2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
7 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
Пікірлер
@ashinvihari9730 10 ай бұрын
How do you explain the subjective experience of Qualia with this.
@ronaldjorgensen6839 Жыл бұрын
real dog named at man?
@orangetuono38 Жыл бұрын
YT's reco engine is running in overdrive with this Marxist garbage. Watched one panel discussion with Komrade Wendt, now we've got this hack trying to equate physics with his Marxist propaganda. Disgusting
@frandeep Жыл бұрын
Great tune!
@terrypmusic Жыл бұрын
00:23 Good stuff, keep it up!
@vertex1047 Жыл бұрын
I thought there would be a chinese person in it and he has a 50% chance to kill the dog.
@false_binary 2 жыл бұрын
Great interview and lousy production.
@randallboggs962 2 жыл бұрын
Is it possible that scientific laws and properties, that seem to be intrinsic to the nature of the universe, are simply driven by a form of material consciousness? Can a consistently swinging pendulum, birthed by a push and killed by gravity, be considered this microscopic life? Perhaps our already well-understood classic laws of physics translate to microscopic matter in the same way quantum properties may apply to macroscopic matter. If the brain is a wet quantum computer, the key to understanding it lies in understanding quantum sciences.
@randallboggs962 2 жыл бұрын
Also if the brain IS a quantum computer smart enough to perceive consciousness, what would prevent any other quantum computer from eventually doing the same. God? I don’t know! Tell me!
@jonlee2722 2 жыл бұрын
we should view it again and again.
@Speciesuniverse 3 жыл бұрын
Wonderful!
@tapashchatterjee5435 3 жыл бұрын
QUANTUM COMPUTING...The APPROACH And STRATEGY For The NEXT GEN.......
@ecomavic3108 3 жыл бұрын
why
@timur5241 2 жыл бұрын
because yes
@alexanderjavier2663 3 жыл бұрын
You can ride the wave of evolutionary politics but at the fundamental level, politics boils down realist-materialism. Every other political thought in IR is a product of these two theories since interests defines the world and it's governance.
@AlexWent 3 жыл бұрын
Very well done (from your quantum twin)
@sebastiaankampers6651 4 жыл бұрын
So he starts the video that people have described the working of the brain like current technology and know he thinks the description of the brain like a quantumcomputer will be different? 😝
@Maceta444 4 жыл бұрын
How does this hypothesis of Humans as "walking wave functions" come even close to explaining the fact of free will?
@feelsbadman1677 3 жыл бұрын
Very very simply put, in saying that the power that choses a state in the quantom wave function is baiscly the same thing as decision making in our brains since our Brain is basicly that and the Wave function is not decided by anything else but it selfe. So we are that power.
@FernandoFlores-oh9cy 2 жыл бұрын
Its explanaition enough for peopple who've never studied quantum mechanics.
@albinjohnsson2511 Ай бұрын
”The fact” lol… Free will is not compatible with classical physics, which are deterministic. That is why most philosophers, ontologists, and scientists versed in the debate deny the existence of libertarian free will. Wendt’s ontology might salvage a limited version of it.
@Maceta444 Ай бұрын
@@albinjohnsson2511 Why the hell would you think classical physics is the way to explain human consciousness? That is absolutely silly.
@josephs4729 4 жыл бұрын
What is the name of the book by Colin White that is reffered to in the video around 11:45?
@projectq3806 4 жыл бұрын
The book is Rethinking Terrorism: Terrorism, Violence and the State by Colin Wight - www.sydney.edu.au/arts/about/our-people/academic-staff/colin-wight.html
@cem9753 5 жыл бұрын
Wow!
@SomeBeautyfulArt 5 жыл бұрын
Great interview but disgusting jumping video
@midnattsol6207 5 жыл бұрын
So, what really is new about this? Physics itself already said all this, didn't it? If quantum mechanics are a valid description of the world, which they seem to, then yes, everything can be described with a wave function. 'Everything' includes humans, includes consciousness, needs, and perceptions and all these brain functionalities. The theories of International Relations, from Realism, Liberalism to (yes) Constructivism are in their assumptions so ridiculously inprecise and leave out more possible dependencies than they include, that it is an absolute overkill to try to modify them with something as precise and complete as quantum mechanics. IR theories leave out information and attempt to find some few variables to base predictions on which are more or less pointing in the right direction. In a quantum mechanical approach, no information is left out. So, what's new about all this? Also: Non-determinism doesn't mean non-materialistic causes and effects are possible. Determinism is broken by absolute randomness. There is no directional item. Edit: 1 more thing: Yes, neurons and their connections are affected by quantum mechanics. This however does not mean, that on the scale of them, quantum mechanical effects are responsible for or needed to create thinking. As it stands, there is no hint that looking at the brain in its classical approximation with collapsed wave function would not be sufficient to simulate/generate/explain human intelligence and perception. The point made in this video is kinda redicoulus as it tries to use physics - the last dicipline to embrace some sort of magic or non-materialist action - as an argument to reintroduce magic "something going on which is not supposed to go on" into the world again.
@theea3466 4 жыл бұрын
Agree with your statement. The last point you make is the key. If you live in the discipline of physics nothing will go on that's not suppose to go on. The quantum coherence allows for a normal unity. However there is no doubt we are in quantum examples of dis-coherence are around and has been for sometime. E.g Mandela Affect, people with psychic abilities etc. I believe we all live in spooky quantum theory and this opens up the notion of parallel universes. The electron classically takes one material path so there is no material universe at the same time. But this just suggests that each person is the centre of their own universe and technically could reverse time and decisions crossing universes without even knowing it unless they develop the memory of any of the previous wave paths. Which I believe is starting to happen. The evidence will be with those people for example who walk outside their house one day and discover a tree in their front yard that they know was never there before. Everyone else in the street or in the family will say the tree has been there for years. But you know with no doubt there was never a tree there... for the last few years you might have even been saying to yourself.. I should put a tree there. We will label them crazy for now until neuron memory retrieval advances. At the end of the day we are all one with one imprint.... Key will be knowing what material path is chosen/taken -Chaos and diversity is where it's at. Let me know your thoughts?
@jackpullen3820 5 жыл бұрын
Consciousness is emergent from collapses of wave functions within microtubules in brain cells, in fact each brain cell is a brain within itself. A third of our brains cells contain 80,000 microtubules per cell and each of these microtubules consists of some 2,000 microtubulin where quantum superposition and collapse takes place. When you estimate computational power in quantum bits, it is more than the number of atoms in know universe for the entire brain. Thus our brains are making computations outside of known dimensions of time and space. See works and abstracts of Penrose & Hameroff
@binuraveendran6794 5 жыл бұрын
Why India keep loosing these brilliant brains.
@AbhishekSachans 5 жыл бұрын
Perhaps because we don't support and value them much.
@RikiB 5 жыл бұрын
I tend to agree this is on the right track to a deeper understanding of many different things but at the end you say "its too elegant not to be true" and that immediately reminded me of string theory. Its always a good idea to be conscious of our bias...
@jackpullen3820 5 жыл бұрын
An eventual goal would be direct interface....
@chrismain3968 5 жыл бұрын
Every premise begins with "what if" and "maybe". None of these conclusions are meaningful without evidence.
@CosmicMoth 5 жыл бұрын
Chris Main you are correct in that “what if” and “maybe” begin every premise, but not just in this video. This is how all science works, it all starts with hypotheticals based on what we know already, we cant have true evidence until mainstream science allows us to Truely test these hypotheses. We probably know less than 1% of all science, so most things that are true we have no idea about, Wendt’s video here is just the beginning of this theory
@chrismain3968 5 жыл бұрын
@@CosmicMoth then he should collect some evidence before presenting. If I were to say, "Hey guys! Maybe gender is a wave function that we collapse by performing!" I would not have added anything worthwhile to the conversation. A hypothesis is useless without evidence.
@CosmicMoth 5 жыл бұрын
@@chrismain3968 like I said this is the first step, he must first get his hypothesis known. This is also not a theory that can obtain evidence very easily. Thought experiments and hypotheses do still definitely have their place in science without evidence. The point is he isn't presenting this as fact, we don't know how consciousness works, and we don't have the means (or we do but not the backing of mainstream science) yet to figure that out. What's your suggestion we just don't even try to understand how consciousness works? This video is to get the narrative of quantum consciousness out there, not to say it's definitely the correct theory.
@chrismain3968 5 жыл бұрын
No, I suggest that people with PhDs maintain their credibility by gathering evidence before reporting findings.
@CosmicMoth 5 жыл бұрын
@@chrismain3968 again, he is not reporting findings, that's where you fail to understand the situation. Before you can even begin to try to start doing research an essential step in the scientific process is to ask question based on observation made about the world, this step doesn't require any evidence as it is literally the step before gathering evidence
@zeromold 6 жыл бұрын
This comment is addressed to whomever created this video. Your camera work leaves much to be desired, however your editing is a sophomoric attempt at creativity the adds nothing to the subject presented. In fact it detracts from the insight presented. Please replace the current version with the unedited footage or, better yet, eliminate the video and leave only the audio.
@54johndavis 5 жыл бұрын
and the music is awful.
@iBen4G 6 жыл бұрын
Just because there is some coherence in some protein in the brain (there is coherence in your fucking table right now) doesn't corroborate the claim that we are walking wavefunctions. This is crazy, and among the other things someone sit this guy down and teach him field theory please!!
@iBen4G 6 жыл бұрын
Physics is grounded in math and formalism. If I were to talk Law and have no clue about the articles in the constitution, what sense would that make? You just simply cannot say "Humans are walking wavefunctions" without a clear and rigorous proof. Its like a judge saying "I say you're guilty" before the trial even began!!
@farzinshokooh2085 3 жыл бұрын
Read his book.
@FernandoFlores-oh9cy 2 жыл бұрын
@@farzinshokooh2085 Have you read David J. Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics? Yeah, there's no walking human wavefunctions there.
@cloustonenergy 7 жыл бұрын
The Wave Function is rather spiritual (energy) and when observed or obtains stimulation the field vibrations localize and the force field interacts with sensors of various things to include humans and their touch then seems to be material.
@FA-tq9ip 7 жыл бұрын
We don't need social scientists going into the natural sciences in bulldozers (preconceived constructist and other blank slate political agendas). What we need are natural scientists going into political science and formulating reasonable hypotheses based on first principles that can be demonstrated. Why does Alexander Wendt put so much emphasis on Quantum Consciousness (a speculative field) being taken up in social science when neurobiology can offer so many insights into human behaviour already (such as the work of Robert Sapolsky)? Why is neuroscience not taken up in social science already??!!..... well but, of course, the social sciences can't tolerate biology so they must jump right past it into quantum physics... much like "The Secret" and the new age movement... Constructivists need to accept that people's behaviour is based partly on biological mechanisms - primates and the average human are not so different. Primatology, neuroscience and biochemistry has more to offer the social sciences in terms of explanations of human behaviour than Quantum theory
@MinimaAmoralia 7 жыл бұрын
First, the transfer of natural science into political science failed long time ago. You cannot expect scientific standards applied in natural sciences to be equally effective in studying the social world. Second, neurosciences is already long time present in social sciences. Third, it seems that you crudely misunderstand Wendt's constructivism. It does not claim that biological factors do not play any role in social relations. It rather shifts the focus to the agent-structure problem without denying biology. It ain't no postmodernism.
@FA-tq9ip 6 жыл бұрын
I think you do not appreciate just how much constructivism dismisses the importance of biology in terms of every single action and decision anyone makes - because of the extent of this influence of biology for one to make a video suggesting humans are quantum wave functions is deception. Furthermore, the reduction or rather connection of social science with natural science is entirely possible - just how chemistry was reduced to physics. It is necessary for us to gain a granular level understanding of how memories are stored in the brain and what neurotransmitters connect up with them to generate certain symbolic-affectations. There is nothing you have actually said which strengthens Wendt's argument you have just dismissed what I am saying - I do not misunderstand constructivism crudely I am well aware of its denial of human nature having studied it myself.
@MinimaAmoralia 6 жыл бұрын
1. you do know that Wendt's social constructivism is IR theory? It has little to do with social constructivism in sociology? In fact, his seminal paper on agent-structure problem employed heavily concepts of critical realism, which is closer to neopositivism. His idea was to acknowledge the existence of mind-independent world and use abductive reasoning in order to tell something about transfactuals, such as identity, power and states. 2. I think I misstated what I meant. I do agree that natural science can bring insights both methodological and ontological into social sciences. What I meant, however, was that positvistic-natural scientific methods failed largely in the social sciences.
@FA-tq9ip 6 жыл бұрын
Yes, I know that it is IR theory. I think all the social sciences have gone off on a massive tangent due to their lack of appreciation of biology including IR, sociology, psychology and the humanities. Identity, power and (nation) states are built up out of biological organisms and ideas, language, culture or memes are only part of the picture they are not the primary aspect of what makes a human what they are - they have a massive effect, of course, don't get me wrong. Alexander Wendt as I understand it is largely arguing for a blank slate or Tabula Rasa view of human nature (constructed). Something I hear often is that neuroscience says the brain has adaptive plasticity so therefore constructivism is correct - well no because while it is adaptable it also has pre-existing programs and impulses that result from biochemical signalling. Thus, it is very clear that a humans actions, emotions, orientations and basic needs are all the result of the biological organs and structures that allow us to exist and operate - and these vary per individual and somewhat between genders depending again on the individual in question. To reduce psychology to biology we need to gather a granular level understanding of the mechanism of action of how memories are stored but also how other signals like neurotransmitters and hormones interact with memories and effect psychological affects and mental states. From there we could begin to reduce what social events mean in relation to psychology-biology how do group affiliations relate to oxytocin for example - in this way we would link up biochemistry with ideas and signs.
@FA-tq9ip 6 жыл бұрын
Realism and liberalism in IR also lack a proper appreciation of biology although I would say Morgenthau has some good points in his Politics of Nations that make sense - but I do think that humans are not as fixed as he makes out also considering we are developing gene engineering, synthetic biology and nano-technology there is, in theory, the possibility of us changing the human on a fundamental biological level and creating a new post-human which has a different biology etc.
@FA-tq9ip 7 жыл бұрын
Typical constructivists trying to deny any basis to human nature (blank slate) - interesting how he fails to discuss any aspect of neuroscience that relates to neurotransmitters. For example, preference reversal can be explained by changes in levels of brain chemistry like dopamine or oxytocin. Such reversals have been demonstrated before and after say an oxytocin nasal spray used in an experiment setting. There really is no need for quantum events to explain complex aspects of human behaviour like preference reversals. Even where quantum events have been shown to be involved in say a Robin's understanding of where it is geographically via the Earth's electromagnetic field this does not mean the Robin is a quantum being as a totality. What it means is a part of the variance of its behaviour is related to quantum level events - it does not mean the Robin is a coherent quantum wave... So even if there is some quantum aspect to the human mind it will likely be minor even if it has an effect (as Michio Kaku suggests). So if we want to explain human behaviour it seems that the variance of mind/brain needs biological understanding more than quantum events. It is such an extreme overgeneralization to say the human mind is built on a quantum wave. Also currently there is no evidence for Roger Penrose's conception of microtubules and quantum tunneling as the basis for consciousness etc.
@freistiu 6 жыл бұрын
some of the best neuroscientists (for ex. Prof. Peter Jedlicka) think that Wendts proposition might be true.
@stef5791 3 жыл бұрын
Show me a neuroscientist that can explain the time I took acid and dissolved into the universe! Can't do it? Checkmate materialists
@FernandoFlores-oh9cy 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you! And you've made obvios his lack of understanding of Neuroscience; but i seriously doubt this guy has ever oppened a Quantum Mechanics textbook.
@theriversexitsense 7 жыл бұрын
is there any evidence of this at the neuronal level? no. theres a lot of evidence against it.
@theea3466 4 жыл бұрын
I believe the evidence your looking for is in memory. Try the Mandala affect.
@hypersky2004 7 жыл бұрын
Great stuff. Wendt never fails to disappoint.
@hypersky2004 7 жыл бұрын
Philipe Afonso Pedrosa He’s a leading scholar in international relations. I’ve followed his work for years.
@marianakalil 6 жыл бұрын
hahaha poor Wendt, but I totally agree.
@KingCrocoduck 7 жыл бұрын
Who would win? Wendt's "understanding" of quantum physics (as well as the philosophy of science), or deBroglie's wavelength?
@KingCrocoduck 7 жыл бұрын
This is pseudoscience. de Broglie wavelength disproves this entire argument.
@FA-tq9ip 7 жыл бұрын
Because Wave-Particle 'duality' does not strictly exist. Particles don't 'dissolve into wave functions' as Wendt states. Rather, in current Quantum Field Theory all particle behaviour is described as excitation in quantum fields. Thus, it is not that there are waves and particles simultaneously as a true 'duality' rather there are quantum fields which come together into a particle when measured. Waves and particle measurement equations are methods originating in classical physics which when applied to quantum particles were inadequate to describe quantum fields (so in reality they are not actually particles and waves simultaneously this is the result of applying classical physics to quantum events): kzbin.info/www/bejne/hoCxXmylorScfbc
@KT-en8pq 7 жыл бұрын
Ok now I see we have a much bigger mystery at hand. The admiral actually asked if it is ethical to change the mind of a terrorist. Sad. Thank you Anirban.
@Zeegoner 7 жыл бұрын
woo-woo
@zagyex 8 жыл бұрын
If quantum mechanics does appear anywhere in nature, and it is proven to be beneficial in information processing, it is extremely unlikely that evolution has left it out from the most complicated object it created, the human brain.
@vikasfavr 7 жыл бұрын
but we need a consciousness based thinking to operate that quantum machine then it can be beneficial in information processing
@K03R53 8 жыл бұрын
Great talk! Really enjoyed it!
@samquigley1637 8 жыл бұрын
A quantum process survived the wet and noisy environment of Alexander Wendt's brain, turning him into Deepak Chopra, which no classical physicist could have predicted.
@donakavite8286 8 жыл бұрын
What he's saying is actually grounded in facts and evidence. However, the same cannot be said of the physicalist theory of consciousness.
@yellowburger 8 жыл бұрын
If there is some level on which quantum fields interact with the brain to create some aspects of consciousness, and that's a HUGE if, it's a gigantic leap to then argue that there is some sort of quantum "collective conscience" behind social relations. Individuals, regardless of whether or not their consciousness has some relation to quantum fields still interact with one another through mundane old communication and physical actions. No need to mystify the social world, and even worse international relations, with the idea that it is all somehow a quantum field interaction. Even Deepak Chopra doesn't go that deep into the land of woo. However, Wendt still deserves (imho) huge respect for his earlier insights into the socially constructed aspects of international anarchy.