Quantum Mind: Is quantum physics responsible for consciousness & free will?

[@scunnerdarkly4929]

British philosopher Emerson Pugh once said “If the human brain were so simple that we could understand it, we would be so simple that we couldn't.”

[@ArvinAsh]

That is a good quote!

[@kennethbransford820]

@@ArvinAsh Evolution = Self Assembling Atoms = Impossible

[@kennethbransford820]

Evolution = Self Assembling Atoms = Impossible

[@jwvandegronden]

I truly genuinely LOVE smart asses! This is a phenomenal observation expressed in such a succinct way you simply bow your head and shut up ;-)

[@kennethbransford820]

@@jwvandegronden Bow your head to what? Another man? === Evolution = Self Assembling Atoms = Impossible =======

[@northernskies86]

Don't blame me for my short attention span; blame the short decoherence time of phosphates in my brain.

[@The_Universal_Trends]

This is classic

[@EXOPLANETnews]

Hey i have an interesting channel about space videos and science mysteries if you r curious about it then do visit my channel.🙏

[@rillloudmother]

don't tell me what to blame ;-)

[@KristenNicoleYT]

For me it’s the low levels of tonic dopamine

[@hosamfikry2924]

Some people find it so hard to acknowledge a good joke

[@theraven6836]

I’m more confused now, but at a much higher level.

[@armenstaubach9276]

Read the book from Prof. Jim Al Khalili, Life on the Edge

[@justinbrat]

But.. Still reductively, right? 😂

[@mitsuracer87]

Should my entire physical self feel created from untold millions of minute bubbles?

[@hosamfikry2924]

I feel the same way. Weirdly, the more I am sceptical about reality, the more positive and productive I am. I was expecting the opposite

[@meganlindseycompton4900]

Just take a deep breath.

[@tomshackell]

7:26 4th option: non-dualism. That the consciousness that observes the universe, and the universe that it observes, are the exact same phenomena. That the universe *is* observation, and all that the exists is consciousness. That people do not have consciousness .. but that consciousness has people.

[@Antifag1977]

I've wondered about this for years now. This dude really does make some of the best youtube vids!

[@fiddledotgoth]

I would question his assertion that free will and consciousness are the same thing or even dependent; just because we are aware of our thoughts does not mean we are or need to be, our thoughts...

[@Antifag1977]

@@fiddledotgoth Interesting conjecture. But seeing as how there are no examples of one having self awareness without having free will (that I know of), I think we'd have to assume as much until we can see proof otherwise. As it stands every self aware person ever known has had some degree of free will - instances of mental conditioning/brainwashing notwithstanding.

[@fiddledotgoth]

@@Antifag1977 Erm, how do you prove that anyone apart from yourself, is self aware...?

[@Antifag1977]

@@fiddledotgoth I can't even prove that I am self aware much less anyone else. It is all best guess on these sort of matters. Sure we have things like the mirror test and the Turing test; but we have developed AI's that have been able to pass them that still aren't what most of us would consider self aware. Who knows? Maybe it is all subjective? . All I can say for certain is from my POV I am self aware and so are all the other humans I have encountered. So far as definitive proof - I am not sure that is possible depending on what one accepts as proof.

[@fiddledotgoth]

@@Antifag1977 You do not need to prove that you yourself are aware and there is, as yet, no way of proving anyone else is; we take it on best assumption and faith but free will is another matter that has more technical aspects...

[@Alex-lc2tw]

I never enjoyed physics that much at school but well made and interesting videos like this really make me enjoy physics

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad to hear that!

[@bb-gb7jv]

Me: I love physics Complex math: Hello there!

[@sylwiadrozd9899]

I agree. I have always been interested in physics, though at school the teachers n subject curriculum made it look scarring. Tkank You, Mr Arvin Ash. I am waiting all Your videos with highest anticipation. I believe Your professionalism and up-to-date science content make wild interest in quantum physics not only amateours like me, but learned phisicists around the globe and help to get the knowledge of science develop at the quantum speed! :)

[@boch2411]

@@bb-gb7jv no. But yes. But nooo....

[@mr.radium4962]

I will always be in superposition if complex math asks me if I like physics or not.

[@AmarDamani]

You are one of the best content creator on KZbin, not just in physics or science, but across all genre !!!

[@innosanto]

I dont think he makes the whole episode himself that could also be the case. The wpisodes are excellent and he is also very good in presentation and in communicating it

[@shashidharshettar3846]

I’m a doctor and have passion to learn Physics and have been learning on KZbin for the last 7 yrs. After this long 7 yrs I easily understood “Quantum Physicis applied in neurophysiology (consciousness), Thanks Arvin

[@unknowngba]

Same here. I am an ex Chartered Accountant (currently a home maker🙁) who has special interest in physics especially quantum physics. Arvin's videos are easy to understand except where mathematics creep in. My last study of physics and maths was in my 10th grade. I also follow Sabine Hossenfelder but her explanation is somewhat hard to digest for an amateurish physics enthusiast like me.

[@icurededs]

Can you answer a question? If you are a doctor and study physics, can you tell my why Allopathic hospital based patent medicine is pretty devoid of any science you find in physics? I mean, it’s a bizarre cult that caused most of my disease. I have seen no more misguided example of this than how modern neurology is practiced. It resembles a cult in my opinion, things lie MS, and “causeless” diseases that are nothing but another group os symptoms that has a cause, no one is looking. Except my Integrated Medicine Doctor. Now I don’t have any of those and other so called diseases. I got one man, fired an entire team of allopathic Mds, did most of the things they said were impossible and now I’m the most recovered chronic disease patient I know of. Everything that nearly killed me can be found in a hospital, and nothing that made me better can be. I wouldn’t have had to fire it after it gave me 5 years to live 9 years ago and fix everything myself. It’s only because I had studied science and logic that I knew it wouldn’t work. How is it that every maker hospital in the modern world practices a form of medicine that keeps you from what works, in favor of turning you into a profit for a pharmaceutical company? As someone who it nearly killed, it’s a question I ask most medical professionals. I go into any rare or chronic disease forums, and literally everyone who has recovered, did it by firing allopathy and doing it themselves. Why is medicine like this? I’m heading back to med school myself, but for integrated medicine. Hopefully to expose allopathy for what it is.

[@manikeshkumar8565]

This is Manikesh, Asst.Professor, Psychology... wanna know your opinion regarding possibility of quantum processes in Brain functions

[@sarthakasingh2179]

​@@manikeshkumar8565 we currently don't understand how human brain works, but quantum physics should play a role as our brain is made up of tiny neurons made up of atoms communicating with each other through electrical Impulses. This is like a quantum computer processing information through probabilities of each interaction with another.

[@NadeemAzeem-km2re]

Wow you peoples are geniuses of the century the theory which is imposible to understand by the great scientists.

[@harshbhardwaj8221]

Hands down literally one of the best videos on you tube. One of the most complex question in Science explained simply.

[@mariuszpak1338]

Search down for dr Stuart Hameroff detailed lecture here on YT about this Orch OR theory. His detailed breakdown of consciousness using mostly bare physics, biology and chemistry are in my opinion one of best videos in here.

[@watamatafoyu]

Watching microbe videos has confirmed for me that all living things have a form of consciousness. They're not just reacting physically to chemicals in the environment. When one is alive, it reacts in a purposeful way to stimuli, but it's not forced to. When its dead, it merely reacts to chemicals in the environment. It's a thin line, but a major leap in difference.

[@classicsciencefictionhorro1665]

Microbes think we are automatons.

[@watamatafoyu]

@@classicsciencefictionhorro1665 How do you know that?

[@classicsciencefictionhorro1665]

@@watamatafoyu They communicate with me. They use English inside my head. At first I thought God was speaking, but when I asked for a Ferrari and didn't get it, I knew it was those pesky microbes.

[@watamatafoyu]

@@classicsciencefictionhorro1665 Interesting.

[@ameliemlv3918]

not all living things have consciousness; its merely instinct transformed. think of the core; evolution and instinct

[@ileftricechannelforidubzch4748]

You deserve more subs. If my science teacher was like you, I would be too smart. I actually like learning when I watch this channel. Been watching your channel for four months now.

[@dragoonTT]

I think before any students get into an equation they should study why, how and when we use these formulas and numbers. I mean looking back it was turn to page 321, do questions 52-98. This is the formula have fun. Well thanks teach

[@ileftricechannelforidubzch4748]

@@dragoonTT Couldn't have said it any other way. I agree.

[@nauka7565]

@@dragoonTT Ikr, I want the basic, the core, the why. I kinda dislike just using the thing like everyone else. If you know the why you can invent new stuff

[@Dxeus]

Arvin's video feel likes a beautiful symphony to my ears. I am into Quantum programming (a little bit )and the more I learn about quantum physics the more I want it.

[@MrBollocks10]

Brilliant! New vid. It must be Friday? Everyday is the same for me nowadays. Yipee! I suddenly have that Friday feeling. And it's starting RIGHT NOW... .....thank you.

[@EXOPLANETnews]

Hey i have an interesting channel about space videos and science mysteries if you r curious about it then do visit my channel.🙏

[@MrBollocks10]

@@EXOPLANETnews OK will check it out. Ta .

[@scienceexplains302]

“Perceived consciousness”... something has to be conscious to perceive anything

[@richardsaid973]

technically as long as the definition remains tautologous. But perceive in this context is used in terms of illusion. so instead of it being circular it's more like saying "what we are convinced we consciously perceive is consciousness". Of course even if we did have consciousness (depending on how you define it) you still wont require free will to be in the picture.

[@scienceexplains302]

@@richardsaid973 Something unconscious cannot have an illusion, either. I have not heard anyone argue that consciousness implies free will.

[@richardsaid973]

@@scienceexplains302 true. I guess that is the problem with arguing by definitions in general...it has to make sense in order to be sound lol. But I have definitely heard theologians and some academic religious people attempt to rationally that consciousness --> free will simply because they define consciousness as mean your "mind" and this "mind" is your spirit. Anyway it does "seem" true that if it is unconscious it cannot have illusion but I was trying to hint at the case where what we may think is "consciousness" may not be "consciousness" at all. Or perhaps, as by the definition of illusion: "a thing that is or is likely to be wrongly perceived or interpreted by the senses" and demonstrate a world where an AI only has infrared sensors therefore it would not be able to "perceive" anything other than infrared even though there is also gamma, microwave, ultraviolet etc. We can then compare that AI to ourselves however, the only issue is that why we have science and alternate instruments to assist us in understanding the world around us so using the definition of illusion still doesn't really get around that issue.

[@thuggie1]

this is where reductionism fails

[@MSGarawi]

Dude, this is singlehandedly the most interesting video I’ve seen on KZbin in years, if probably not ever. Thanks for this! While it’s very difficult for us to accept the possibility that this is all a simulation, I can’t help but bask in the potentially, and probably, simulated pleasure of entertaining those questions.

[@MSGarawi]

Guff what about the possibility of me actually meaning what I wrote because the video resonated with me (regardless if it’s an objective truth or not) and you having the right to disagree and to think otherwise?

[@christopherblanchard2099]

@@guff9567 Troll

[@StefBelgium]

Definitely underated channel. Hoping you ll grow fast! Congrats on your videos and educational approach. Love it!

[@psykoj]

I'm happy that there are 141,502 other people interested in videos like these!

[@matthewwilliamson9286]

Your content is incredible man. The way you break down such complicated concepts to a level someone with no proper education in physics can understand is a really something special for someone like me. Thank you

[@goertzpsychiatry9340]

Matthew Williamson kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYC6pWWcd65kjKs

[@nerdexproject]

How come that every single video from you is so crazy interesting and so well explained?! I just love how you dive deeper into the substance than others! Gonna share!

[@ArvinAsh]

Probably because I'm a nerd. lol.

[@Reach41]

I’m glad I was predestined to watch this video!

[@braintalk9664]

Very interesting video, but as a neuroscientist working on the topic, there are a few additional issues i would raise with these types of theories: 1. If indeed consciousness were about microtubules, you'd have to explain why you can lose (e.g. in injury) the microtubules of most parts of the brain and remain conscious whereas losing a relatively small number of microtubules in the central lateral nucleus of thalamus instantly delete consciousness. 2. Phosphorylation is the process used in mitochondria to generate energy to restore out-of-balance gradients after neural activity takes place. They are simply "energy repositories", nothing else. So how that would then generate consciousness would still be very mysterious. 3. Re free will, other than "quantum physics is mysterious just like conscious (so one must explain the other)" how did the randomness/probabilistic nature of quantum phenomena offer a seat for the "volition" of free will?

[@dragonsickness4561]

I know there are quantum processes going on in the brain. The shrooms showed me. It was beautiful.

[@AchileDeji]

Yes, shrooms the way.

[@mo_philosophyw5414]

Shrooms dmt etc are here for a reason

[@eagwrevbrew43]

Care to elaborate?

[@birdsayshello]

@@eagwrevbrew43 drukgs mmmh ye MMMMM

[@prospectorpete3738]

@@eagwrevbrew43 bit hard to describe a 5D geometric shapes covered in rotating alien language while the Buddha gives me life advice.

[@nayankulkarni5131]

Commenting before viewing because I know the next few minutes are going to be great when you publish a new video :)

[@devekhande9204]

Same here.

[@2006MC]

I watch a lot of KZbin and this absolutely my new favorite channel. I'm far from an academic but I'm glued to his videos.

[@2006MC]

@BBB H Thank you for the recommendations I will definitely check them out!! And along with this channel I've been watching a ton of kzbin.info these videos too!!

[@Robertpupo]

Hey Arvin big fan fan your videos & less than 20 min shot that you provide on complex subjects of quantum - best part beyond information & knowledge, you manage to trigger the need to know & understand more on this fascinating subject - but whenever there is an attempt to particles, energy & beyond that physics with subject of human consciousness, it's always been woefully short & wanting - we don't understand particles themselves fully, leave alone they coming together in combination & the outcomes - seems like a leaf trying to explain the structure of tree - we now theorize about multiverse & that we may be living in a 3D holographic state (Lenny Susskind) - based in string theory postulates, and multiverse, where do search conciousness - in our existing state & brains or its projections in other multiverse - Michil kaku admits like fish we probably are not able to see beyond our water envelope - we admit we don't know what we don't know & still we want to push with all conviction "theory of everything" - would it not constitute naivety (my respect & gratitude will definitely not allow me use the term charade here)

[@EXOPLANETnews]

Hey i have an interesting channel about space videos and science mysteries if you r curious about it then do visit my channel.🙏

[@tokensharma3738]

I am glad that we are trying to find real answers to questions instead of just dropping it by tagging it as a wrong question.

[@satyakamasani]

Thanks!

[@ArvinAsh]

Thank you!

[@willywonka6948]

I just wanted to challenge my disbelief in free will, but now I feel like I'm processing an acid trip. Phenomenal job, Arvin!

[@Alkis05]

I don't know about phosphorus, but QM mechanics certainly has the effect of getting my brain entangled.

[@foreverraining1522]

I wish I would've had you for my professor for undergrad physics. I would've excelled.

[@VasilisAnagnostou]

I'm not losing a single episode of Arvin Ash science videos. Astonishing, at least.

[@pjaworek6793]

ORCH explains retroactivity which I think I'm seeing all of the time so it's my best explanation for that. Apart from experiencing instantaneousness generally (even precog reactions that surprise me) I once saw/heard a complex event twice, once while falling asleep to a startling set of sounds and again after it startled me awake. It was a sequence of sounds and verbage that could not possibly be reproduced twice like this.

[@nathanderhake839]

15:44 freaked me out a bit. Good video. I have a new appreciation for the brain.

[@Quantumanandha]

Thank you quantum friend. I am taking Phosphorus rich food to have my consciousness entanglement with constellations.💜

[@ArvinAsh]

Haha...Matthew Fisher will be very proud of you.

[@b4byf4c3455451n]

@@ArvinAsh Free will is the tool with which our omnipotent reality chooses to fulfill its only desire, understanding. In physical terms, understanding would be the spontaneous formation of order in the midst of chaos. In fact, disorder always increases in our phenomenal universe. Endri Vuka, an albanian guy wich grow up in Italia or Italy 😅

[@b4byf4c3455451n]

@@ArvinAsh I developed the mother physics theory of all theories. Fritjof Capra used to call it M-theory

[@b4byf4c3455451n]

@@ArvinAsh Because I set myself the ontological paradox of the almighty and then I resolved this paradox. Coming to understand that the object of the almighty's only desire is understanding and the almighty himself needed free will to satisfy his only desire. You see, it all comes from a need for understanding. The disorder of covid19 was necessary to understand that the real parasite for this planet is our lifestyle. And our planet changed immediately. As if to say if you humans change your lifestyle, I immediately change too, who am a living planet like you.

[@EXOPLANETnews]

Hey i have an interesting channel about space videos and science mysteries if you r curious about it then do visit my channel.🙏

[@swamiaman7708]

Wow .... What a wonderful explanation in such simple language .... All the best Sir .....

[@RicardoRojasBedoya]

Hi Arvin! From Peru again. Just a short note to point out that my guild (I am a neuroscientist) is not making the adequate distinctions therefore they are not using the vocabulary correctly. For example they are not distinguishing between ATTENTION, INTENTION, MOTIVATION, SENTIENCE - all of which are EPI PHENOMENA and CONSCIOUSNESS & ITS OFFSHOOTS! As long as they keep this up the conceptual problem is not only unsolvable but it is also being mucked up by this! As always Beautiful job my dear friend😉!

[@justinbrat]

Things are getting revealed about this world very quickly and Mr Arvin isn't doing anything to slow that down! Thank you!!

[@goertzpsychiatry9340]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYC6pWWcd65kjKs

[@KasiusKlej]

One thing we were taught at school, when learning how to program an artificial intelligence software. In order for consciousness to arise, a certain feedback loop mechanism is required. In our bodies it's the signal loop, that starts from our brain thinking let's move a leg, then leg moves, then our senses pick up the signal from here, we see the leg has moved. Luckily programming loops in computer science is easy. We made a machine, an automaton you would say, that can think and play chess. We believe, or at least our school does, that this machine is conscious. It lives in different sort of universe than we do, though, the fundamental law of this universe being that there is a non stop chess tournament going on. And the beast never falls asleep. And the first time people noticed that this AI might have a mind of his own, is when the machine started to deliberately lose some of the games. Therefore, we think, quantum effects are not neccessary for consciousness and free will. Automaton could have a free will, if cleverly built.

[@ArvinAsh]

Interesting. Thanks for the comment.

[@tomashull9805]

And how successful has the artificial intelligence software industries have been in making AI conscious? Last time I heard they were cautiously optimistic without any results though...

[@KasiusKlej]

If you ever saw a sleeping crocodile, thinking he's awake, then you'd notice how difficult it is sometimes to recognize the state the animal is in. The software industries deal with the same problem, except they don't deal with such complex bodies as crocodile's for now. They attach much simpler bodies to their AI brain, like a robot hand with a paintbrush that paints masterpieces for example. The thing may be alive and conscious, still many say it rather looks like a robot and half asleep.

[@tomashull9805]

@@KasiusKlej You can tell what a crocodile is thinking? Why are you wasting your time on AI? You should be playing the stock market... 😉

[@Bolizen]

@@KasiusKlej Did you take something or did you not take something?

[@frede1905]

Something I often think about is the difference between my sense of self, and your sense of self. I mean, if we are just big collections of atoms and molecules placed at various different locations, then how can it be that I am conscious in my body, and you in yours? I mean, if the "me" is a part of my physical brain and body, and not something "outside" of it, then how is this illusion of "me" created in this body, and not in some other body, and in particular, how can different "me"'s be created in different bodies? This is really hard to explain, but what I basically wanna know is what is stopping "me" from being conscious in all other bodies, and not just mine? I mean, we are just huge collections of atoms, so I don't see why my sense of self can't be extended to all other humans. What is "stopping" it from doing that? I am probably gonna sound crazy to anyone reading this comment, but I promise that it isn't that crazy, it's just insanely hard to explain. But anyways, this is really something that bothers me, and I'd really like to discuss it, if anyone out there can relate to what I am talking about.

[@itobitobobbobitob3663]

Yes, I get it. I have not much to add, not in regards of physics or real explanations. The thought is very interesting to me, too. In Buddhism and to same regard in Hinduism there is this idea that the notion of self is a false notion/illusion and that "reality" is just one unified flow and our conscious/ego is creating a divide. So maybe conciousness is the very thing preventing you from feeling your "me" in others and all things? Dunno, just reminded me of what you described.

[@frede1905]

@@TheKaraqi4 Yes, but I think that "oneness" is just a feeling, an experience you get when you take those drugs. I'll come into your brain and alter your perception of reality, and I am sure scientists soon will find an explanation of how it does that (if they haven't already). But that explanation is in some way or another based on our perception when we DON'T take the drugs, because if they figure out how the drugs do what they do, then that discovery is probably based on measuring brain activity when somebody has it in them. And, knowing what "usual" brain activity does to our consciousness, then can most likely figure out how the "new" activity alters this perception. So there's still the question of how the "usual" brain activity creates this conscious awareness. Also, even if this "oneness" existed, then I still don't understand why the consciousness separates into different bodies when we don't have the drugs.

[@frede1905]

@@TheKaraqi4 I still don't quite see why we can't perceive other's consciousness. I mean, by which specific physical process does this ego make sure that my "me" can't be extended to other bodies?

[@solomonherskowitz]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/fWfNmXprgd2VY80

[@prateekgupta2408]

I love it when he says *The explanation is coming up right now*

[@kilat1791]

The biggest hurdle in understanding consciousness is the idea that there exists living and nonliving things and therefore a living person is different from a dead one. It is correct to say that everything including us is a product of the laws of physics and the conclusion we can derive is that the idea of being dead is an illusion. What makes something alive or dead is simply pattern. A living person has the pattern of what we call as being alive. A dead person has a pattern of what we call as being dead. This gives clue about the idea of animism which happens to be one of the oldest religion. Everything is alive including nonliving things like rocks, mountains, rivers, etc. The only difference is the pattern that makes something a rock compared to a human. This is how the concept of the soul is validated because the soul is simply a pattern of reality. The idea of god and soul can be said to be knowledge of reality muddied by time and human misunderstanding. The fact reality is a product of quantum mechanics and reality is inherently probabilistic at its core is enough evidence of free will. Nothing is determined because what we call as deterministic is yet another result of the pattern that creates the universe. Just a snowflakes follows a pattern and yet can be unique to one another so is human free will that follows a pattern which is expected behavior and yet can act outside expectations in some way.

[@owenjohnson1883]

Spot on!

[@ghpeakfitness3813]

I tried to watch this aswell as you solopsism episode but unfortunately this is the type of thinking that started my panic attack 3 years ago and I've gotten better at controlling them but man, still not 100, so I must bow out, I love you though man, keep putting out that deadly content that makes us think....maybe one day I'll be able to comfortably watch these episodes haha

[@anujarora0]

The objection to the phrase "I think therefore I am", as presented by Georg Lichtenberg, is that rather than supposing an entity that is thinking, Descartes should have said: "thinking is occurring." That is, whatever the force of the cogito, Descartes draws too much from it; the existence of a thinking thing, the reference of the "I," is more than the cogitocan justify. Friedrich Nietzsche criticized the phrase in that it presupposes that there is an "I", that there is such an activity as "thinking", and that "I" know what "thinking" is. He suggested a more appropriate phrase would be "it thinks" wherein the "it" could be an impersonal subject as in the sentence "It is raining." Descartes’s dualism seems to tell us that the interaction between the mental and the physical realms is impossible.The interaction problem isn’t just a gap in the theory. It’s a built-in refutation of the theory.Gottfried Leibniz offered a theory to explain how the two realms interect . According to his theory there is no real causal interaction between the two realms. ○ But at the beginning of the creation, God wound up a physical clock that would carry forward the entire physical history of the universe. Beside it he wound up a clock of mental events to carry forward the mental history of the universe. ○ In his wisdom, God designed the clocks so that they would run perfectly in parallel, side by side, despite the lack of any real link between them. It is known as Leibniz’s doctrine of pre-established harmony. ● Both of these are attempts to live with the implications implicit in Cartesian dualism. If Leibniz’s theories seem like desperate measures, they’re an indication of the desperate measures that a full-blown dualism seems to require.

[@ArvinAsh]

Good comment!

[@phoule76]

Je pense donc je suis. = I think therefore (or so) I am.

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

The problem with that theory of yours? Conciousness and the physical realm are not separate at all. That much science shows. Also mosst recent quantum experiments suggest that the universe is not deterministic, so no clock was wound up. Everything is "decided" by quantum particles as we go along.

[@kennethbransford820]

Evolution = Self Assembling Atoms = Impossible

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

@@kennethbransford820 well actually that is not that impossible, if you consider virtual particles.

[@swamiaman7708]

Who is the observer inside us ? Are we observing inside or outside ? Does observation make difference in our thoughts pattern ? Our thoughts are becoming our actions so observation is affecting our action too ... it seems ! Are we inside the world or world is inside us ? Please answer Sir .... Only you can answer these questions ......

[@ArvinAsh]

I think there is an objective reality outside of your mind.

[@Qrexx1]

Many people miss the difference between observation and measurement. Quantum systems in superposition need Measurement not Observation. Measurement doesn't require a conscious being. It's simply the interaction of 2 or more systems.

[@swamiaman7708]

@@Qrexx1 I am using the word observation for observing things inside our own mind and the fact is that we are observing everything inside our own mind. From outside we are just getting signals. What we are observing is recreation of reality in our own mind. There observer plays wonderful role. There too observation changes objects of observation just like in dreams.

[@lbarudi]

A video that references both Max Tegmark and David Chalmers is a video that certainly has my like

[@tomashull9805]

Tegmark was proven wrong about the brain being too wet and too warm for quantum processes...He never retracted his false claims...

[@leonherrera7957]

​@@tomashull9805 any source on that?

[@tomashull9805]

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140116085105.htm

[@leonherrera7957]

@@tomashull9805 interesting indeed, but still pretty far from consensus (as one quick Google search will point out). No offense dude, but saying Tegmark was "proven wrong" based solely on still disputed claims sounds like a bit of a stretch

[@tomashull9805]

What were Tegmark's claims? The brain is too wet and too warm for quantum processes. What was found? Quantum vibrations in microtubules of brain neurons... I don't care that some, including Tegmark, don't like the evidence against their beliefs... Consensus? Don't make laugh...

[@HawthorneHillNaturePreserve]

Arvin Ash is awesome! Just amazing videos and discussion. Arvin has the ability to cut through the BS and present information in an understandable and enjoyable way. He is natural educator. So glad I found his videos

[@ArvinAsh]

Thank you and Welcome! Glad you enjoy them!

[@benclubbs8282]

That was completely absorbing. I really enjoy the way you put everything, my hat is off sir

[@MrBledi25]

love your videos! you are a very good presenter👍👍👍. To my understanding the mind and the body are one , you are not the body or the mind , we have lost the way to identify ourselves,we are having a physical experience but what we are is our inner being soul/spirit ,the bridge which connects our soul to the body is our heart. There is no death , death is a human construct, there is transformation, there is no meaning to the universe meaning lives in our mind , The life as we know it is an inevitable consequence of the universes physical properties. Don’t worry for nothing just enjoy the experience.

[@BernieClemenz]

Great video. I always thought that consciousness is somehow linked to the universe via quantum physics. But maybe on a even deeper level.

[@tomashull9805]

There exists experiential evidence showing that consciousness may also defile space and time. MRI brain scan images indicated brain stimulation prior to the stimulus... In other words, patients hooked up to very sensitive equipment and during MRI scans showed specific parts of brain activities before the images where shown to the patients... consistently...

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

That is one of the reasons why I think the Transactional Interpretation (while not complete) is probably the best theory we have on quantum "decisions".

[@a64738]

I have heard about that before and when I looked into it seemed like they had forgot to account for the delay we all experience when we see something, thus making it look like people was reacting before it "happened" since they bypassed this delay in experience when using a MRI to observe the change.

[@tomashull9805]

@@a64738 You should read about it FIRST, before repeating unsubstantiated claims....

[@tomashull9805]

@@mxultra8995 With an outstanding predictability? Have you seen the actual experiment? The brain stimuli doesn't happened via blood circulation... too slow...

[@roblovestar9159]

LOL! Defile space and time? Quit thinking dirty thoughts! ;)

[@hydrorix1]

Consciousness must be recognized in the Standard Model as an additional fundamental universal force, along with Electromagnetism, Gravity, and the Strong & Weak Nuclear Forces. Consciousness is primordial, executive, superintendent, creative and sustaining of all other perceived forces.

[@ArvinAsh]

What makes you say that it is not an emergent phenomenon rather than a fundamental phenomenon? The problem is that consciousness has never been observed, measured or detected outside of a brain or highly networked group of processors.

[@hydrorix1]

@@ArvinAsh The nature of Consciousness is reminiscent of Gravity, a thorough theory of which we are lacking. Consciousness is yet another invisible force, the mechanism of which is not understood, probably due in part to it not being studied properly as the overwhelming force it is.

[@augustadawber4378]

As with all Arvin Ash Videos - equal time is given to Scientists who disagree with him and their positions are put forward in an eminently fair and concise manner. Thank you ! Penrose and Hammeroff have published lengthy responses to criticism of ORCH OR. According to Wikipedia : "In 1998, Hameroff made eight probable assumptions and 20 predictions to test the proposal. In 2013, Anirban Bandyopadhyay of the Japanese National Institute for Materials Science detected quantum states in microtubules. Penrose and Hameroff reported that Bandyopadhyay's experiments supported six out of 20 theses, while invalidating none of the others. In 2015, physicist Matthew Fisher of the University of California, Santa Barbara proposed that the nuclear spins in phosphorus atoms could become entangled, preventing the information loss of decoherence and enabling quantum computation within the brain." But this Video is correct in stating that so far - no Theory linking Quantum Mechanics to Consciousness has been proven.

[@ArvinAsh]

Good update. Thanks!

[@averycuriousclumpofatom2159]

Source ??

[@jordanhalmosman9957]

Actually not true. He left out a lot

[@MM6_Bruh]

there's a type of frog that freezes it self in the winter stopping many functions of the organism,how is this animal kinda conscious?how does the animal feels when it freezes?

[@zvpunry1971]

A more general question: How does a frog feel? We can't even be sure that the way we perceive sensory input is the same between individuals of our same species. When I look at the grass I can say it is green and you could agree with it. But imagine that I had always perceived the color of grass completely different and I had learned early on that this is green... there is no way to know it. ;) The frog you mean is probably rana sylvatica, also known as wood frog. If the temperature comes close to freezing temperatures, he produces and accumulate glucose and urea that act as anti-freeze. It protects the cells and the important organs. As all amphibians, his metabolism gets slower and his reactions get slower when the temperature sinks. At some point there is no reaction left. The metabolism slows down and may stop. Parts of his body might freeze, but as long nothing is damaged he will survive.

[@danielkatona8778]

If its brain is not working then it cannot do anything, so you have no reason to think it's conscious. If its brain is working then you have no reason to think it's unconscious.

[@zvpunry1971]

@@danielkatona8778 I agree with your first statement. The second statement however is not true. The question about consciousness is too hard for such a simple answer. Consciousness is a process that depends on the ability to perceive and imagine things, to remember and to plan things, to be aware of yourself. This process can easily be influenced or even stopped with chemicals (drugs, anesthesia), physical damage or even by something completely normal as falling asleep. This doesn't mean that the brain isn't working anymore, it just does its thing slightly different. When we sleep, our ability to move is blocked as well as the formation of long term memories. This is why we don't hurt ourselves and also can't remember dreams (the short term memory works, so if we wake up from a dream we remember it but rapidly forget what it was). There are some much more simple brains in nature that we still consider a brain. The brain of a fruit fly is tiny like the dot behind this sentence. It still has about 250000 neurons. It can fly and navigate via sight, it remembers its location and can use these memories to navigate in the dark, it can detect food-sources and other fruit flies to procreate, everything a fruit fly needs. They don't have the ability to learn from the previous generation, at least nobody has observed a fruit fly school where the larvae learn how to become a successful fruit fly. All of their behaviors are inherited. I highly doubt that they have something like self awareness and therefore consciousness. On the other hand, there are many animals that can do some planning to solve complex problems like crows that use tools to get to some food. They learn this by experimenting and watching others. Animals that live with us as pets, like dogs and cats, show us their personality and how they feel, what they like and what they dislike. Some apes recognize themselves in the mirror, they detect a spot painted on their head when they look at a mirror (some others try to attack the "other" ape). Its not about the brain size, African Elephants have bigger brains then humans. Three times as much neurons, but they are almost all in the cerebellum (which also coordinates the movements, think about the 40000 muscles in their trunk instead of the 650 muscles in the whole human body). Their cortex is just one third of the size of that of a human, but this region is also the one associated with higher cognitive functions. How self aware these animals are is not easy to answer. Do they have a consciousness? Probably. But I won't even try to compare it to ours. We can't even know if we perceive the world in the same way as others do.

[@zvpunry1971]

@@zakihumble "stealing", "drinking tea", "jumping", "good", "bad", "legal", "illegal" are all learned concepts. We communicate these concepts with a learned language. This has nothing to do with our perception of sensory input. Drinking tea will never be perceived as stealing or vice versa (except it isn't your own tea). The sensory input created by drinking tea can be perceived differently, how it tastes and smells, how the temperature feels and how heavy the cup is and so on. What is good or bad depends on learned moral values, what is legal or illegal depends on the jurisdiction you live in. This is also not related to the perception of sensory input. Maybe I didn't understand you. At least I don't understand what you mean with ""his own 3D but very relative".

[@zakihumble]

@@zvpunry1971 i meant his own vision communication and perception of this world

[@iphaze]

Wow. Thanks so much, this was fascinating! I had a thought about how superposition in the brain could somehow project consciousness onto us but couldn’t fit the pieces together until you explained it better - will definitely look into OrchOR. Incredible.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@watamatafoyu]

Never did I think a physics theory would make me think of an orc oar.

[@johnr3936]

This was an incredible video, thank you.

[@johnr3936]

@@guff9567 you aren't even smart enough to use insults correctly

[@SonuSingh-sn8qg]

Arvin you are one of the best in the field. Would love to see you live.

[@bkenglandUTube]

I liked this, Arvin; thanks! Covering the different angles of how consciousness is interpreted makes the most sense. Rather than sticking with just the materialistic approach, which, while possibly the correct one, seems unnecessarily limiting to me (like "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain). One reason folks like Richard Dawkins are so galling to me. Thank you for looking both within and outside "the box."

[@ArvinAsh]

That was my goal. Glad you liked it!

[@Thomas..Anderson]

10:23 Should be "much lower".

[@mjames7674]

Awesome episode! There's so much new info and so many ideas that I'd never even heard of before, I'm going to have to re-watch it a couple times to absorb it all. I've been into this type of stuff for a very decent amount of time, and it's rare to come across a video that doesn't just repeat the whole which-way/collapse/consciousness woo etc etc. It's nice to be introduced to and learn new ideas and theories.

[@evollove19]

I always wondered about this, never ran into research of it or people that studied it. Thank you for opening me up to a whole new field of research for me to explore. I see roger penrose was on joe rogan too. Cant wait to check that out. Thank you. I always thought of this not as a way to say we had free will for sure, but to at least disprove hard determinism when it came to consciousness. . I thought that, deep into the mechanisms of the brain, there would be some quantum process that when expanded would leave opening for hard determinism to be wrong. But instead of free will, it would find more of a randomness, or probability. The opposite of determinism isnt free will, its randomness. I still think there is a difference between wind pushing someone over an edge of a cliff and a person doing it. Consciousness seems so weird to evolve, There seems to be some weird inefficiency of it. Why was it needed? If its all mindless non free will things going on at the fundamental level , why would evolution have this useless bioproduct illusion to happen? I would think mindless automatons would be more efficient.

[@MrHan-is1ko]

I think the illusion of free will is a byproduct of our brains getting more and more complex, which can't be avoided. maybe consciousness emerges from cognitive abilities.

[@evollove19]

@@MrHan-is1ko I suspect this is true. Do you think there could be a complex system, that could do what we do while not having consciousness? Would that system be more efficient to produce? or would it need a lot of extra process and parts to replicate? I just wondered if there could be a philosophical zombie that does everything we do, but without consciousness it would be more efficient. Maybe I am wrong about that, and the most efficient way to get a being that does what we do, has this added consciousness byproduct emerge. The philosophical zombie would have to be more complex and be even more inefficient. There seems to be a wasted effort and energy for consciousness to emerge, or I am wrong, and the consciousness emerging is part of the short cut and efficiency of evolution. The mindless automatons would suck at survival or come with to much added weight some how.

[@henrilemoine3953]

@@evollove19 I think that consciousness is a very efficent way of predicting the future, and therefore that evolution could select for it. But that supposes we all have the same definition of consciousness. I think that your philosophical zombie would be a dramatically inefficient machine. One of the advantages of thinking of ourselves and others as people is that it is way easier to predict the decisions of a "mind" with agency than to predict the future using the knowledge of every of its parts. Consciousness might be a byproduct, in the sense that everything is (all is modified enzymes and proteins in the end) but it is likely not to be inefficient, since evolution would've discarted it otherwise (like it does for unfortunate byproducts when possible).

[@evollove19]

@@henrilemoine3953 But is it an illusion?, it would seem so. A powerful illusion when talking free will. My understanding, evolution isnt always very graceful though. Like where it keeps your pinky toe, the appendix, doesnt rewire the artery's of a giraffe for its very long neck, or puts our pleasure reproductive organs right next to our waste removal. Maybe these arent choices and free will is a powerful illusion, the consciousness of it is just a tip of a tip of an iceberg, the dominoes and microscopic rube goldberg's machine inside is just following the algorithm and for some reason some of the tips of those decisions are excitation of a false sense of self awareness we call consciousness. This is where i am not sure if its a waste, or just a lil happy lil byproduct that lets us have subjective experience. It does feel like an expense though. And curious if it could be designed without the consciousness. I prefer existence having an experience, and would be a nightmare when our corner of the universes lights go out, if we were ever to replace ourselves with more efficient automatons. This is above my pay grade, glade when people on youtube run into this subject and explore it further though.

[@henrilemoine3953]

​@@evollove19 When evolution keeps something that isn't requiered, it is often because it would be too costly to do so, or that there is a small benefit to it. All vestigial organs are like this. The appendix has been shown to be the home of plenty of beneficial gut bacteria, and people that are born without an appendix are more likely to have infections; the pinky toe is very useful for balance; and about the arteries in the giraffe's neck, I don't know what you are talking about, but I'll assume you mean the vestigial larengial nerve in giraffe' necks that can be multiple meters long, in which case the evolutionary "cost" of a mutation which would make the nerve choose a shorter route is too high compared to the evolutionary advantage that such a mutation could provide; the reproductive organs are fine, and again, the work/"cost" of a mutation for a completely new tract is unlikely to evolve since it's advantages are not big enough. Evolution isn't perfect (at all) exactly because it is too graceful. You can't jump evolutionary steps because evolution doesn't work like that. Ok sorry for that little rant. Now lets move on to the point I made in the previous comment. "a false sense of self awareness we call consciousness" If that's what you want to call consciousness, then there is ample evidence to show that this sense of self awareness is evolutionary advantagious, but only in social species, and I really need to stress this. Important as well is to be aware of others as "individuals". It is advantagious because it is efficient. How so? Simply because, as I said in a previous comment, when trying to model the world and make predictions to take better decisions, it is easier to think of yourself as yourself or your mother as your mother, instead of thinking of yourself and your mother not at all or as a series of smaller parts you need to predict. This isn't self evident, but I can try to show it with an example. I was playing a game cards with my familly the other day and I'll spare the details, but the main point is that you need to be able to lie at the right places about the cards you give to gain an advantage and make some kinds of alliances. Anyway, instead of thinking of every people as the sum of their parts (hand, brain, etc), thinking of my brother as a filthy liar made my model of the world easier and requiered less computation, as I was more focused on the lies where he was concerned, and more focused on alliances where my sister was concerned (and to lie to her). By giving an illusion of agency to people, as it is how they generally act, it is easier to model that way they will act, predict it, and beat them at their own game. Evolutionary speaking, I suspect that over the evolutionary time mutations which made the brain of an individual more likely to see themselves and others as individuals had an advantage in efficiency of predicting actions of others. These individuals would have a more efficient predictive system and therefore be more likely to "win at life". Maybe a byproduct of these mutations would be a bigger brain, or maybe it would be a pleiotropic effect of the gene, I don't know, but in any case it could be selected. I doubt you've read all I wrote (I sure wouldn't have lol) and I don't expect you to. Anyway, I'm not finished. "It does feel like an expense though" It is an expense, like everything in evolution, but the question is whether the costs surpass the benefits, and I think that the answer to this question is demonstrably "no". For example, the wings of a bird are very costly to it, as they cause it to have to make much bones and muscle tissue and other things, but of course the benefit of flying surpassed all those costs, and this is why birds can fly (not all, of course, because those found and evolutionary advantage in not doing so). If we someday create minds that are better than us at the social tasks, I predict that they will be composed of small systems that simplify individuals as "people" instead of their constituents, and themselves as an individual as well with self awareness, because I think it's just the most efficient way of predicting things with limited information (all social interactions are like this). Anyway, that's my two cents, and I wonder what you think about it.

[@MindSurf248]

Amazing video, watched a really interesting but very long debate with Rodger Penrose discussing this. I've been crying out for a simplified summary to refresh my memory and share with my mate.

[@smartscience5305]

Hello sir another time. Your video is really helpful . And I usually seek on internet to understand more about quantum consciousness, and your video is really really really helpful.

[@XEinstein]

A century ago people perhaps assumed consciousness came from electromagnetism because QM hadn't been described yet. They did not have the physics nor the language yet to describe consciousness in terms of QM. So why would we presume now that there is a connection between QM and consciousness. Since there is no data nor evidence supporting these ideas there is no reason to assume that there a connection at all. My gut feeling (which is worthless, I know) tells me that slowly but steadily there seems to be data to support something underlying QM. Something that has to do, it seems, with information, entanglement and entropy. Perhaps in another century we will have developed a full theory of that underlying 'layer' and perhaps then we'll presume consciousness is linked to information entropy. 🤷🏼‍♂️

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

Actually we are nearing it down. Many world's is nonsense. Hidden variables has been disproven and pilot wave is looking less and less likely. So we are left with either a non-real universe, a true stochastic universe or something like the Transactional Interpretation, which is not fully completed yet, but seems to me to be the most promising option.

[@Joleyn-Joy]

In fact there are some reasons. You might think it's not enough but they exist.

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

@Generic Normie well me too.

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

@Generic Normie yeah well the physical definition of non-reality is even worse than what you seem to be referring to.

[@solomonherskowitz]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/fWfNmXprgd2VY80

[@geemanbmw]

You know when someone's mind is blown they make boom!! Sound along with their hands mimicking an explosion that's what Arvin did to me lol

[@jdkingsley6543]

Clearly we are, our ability to reason and think has in a hubris state of “ we must be special “ when l don’t believe that all. We can only do what the universe permits. Ever mirco is a representation of a macro. Edit: what a beautiful channel

[@javanpoly4901]

Hey man,excellent exposition on the nature of consciousness. Bravo!

[@manuelmartinez-gq4ij]

Professor- I’ve had the fortune or misfortune to have had a few Surgeries over the last few years and the one thing I enjoyed was the anesthesia. When I get put under their are no dreams no noise there is nothing, I believe this is as close to death as what death is. I will say I get annoyed when I’m woken because of the fine rest I get. But my point is someday I will take the final sleep but until then I want to keep every neuron every atom of my body awake alert and learning. I thank you for your contribution, a debt that can not be repaid.

[@ArvinAsh]

Interesting. Perhaps there is nothing to fear about death?

[@manuelmartinez-gq4ij]

My belief is there is not. It’s a simple release of energy into a different state, as for me I ask my family to look to the stars as I will be wondering in search of Stars, Galaxies and the Ultimate Adventures. The final 😴. Keep up the great work.

[@ChannelZeroX]

@@ArvinAsh I'm afraid of nothing. As in, I'm literally afraid of it!

[@bsclifton]

Great video - lots to think about 😀 I think there are accurate ways to try and qualify consciousness: Do they respond to an input / test? Are they capable of communication? Are they self aware? Do they have memory of past events that they use for making decisions or reacting (self-consciousness / qualia)? How or why consciousness happens is interesting too. Is our perception of consciousness purely due to physical conditions? Measuring brain activity as you shared is a great example of viewing the physical actions happening. Consciousness and the mind have reactions to physical elements too- like consuming alcohol or drugs may change your perception or how your consciousness would respond (short term or long term). After watching, I think about folks that are in a vegetative state. Depending on the situation, their brain may physically have the same neural connections, etc- but "something" (due to damage?) is not working as expected. Are these folks still considered conscious? With anesthesia awareness, staff can monitor patient vitals as a way to see a physical response (raised heart rate for example). Do you need to be able to respond to a test a certain way to be qualified as conscious? Thanks for the quality video! 🙂 Raises a lot more questions than it answers (things I have 0 clue about)- but extremely entertaining

[@ArvinAsh]

Nice comment! The interesting part regarding the issue of vegetative state is that usually in order to determine whether they are conscious, we hook them up to a brain scanner to determine what kind of activity is going on in the brain. No one presumes any other source of consciousness.

[@selmamemic5986]

I’m very interested in this topic and recently read a book called Life on the Edge (quantum biology). In the book they mention a new research that shows how different parts of cells vibrate (produce waves) and that helps maintain quantum behaviour of a system (meaning particle stays in the wavy state). They even found out 2 different kinds of waves that enable the process, white noise waves (low amplitude, but omnipresent) and ones with specific frequency (sharp spikes). Do you think that could help the micro tubules theory, the one by Penrose?

[@Phoenix-tv4gb]

Free will is easy to understand, it's one free will since there's only One being, one awareness, one light, one love,one energy.... no body,no mind, all is awareness and the infinite forms is actually energy ... no confusion, once you experience it for yourself, it is very clear! 😍💖🕊️🎶

[@akostarkanyi825]

For me this sounds so that then there is no point in the existence of any individual person or of the history of the Universe. "Everything is just one... er....Thing." And for what, then? No, I am Christian.

[@ayzadiaz]

@@akostarkanyi825 to experience ourselves

[@akostarkanyi825]

@@ayzadiaz And... So what?

[@ayzadiaz]

@@akostarkanyi825 ask yourself why, you’ll get the answer, it’s not in a word

[@jasethconnor6501]

I must catch up on Penrose! Great video

[@ESA-Naomi]

Came up this thought after my first psychedelic trip, searched this concept. Feeling much more comfortable now in an unspoken way. 💓

[@goertzpsychiatry9340]

Naomi Yoshida kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYC6pWWcd65kjKs

[@Sky22_00]

Did you ingest anything before your psychedelic trip?

[@ESA-Naomi]

Nour Abbas No😅, but I did 400 ug ( 2 tabs) instead of a regular 200 ug dosage.

[@himalayasrivastava2007]

Even if it's all just a simply complex classical physical processes. My question is who set these laws of physics that we all have to obey and are unable to defy ?

[@ArvinAsh]

Good question. Not sure there was a "who" but certainly "why?"

[@abhishekshah11]

There has to be an underlying reason. For example, why should Nature follow principle of least action and why not follow principle of maximum action? Maybe because least action is sexier?

[@himalayasrivastava2007]

@@abhishekshah11 I mean the answer to that could be just Randomness, maybe in another universe it does follow the principle of maximum action and we just happen to be in this one.

[@himalayasrivastava2007]

@@ArvinAsh I think once and if we cleary understand the why it could lead us to "who"

[@abhishekshah11]

@@himalayasrivastava2007 Yes. There's no reason this is the only way to make a universe.

[@mr.lumbergh7273]

The brain is a large-enough structure that any superpositions would decohere very quickly. This is also what arguments such as the moon not existing if no one is looking are untrue; the moon would also decohere immediately.

[@ArvinAsh]

Sure. Looking at things makes no difference in the macro world.

[@nicholastidemann9384]

That's exactly what Penrose and Hameroff are arguing against. You're not the first one to state that the brain is too "warm, wet, and noisy" for superpositions to last long enough to have real effects, but this is precisely what they are saying is not the case, and that in certain structures such superpositions do indeed persist for long enough to affect the large-scale electrical signalling of the brain, and ultimately to determine on a macroscopic scale how the entire body moves. Note that this is not analogous to the Moon at all, because the Moon lacks these microscopic structures which cascade up to maintain superpositions of neuronal activity.

[@mr.lumbergh]

@@nicholastidemann9384 Yes. You're pointing out exactly why I think a strict interpretation of the observation argument is lazy. Yet it persists.

[@1CProgrammer]

After watching this video my mind is in super position state, I understand video and I didn't understand video

[@bettekavalec1454]

ALVIN, YOU ARE THE BEST!!! Love your videos!

[@dinodinoulis923]

How does proving that we are driven by an inherently random process (Such as quantum mechanics) show that we have free will as opposed to a completely deterministic process? Surely having our decisions, our lives and our futures being completely randomly determined is no more satisfying than knowing that our futures are completely predetermined? Proving that the universe is not deterministic does not prove that we have free will.

[@wp9860]

Exactly correct, Quantum mechanics cannot possibly account for non-autonomous thought or action. Any effect it could have is still mechanism. No free will, as it is generally understood, to be found here.

[@RushFan84]

Plus who says free will exists? That hasn't ever been proven.

[@nileshkulkarni6196]

Peter yup

[@geemanbmw]

@@nileshkulkarni6196 true and that's scary

[@angadsingh9314]

Depends on what you mean by free will tbh

[@nileshkulkarni6196]

Gman k but existence of pure determinism tells us that our current science is correct

[@RushFan84]

@@angadsingh9314 The traditional meaning. But I suppose that can be altered and then its just mental masturbation.

[@vaisakhk4564]

I was home alone and with lights out when watching this. The last part sure gave me a jump scare.

[@anotherarmchairhistorian2831]

Yeah that really creeped me out too..lol I certainly wasn't expecting it.

[@vaisakhk4564]

It's worse when you are not expecting it.

[@vaisakhk4564]

@@anotherarmchairhistorian2831 you any chance interested in any kinda weird fetish. I got a really big collection that I wanna sell

[@anotherarmchairhistorian2831]

@@vaisakhk4564 unless you have some dimethyltryptamine I'm not interested.

[@vaisakhk4564]

@@anotherarmchairhistorian2831 nope I don't have that

[@gonzalogarcia6517]

Consciousness is an emergent phenomenon product of quantum entanglement and the uncertainty principle

[@numero6285]

ou pas

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

Exactly

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

@meow there actually are several papers on this, but for a Nobel the experimentation needs to be in and unfortunately a few of the most critical experiments are not technologically possible, yet.

[@MichaelAntonFischer]

@meow yeah point taken. Still at this point the evidence we have points to him being right and we don't have a better explanation.

[@jordanhalmosman9957]

Consciousness is not emergent. It is on equal status with the matter/energy world.

[@davetinoco]

Hubbard wrote about this extensively. The best description I read was in Fundamentals of Thought. Consciousness is a fascinating subject. I think he called it the “awareness of awareness unit”

[@TM-yn4iu]

A fantastic and open insight to a complex and diverse interpretation or opinion(all sound) of what we yet have the capability of understanding. I do appreciate these videos, as they help me, and others, to appreciate science as an open/valid research that until it proven, it is theory. Theory that is based on true research. Much thanks.

[@katiorchi7676]

What's amazing to me is the way I dream. Why and how do I dream about the things I do?? My dreams are so wierd, so far affached from my real life, yet they seem so real while I'm dreaming them. Sometimes I think that what I dream about is episodes of my life experienced in a parallel universe appearing in my mind through quantum entangalment.

[@spaceexplorer3690]

q.ent...dreams....??? d you know that what you wrote is pure bollocks 😂😂

[@birdthompson]

Buddha might say: all that matters is that you realize there is no "I"

[@Fastlan3]

Consciousness disappears at "death" because the chain reaction of converting appropriate properties of energy for which the system of the body relies, becomes incapable of continue said transfer of energy.

[@tomashull9805]

Unless consciousness is quantum and if it is,quantum information doesn't disappear...

[@Fastlan3]

@@tomashull9805 the process from which consciousness arises might be quantum, and the energy that it consist of might not be destroyed, but the ability to continue the particular process of energy transfer from which consciousness arises is completely compromised, consciousness itself does indeed seem to disappear.

[@mosca-tse-tse]

Oh this was such a pleasure to watch! Very informative and as objective as possible. I love high quality material on You Tube. Glad I found this channel.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@agmuntianu]

Another way to test the theory of the quantum quality of the brain would be to grow neurons in petri dish, and see if they can be "trained" to solve something quantum related, like quantum adiabatic annealing. Tests have already been done, to train neurons to solve simple problems ( being interfaced with nano gold wires etc.) , it's just a matter of thinking of experiments to go further.

[@JoseRivera-un2td]

Hey Arvin, remember way back when I critiqued the 2D model of matter warping spacetime in your video and I said, "my mind is a quantum computer. In order to properly process the concept of matter warping spacetime, I need a 3D model." You said there are no 3D models. Remember? What I meant by mind being a quantum computer was that the brain could be thought of as a 3D web of octopus type neurons. When I say that it processes all possible outcomes in 1 iteration, I meant that, since all outcomes can simultaneously be represented as certain neurons lighting up as a concept. Since neurons are microscopic, I inferred that all possible neurons iteration shapes, or all possible outcomes, can be iterated in 1 motion, thus arriving at the correct answer in 1 try. I guess I should have been more specific. Hehe. Sorry.

[@wolly4u]

It’s amazing and interesting. Nevertheless I like to add a different perspective to that issue. Why don’t look at it with a different question: ‘Is conscience the reason for this phenomenon of quantum physics?’. If I follow a path that doesn’t bring me to my destination I have to change it and take a different one. What if there is “something” of another dimension, with rules we could never understand with our four dimensional mind? A three dimensional being (let’s say with time, length and width) would never understand what happens when a four dimensional being interferes in its three dimensional understanding. It tries to explain it with its three dimensional rules but experiences results that contradict their rules. It reaches a border of understanding because it’s impossible to understand. What if in our case there is a being with much higher insight than even our most smartest person? What if this being is trying to lead us through this jungle of wicked information to make the best out of it? This is the moment we have to decide what to do. We can follow the instructions for our best or stumble blind in our limited experience. This is in my opinion exactly what happened when we call that being “God”. It explains us everything including the things behind our limited event horizon. I followed these instructions and my life became much better. BTW I became a Christian in the midst of my twenties after growing up in an atheist family with my brothers studied mathematics and physics. I also studied science and became an IT administrator.

[@abhishekshah11]

Consciousness won't be studied by academia seriously because it is non-quantifiable and subject to well, the subject.

[@wolly4u]

Abhishek shah - This is exactly the point. Ignoring some obvious facts (conscience as a fact also mentioned in the video) doesn’t bring you closer to understanding. It’s the narrow border of the event horizon of human mind that prevent many people to think beyond these limits. If some don’t understand some things it doesn’t mean they don’t exist. The point of view is the problem here. Science gave us many answers about the world we are living in but there are still a lot questions that are still unanswered. How do you know that there are no other dimensions that exactly explain what we yet don’t understand. You can’t deny it by just closing your eyes... Quantification is based on our four dimensional view and who tells us that it’s universal?

[@akostarkanyi825]

A similar theme was the plot of an interesting Soviet-Russian sci fi, Roadside picnic ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Picnic ) Which was later transformed into one of the most famous quasi sci-fi cult films Stalker ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalker_(1979_film) ) with an already religious and Christian meaning.

[@wolly4u]

Ákos Tárkányi - Thanks. I checked it out and it’s interesting. The key point here is that we don’t know our true desires/motives and be betrayed by it. We pretend to follow something “true” and “good” but in the end we don’t even know ourselves.

[@ultimathule1000]

Free Will doesn't act according to the probability function. If it would, it wouldn't be a Free Will but another way of manifestation of determinism.

[@LeTtRrZ]

Very good talk. I've often thought about individual experiences, and having learned a little bit about machine learning, I'm inclined to say one thing: It's not necessarily about what exactly it's like to experience, for example, the color red, it's about how that experience compares to others and how it interacts with memory. If you were to teach a deep learning algorithm to identify colors without giving them the specific hex codes, color codes, or color names, it would essentially look at, for example, red, and conclude "Ah, that's similar to the first color I ever saw". The same parts of the AI would be stimulated as when it first saw red. Other parts of the AI that are usually stimulated when it sees other colors such as blue would not be stimulated. I have never actually tried this, however. This is just speculation on my part.

[@ArvinAsh]

Interesting insight! Thank you.

[@ilankrt]

I think that you should update your presentation because the „too hit and too wet” claim has now been refuted several times!! 😊

[@JwalinBhatt]

Excellent video!

[@Salv-lj8kj]

Good video Arvin. Great work. I suppose for me it seems obvious that the brain cannot be the mind. There are too many attributes of our conscious subjective experience that are intractable even in principle. Here are some examples: The information content of DNA that encodes for the brain is insufficient to account for the information capacity of the human mind when judged by the what the mind can do. Whereas the information quantity of the DNA that codes for the brain components is relatively small if you calculate the base pairs that code for the codons and proteins, yet the capacity of the mind is seeming unlimited as adjudged by the sum total of all human knowledge, human artifacts and artistic renderings. Related to that, the DNA information quantity that codes for the brain of a chimp approaches that of humans yet again the information capacity of the mind of humans is immeasurably larger than a chimp. What accounts for the difference? Information and complexity don't just come for free. Emergence is just a label applied to a mystery masquerading as an explanation. I don't see any attribute of energy fields that could give rise to consciousness. The characteristics and attributes of matter and energy are that they are extended in space and time. The primary characteristic of mental things is that they are about something and do not seem to be extended in space and time. That we are no where near and seem to have no real hope in my opinion of explaining how abstract thoughts could be stored as material configurations or instantiated in thought with particles in motion--even in principle--tells me that there is something more than just the physical brain. How are abstract thoughts stored and how are concrete thoughts stored? A gradient? How are they instantiated in thought? Where did the brain function that brings a stored configuration of matter to a thought as it is instantiated in consciousness experience come from? I have never seen any hint of an explanation as to how brain functions could work. Any attempt to dig in and provide a detailed set of causes for any brain function encounters one or more of three fundamental problems: Infinite regress of causes, entropy (improbabilities of arranging vast numbers of material particles into precise configurations), the need for foresight. I could describe countless examples of this but it would take a bit of time. As a challenge try and think through how a new thought arises...go through all the steps that would need to occur...I don't think it can be done. The fact that the conscious thoughts continuously stream through our subjective experience and each thought is related to the previous thought in time, instant after instant and occur continuously without any gaps is beyond what a physical system could ever hope to achieve. The creative complexity of dreams with their novel imagery, auditory, tactile content--essentially a short new movie--could not possibly be created on the fly by any purely physical entity such as the brain because of the improbabilities of arranging vast numbers of particles in the brain in novel and very precise configurations instant by instant. And doesn't it seem strange that there just happens to be a section of the brain that can precisely emulate our senses? The fact that you can put a person under deep anesthesia and drain all the blood out of their brain for an hour in the Standstill procedure and then bring this person back to life and have the same person emerge is astounding and tells me that that there is much more to human consciousness than the physical brain. If the brain is all there is then there must be structures that represent countless programs that do all these marvelous mental things. But if you entirely disrupt the brain and halt all molecular activity it would be hopeless to believe that these same programs could magically be restructured and re-established. But yet that is what in fact does happen. The numerous cases of out of body experiences and near death experiences with veridical and ineffable accounts of actions going on while the brain seemed to be flatlined or at least greatly impaired tells me that the physical brain is not all there is to the story. As far as fMRI tests supposedly demonstrating proof that the brain is the mind. I could make the same comments about a computer or TV. No dualist would say that the brain does nothing. It clearly does a lot and this is why there is correlation between changes in the brain and effects on the mind. But correlation is not causation. Finally, I am about 99.9999% sure I can control my thoughts...this post I hope demonstrates that. And if I can control my thoughts, then my thoughts are not determined by the long prior chain of causation.

[@ArvinAsh]

You make some excellent points! I think these are areas of research for current day neuroscientists. Hopefully, we will have some physics-based answers.

[@spiralsun1]

This is one of the most intelligent comments I have ever read on KZbin. Thank you 🙏🏻 🥰. I think a lot of the problem with not understanding the brain is the same old issue that the consensus is the barrier-only now it’s much worse because of hubris and complexity. So yeah Copernicus had it easy. Lol. Now we have “academics” who want to say that the “lone genius” doesn’t exist because they have so much hubris. Like an ant saying “there’s no queen” Lol. Because the ant colony is so large and complex they can’t see it, or an Egyptian saying that the brain serves no function 😂. There is a world of difference between saying that you are motivated by truth and actually being motivated by truth. In psychology and personality psychology we know that these people are only 2% of the population, further the intelligence and humbling yourself enough (letting go of easier survival patterns) is rarer still. Let’s be generous and say .25%? Contrast this with the idea that IQ is the only thing that counts. It is definitely not. Motives affect what IQ is used for and if you are not basically objective minded and self-effacing open and agreeable and low in “duty” or conscientiousness then you will make your own complex prison of mind with your IQ. Because it works to give you an identity and for survival. Like the grasping reflex of infants, it is a survival pattern from our past. So is the “grasping” at discrete concepts or niches of mind for those who are smart but not “lone genius”. So getting good grades all through school will mean that you are not motivated by truth primarily. Because to be so motivated means that you will think and integrate the knowledge in your classes and study on your own beyond memorizing the right answers which actually destroys or is a substitute for actual holistic thinking and understanding. That’s why I took years to actually accept that people actually did not or could not think about things that were obvious to me 40 years ago like what is now called the “binding problem or the hard problem” of consciousness. They still don’t get the crux of the problem. So yeah if you deny the existence of the lone genius, then you obviously aren’t one. Further, you are setting back the advance of knowledge at a time when this actually jeopardizes the future of us all. The lone genius with a more selective memory exists though rare, but they are vital hubs and parts of the larger mind formed by civilizations. Thank you for this comment. It’s extremely important to think clearly about these things. 🙏🏻🥰🔭🫧👽 What humans don’t understand is that there is a survival reason that knowledge has to advance rapidly right now. The reason they don’t know is the reasons stated above. Basically they don’t want to know. It’s tangled up with mortality denial, which I also don’t have an issue with-or I could not be objective. Because it’s my job. This makes me somewhat unintentionally abrasive to people with other motives, made worse by the denial that I exist-since they already interpret me non-objectively through a personally-serving emotionally-supportive lens. Which is ironically why I am stuck telling people stuff like this and seeming like an asshole to them, even though I love people and want to show them their true potential. Which I actually can do. I also formulated a whole body of natural laws related to how information works, and how to read the information encoded in nature and body organ configurations, what life is saying, what gravity actually is etc. we are not separate from those things and they are the key to the human future. So if you keep going with these paradoxes and ideas you bring up, you will see more-larger problems behind everything in the human world view. So you have to go to epistemology and psychology combined with evolutionary theory to see past all this. So your comments here are of vital importance in the larger picture of things and I wish you well and I hope you continue with your wisdom. The world needs you. You cannot simply tell people to “reframe” the contexts of what they already learned in some false “memory palace”. They don’t see the limiting parts of the frame of understanding that they committed to memory. Then they “pruned” the pathways where they might have gone around barriers or changed them BECAUSE they needed to be “accurate” for good grades. The only way around that effect is to know that it’s your job and fall on that grenade because it’s exponentially more work and grief to do so. And no one is going to take a chance on you and come to your aid when you seem unintelligible. No one gives a grant to anyone not vetted by the system. The primary barrier to a viable human future is not understanding our own minds, not being motivationally capable of understanding for the most part. So thanks again for this. You give hope. I still don’t understand fully why hardly anyone listens to what I have to say but when they do they write books and use aspects of my ideas but they don’t see the larger picture. Near as I can tell it’s because of what I said about personality, evolution, motives, and IQ. 🤷‍♀️ Which is why the most important thing there is is for humans to understand themselves. But that takes extreme objectivity or motivation primarily by objective truth which is extremely rare. And dying. It’s the most directly threatening “endangered species” affecting the human future.

[@jeffreybarrett1910]

Uh yeah... I've been saying that for years 😵‍💫

[@clapton79]

I read Free Wifi instead of free will and asked loudly WHERE WHERE? LOL

[@azaleaslight7243]

🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

[@danielkatona8778]

The brain is a place where quantum uncertainty can have a chaotic effect. It is sensitive to very small changes, so it's a good breeding ground for the butterfly effect. It's different from computers, because they are designed with error correction to prevent exactly this chaotic behavior. So when a computer malfunctions on an electron level, it is literally exercising it's free will.

[@kaansancaktarmusic]

Trying to put quantum mechanics into biology and trying to explain the problem of free will with qm seems futile to me. First of all what does it mean for a system to be "probabilistic" instead of deterministic. Simply randomness. İf our decisionmaking processes are made with the random movements of qm then it is no better than determinism. Still doesn't explain if a decision is free or not. It just says it might be random.

[@ArvinAsh]

Your point is valid.

[@wp9860]

@@ArvinAsh Finally, an accurate statement. But, then why did you even consider theories of free will when it doesn't exist, and you never say that in this video. You bury this point here in a reply to a comment. You also misrepresented this in the title of this video. My first view of any of your videos and likely my last.

[@ashwinkhambadkone394]

Great job Arvin, love your breaking down complex ideas into simple knowbits (knowledge bits) 🙂

[@schlobopoin6348]

The materialist explanations seem self-succinct and straightforward. There's no evidence whatsoever that there's more going on, so I'm going to take any claims like that with a healthy grain of salt. Occam's razor, and all that. Ultimately, though, we just don't understand the brain well enough yet to answer definitively -- but we will, likely within the next 100 years.

[@keegan9285]

Well, this is simply ignorant of all opposing views to say that there is NO evidence whatsoever for any position ever. Even the most arrogant can recognize the validity of nearly all positions and that all arguments have premises, some better than other but none without so that is your first fatal flaw. Also you use Occams razor wrong, it is to simplify an argument since any premises that isn't required for the argument weakens the argument in its entirety, however that doesn't deduct the idea of complexity in the argument outright. It must still be coherent which materialism fails. I actually differ completely and think the position of materialism is ridiculous and to follow the most coherent view you would have to concede to Dualism. Nonsubstance Dualism to be exact. As a final note, William of Ockham was a theologian who directly opposed the position of materialism and used Occams razor to debate those who complicate the premises of Christians and Athiests.

[@Ismail-po2xm]

i can't believe that pure materialists still exist in 2020

[@MagruderSpoots]

Posnerd molecules. Now you know where nerds come from.

[@ArvinAsh]

Lol. I hope you comment on all my videos! haha. I need a laugh sometimes.

[@spacebarbarian._]

0:59 Guess who's back Its the Maxwell's demon!

[@oneslysniper]

I've known this for a while. Thank you for giving me a video to send people. You will save me a lot of explaining

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad I could help!

[@physicslover1950]

We need no Megallan tv as long as Arvin Ash is here to present documentaries on his own channel. No video on this channel ever disappointed me. I hope the upcoming video would be about bohmian mechanics. The pilot wave interpretation.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks, but no, the documentaries are far more fascinating and entertaining than my videos.