sees two churches on opposite sides. One is called the Church of Determination, the other The Church of Free Will. He goes into The Church of Determination and is asked why he wants to join? He answers because I choose to and is thrown out. He then goes into the Church of Free Will and is asked why he wants to join? He answers because I have to and is thrown out.

Quantum theory is not classical theory. Classical wave mechanics, and classical particle mechanics don't work. The 2 slit experiment is an example that they don't work. There is no particle wave duality or wave function collapse. or entanglement. Those are hodgepodges of obsolete understandings. The rules of wave mechanics don't work when there is one sit open. The rules of particles don't work when there are 2 slits open. The exact same rules work for either case when we use the rules of quantum mechanics. This video is technobabble bullshit by a dishonest intellectual moron. What Feynman meant by "nobody understands quantum mechanics" is that nobody understands why the absurdly simple, and crazy rules work for all known phenomena to incredible accuracy at the limit of our ability to measure. The key rule the 2 slit reveals is that when you have 2 or more paths you add "probability amplitudes". which are just arrows that turn like hands on a clock very fast, and stop depending on the time light takes to go those paths. When there's one slit open there is only 1 arrow. When 2 slits open there are 2 arrows. Any path to any point on the screen where the arrows point in mostly the same direction has a band of light, any path to any point where they point in opposite directions there is no light. Simple as that. Goofy as that. That is what nobody understands. Why it is that.

.... you're literally trying to do exactly what I am. I'm working on a univalent formal system of direct reference for a pure disambiguated and vagueness free language with unrestricted verification capacities. May the best man's project win, my friend.

There seems to be one problem by which many modern philosophers to my knowledge go wrong - and that include the line from Hume; That the humans are like "Tabula rasa" until they perceive the world Most modern people don't even consider that apart from all the biological heritage from the gens we are far from the blank screen. Very little of our personality refers to biology alone and from the psychical inherited architecture which is determining our choices but the conscious choice from a independent free thought and will GIVEN to us. The VERY meaningful process of reincarnation is here left out because of the idea that our life is random and meaningless of cause the conclusion of a random and meaningless universe beginning in an explosion... Most scientist seems to be Deterministic without acknowledging the absurd consequences of the logic following this train of thought

Wonderful lecture. One problem though; You need to stop making that "tsa/tsu" sound with your mouth when speaking. It is extremely annoying. Touches a nerve. Making the speed 1.5 faster made it somewhat tolerable.

Thank you for sharing all these informations in this channel. I studied some if your articles and am even more interested now in your ideas, books, articles and life.

Awesome lecture professor!

Awesome video. Einstein is the greatest scientist to ever live. Douglas Stone argues that Einstein should have won 7 to 10 Nobel Prizes for his contributions to science. He was a breath-taking genius. His work on Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission ALONE would have made any other physicist a legend. Thank you for this video Professor.

Show me a neuron that fires without being influenced by stimuli, hormones, genetics, epigenetics, society or evolution and I might consider there's free will.

Liked and subscribed. This is great work! I am roughly your age. But my demographic is primarily 18-24. I’ve been reluctant to show my face on camera as a result. My belief/theory is that, while Hebb refers to what is happening in our own brains is independent of other brains/minds. However, my dog and I playing ball is a developed turned envy based on external potentialities between each other. My own neurons that fire together, certainly wire together. But what about other species with potentials for neuro-plasticity? I’ve begun to explore these concepts beyond our own minds. It’s easy with dogs, horses, and other mammals. But what about other species. I am the first, (to my knowledge) to train a spider, and tame multiple wasps. This has required the development of new neuronal connections in my own mind, but also in theirs as well. Are our models limited to our human minds alone? I hope you’ll check it the Phidippus Project, and my other channels. 🙏🏻

"we could try to simplify rather than complicate" no wonder academic philosophers despise you

Oh, man, the things are interesting, way more advanced than what most philosophers know... BUT, wrong video-sound synchronization! From You! Unbelievable.

You're the best. Don't like the "systematism" of the information philosophy, but anyway, 99% interesting and 100% clear and simple

We want to know what the time is not how to build a watch

I wonder what your take on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law would be?

thank you for uploading because I can't afford school but understand this and want to learn more so badly

Right it is incomplete einstein never said that it was wrong. Ironically he contributed to it by using photon as a particle. And even his Bose einstein statistics which bosins the smallest particle known follow