Can cells think? | Michael Levin

[@The-Well]

Want to hear more from Michael Levin? Check out our new video, "Why evolution is the Picasso of science," where he explains how evolution is a lot more random than you think. Here's the link: bigthink.com/the-well/evolution-explained-by-a-biologist/

[@MeOnytube]

----- On the Day of Judgment, people's own senses - hearing, sight, and skin - will testify against them about their deeds in this life. Their senses will speak by the power of Allah, who made everything able to speak. ----- Until, when they reach it, their hearing and their eyes and their skins will testify against them of what they used to do. (Qur'an 41:20) And they will say to their skins, "Why have you testified against us?" They will say, "We were made to speak by Allāh, who has made everything speak; and He created you the first time, and to Him you are returned. (Qur'an 41:21) And you were not covering [i.e., protecting] yourselves, lest your hearing testify against you or your sight or your skins, but you assumed that Allāh does not know much of what you do. (Qur'an 41:22) -----

[@charlesbrightman4237]

THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW: Consider the following: a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics). b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand. c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary. d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above. e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality? f. Photons: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." A photon is usually depicted in a sine wave pattern with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. The 'e' and 'm' energy fields go out together and come back in together, over and over and over, doing so even across the vast universe as far as we can see. Where does the energy in the energy fields go when both the 'e' and 'm' energy fields go to zero? And what causes the 'e' and 'm' energy fields to come back to 'full' from zero? Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above. Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?). g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent? h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How? * Note: My theory of everything idea, 'if' true (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test, but 'if' true), can potentially answer all of the above items.

[@charlesbrightman4237]

GRAVITY: WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS): Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way. a. Imagine a 12 hour clock. b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions. c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions. (The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.) d. Direct a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields. e. Do this with the em fields on and off. (The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.) f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects. (Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.) (And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.) (An alternative to the above would be to direct 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space. Maybe I could concentrate the Sun's 'em' into a high powered laser. Might even work with the correct set up breaking the Sun's 'em' down into single 'em' energy frequencies acting like a single energy frequency laser. A high energy laser powered by the Sun. Cool, or actually pretty hot. More than one way to build a laser.) 'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done. 'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. (But hey, might even still get a Sun powered laser, which of course could even be utliized in outer space for various agendas.). This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward. * And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................) But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions. * Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be? So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true? But also: Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides? (Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?) * Added note: Suggestion: 'IF' society did not want to do the gravity test, one suggestion might be to at least create a model as if it were true, then see how that model matches with observations and predictions. It might be possible to discern the theory of everything without actually generating a gravitational black hole (which would definitely prove the TOE idea as being really true).

[@charlesbrightman4237]

PERIODIC TABLE OF THE ELEMENTS: Potential completion of the Periodic Table of the Elements: I currently believe that there are 120 chemical elements in this universe. If a person were to look at how electrons fill up the shells in atoms: 2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 8 (seven shells), and realizing that energy could freely flow in this universe if nothing stopped it from doing so, then a natural bell shaped curve might occur. An eighth energy shell might exist with a maximum of two elements in it, chemical element #119 (8s1) and chemical element #120 (8s2). Chemical Element #119 (8s1): #119 I put at the bottom of the Hydrogen group on the Periodic Table of the Elements. It only has one electron in it's outer shell with room for only one more electron. Energy might even enter the atom through the missing electron spot and then at least some of the energy might get trapped inside of the atom under the atom's outer shell. Chemical Element #120 (8s2): #120 I put at the bottom of the Helium group since it's outer shell is full of electrons. It might have some of the properties of group two, Beryllium group (Alkali Earth Metals group) since it has two electrons in it's outer shell; as well as some of the properties of the Helium group (Noble Gases group) since it's outer shell is full of electrons; and if you look at the step down deflection of the semi-metals and where #120 would be located on the chart, it's possible #120 might even have some semi-metal characteristics. #120 would be the heaviest element in this universe. I believe chemical element #120 could possibly be found inside the center of stars. When a neutron split inside of this atom, it would give off one proton, one electron, neutrinos and energy. The proton and electron would be ejected outside of the atom since all their respective areas are full. One proton and one electron are basic hydrogen, of which the Sun is primarily made up of, and the Sun certainly gives off neutrinos and energy. And note, it's the neutron that split, not a proton. So even after the split, there are still 120 protons inside of the atom and the atom still exists as element #120. The star would last longer that way. In addition, if the neutron that split triggered a chain reaction inside of the star, this could possibly be how stars nova, (even if only periodically). If stars were looked at as if this theoretical idea were true, and found to even be somewhat true, then we might just have a better model of the universe to work with, even if it's not totally 100% true. And if it's all 100% true, then all the better. (Except of course for those who might be in the way of a periodic nova or supernova. They might have a no good, very bad, horrible day.)

[@izdotcarter]

I thought this was called Big Think

[@dontaylor7315]

I once heard someone say that the brain isn't a command center but a boardroom or conference room used collectively by all of the organs. That's always sounded right to me.

[@marcc16]

And dopamine is that plate of free donuts they just brought in and it’s almost break time and I already see the one with the most sprinkles I can already taste it P.S. Levin is the real deal. Watched a 2 hour podcast talking about indestructible water bears. Pretty cool stuff. Rock on Levin.

[@dontaylor7315]

@@marcc16 I've got my eye on that donut and I bet I can grab it quicker. Levin is new to me but my interest is whetted, thanks.

[@nycrsny3406]

@@marcc16 Would you happen to remember which podcast it was?

[@marcc16]

@nycrsny3406 might have been Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal. Excellent podcast. If it wasn't that one then you may have luck searching for tardigrade/water bears

[@yourcrankyneighbour1248]

Why not both?

[@conradmphiri]

This question is golden. I've been deeply reading about cells for 7 years now, through my experience in medical school. You know what's crazy? The similarities between cells and the human body are so striking that it's scary. If you compare the human body to the planet too, the similarities are deep - something I am putting into writing. I believe cells think. Or rather have a system which is as real to them as our system is real to us - a matrix as others would call it. The same way life is formed in our bodies [trillions of life forms (cells) originating from one life form - the zygote) is the same way life formed on the planet according to science. Trees, bacteria, lions, humans etc all came from LUCA - our last universal common ancestor. That's like a zygote in our world. This may be pseudoscience or whatever but I find the microscopic & macroscopic similarities of life interesting.

[@onebylandtwoifbysearunifby5475]

"Macroscopic" and "Microscopic" are human-centric terms. They have ZERO meaning to the Universe. (ie. You're on the right line of thinking).

[@trncn]

I don’t believe that the brain is the source of consciousness, anymore. In fact, I can’t find anything that does, or even a plausible explanation of where we could find it. So I back you up that something with our current story of intelligence doesn’t add up.

[@Kannatron]

@@trncnI think consciousness is just the idea that our brains have a current moment, which is affected by the sum of all previous moments, and the ability to understand how the previous and current might affect the future moments. (Moment as in a snapshot of thought). Basically we are aware of our past and present, and how that could impact the future.

[@tadasturonis]

what do you think about aging? why do we age?

[@annahklam]

@@tadasturonis I feel like life cannot exist without change; aging and some form of death. They are one and the same.

[@tonx23]

Fantastic - finally a short video I can send to all the friends who wonder why I spend hours and hours listening to every Michael Levin lecture.

[@georgek8588]

same here, but I stopped sending. I will wait until he wins a Nobel to tell them, "see, I told you " :)

[@anthonybrett]

@@georgek8588 I don't think that will take long either.

[@sayhellobryan]

Michael Levin is at the forefront in a revolution of biology. His work on bio electricity is as big a deal as learning about DNA ever was.

[@beti4564]

Thanks mate

[@moderncontemplative]

I concur!

[@The-Well]

@sayhellobryan We've got more Michael Levin for you in the pipelines... Stay tuned!

[@RogueElement.]

​@@The-Welllesss gooooo😁💪🏾💪🏾💪🏾💯

[@alexandrekassiantchouk1632]

Interesting how long it takes for a planaria to regrow its head in a clear water, without Ba, when head is cut off? Is it much faster than 2 weeks in Ba experiment?

[@februarysnows5528]

Cells are truly amazing workers and the ability to work collectively to come up with solution is beyond beautiful. The fact is they have done it in front of this research team but no one could see their discussing, planning stage, except the execution (a new adapted head) part. Our understanding and technology aren't advancing enough to learn it. But that's okay, thats where one of the abundance of excitements lies, yet so much to explore! ❤ Salute to all the cells out there!

[@shaney8275]

Somewhere around 30 years ago, a woman named Ariel Browne (Ph. D., psychology), wrote her doctoral thesis on the consciousness of cells. Just felt like giving her credit - this is an idea that's been around for a minute. I think the current debates in physics around the measurements of consciousness and nature of reality are pointing us to the next level of human evolution.

[@danjones8458]

Cell consciousness is the smallest unit of large scale consciousnesses.

[@Dilmahkana]

Yep it's been round for a while. I'm glad it is resonating with people now. Particularly for me, Gregory Bateson was a pioneer in this thinking. Steps To An Ecology Of Mind is a great (but hard-ish) read. Plus Fritjof Capra who explains thing so simply and truly holistically.

[@Dilmahkana]

@@danjones8458 Hmm everytime we label something "the smallest unit of ___" it means we're probably ultimately wrong as the universe doesn't seem to work like that. Atoms, genes, cells, quarks, thoughts, the individual have all been said to be the smallest unit across various fields. It's bloody mind-warping honestly haha.

[@Fibonacci620]

Isn’t there a difference between consciousness and intelligence though?

[@VonJay]

@@Dilmahkanawhat do you think of orchestrated objective reduction by Penrose and Hameroff?

[@starxcrossed]

I love listening to Michael Levin. Every time he talks, I come away with better understanding or insight. He’s a genius

[@The-Well]

We couldn't agree more!

[@georgek8588]

There are two kinds of people. The ones who follow his every word and the others who have yet to hear about his ideas. I need to hear more. The type of science he is championing is not developing fast enough for my patience. I wish there was a way to contribute so things can move along faster.

[@Rosivrodrigues]

Michael Levin's work is incredible! #nobelprize

[@TasZ06]

I can never get enough of these "The Well" science videos.... I am mesmerized by this great scholar's explanation of intelligence. Thank you, Professor.

[@The-Well]

We're so happy to hear this; thanks so much for watching!

[@matiasadrianmahler322]

I'm a game dev, VFX artist specialist that's been obsessed about this topic for years ever since I started learning programming and simulations. I'm so happy I'm starting to see more content about this!

[@VonJay]

If you ever read Penrose you might quit trying the subject. He claims that the human brain cannot be simulated until quantum mechanics is rectified with gravity. He also says that there are fundamental flaws in how we proof reality through mathematics. Such as the invention of imaginary numbers which we do not know why they satisfy certain equations but they do. There’s also Godel’s incompleteness and so on. His objective reduction theory of consciousness claims that true consciousness happens every 45msecs when cellular microtubule undergo a wave function collapse. The way I understand it is that neurotransmitters of certain neurons are being carried across microtubules when the wave function collapses and that is the moment of consciousness

[@dinomite592]

Please consider a project for me. I wish to combine VFX artist skills with cellular biology to produce a better visual graphics presentation of what people see when they "hallucinate" kaleidoscopic patterns. Please check out some videos about what people see when taking hallucinogens. The kaleidoscopic patterns typically shown do not come close to reality, and the poorest examples are AI generated. Consider a software generated variable speed kaleidoscope game where the rules compiling the software are derived from known cellular machinery and frequencies. The gamer would control the cells environment and request the cell to perform functions and then see the affect on the kaleidoscope that these changes to the cellular machinery cause. I think the visual kaleidoscopes people experience are them connecting to the frequencies of their own cellular machinery. Hallucinogens seem to freeze frame and slow down the speed of the kaleidoscope so a person can see it at the slow speed people think. Using Michael Levine's logic, the human mind generates the kaleidoscope by connecting to its cellular intelligence.

[@saturdaysequalsyouth]

Like Nick Lane said, this is Nobel prize type stuff. This could lead to an entirely new branch of scientific study. Something to do with the principles information, physics, self-organization, computation, ingelligence, complexity, parts-to-systems dynamcis and emergence. I don't know what it would be called but living systems would definitely be one example.

[@ximono]

Also touching on Koestler's holarchy where a cell is simultaneously a part and a whole

[@goldwhitedragon]

Been done. Google CTMU.

[@eloycolombo7125]

This theory is quite the core of ancient Egyptian philosophy in which the universe is the God Amun, "the one who divided Himself into everybody." In that way, we are individuals inside the God Amun, He is an individual at the same time we are individuals. It is the same within us, each cell, each organ is an individual at the same time we are an individual.

[@BLFJobs]

I have come to learn that my mind is not in control, it only makes sense of what is happening. It controls the perspective of the experience, but not the experience.

[@infinitygame18]

we are 5th dimension being came into this 3 dimension to explore the potential to evolve & aware of self , understanding is liberation

[@allenhay4811]

I feel like this Dude is one the Realist Doctors I've heard speak about each and every organ in the body and how collectively works in unison with the next organ that help make up our entire human body. I'd like to see and hear Him more. ✌️ and ❤

[@The-Well]

So glad you liked it! We've got more videos with Michael Levin on the way - stay tuned!

[@VonJay]

@@The-Welldoes that make them intelligent or algorithmic? For instance, there’s a feedback loop baked into the system when a woman gives birth to a child. It isn’t something that the woman is conscious of. Sure she knows the baby isn’t out yet but she keeps pushing. Internally her cervix is sending signals to her brain which then releases more and more oxytocin until the baby is released. Or even the release of Von Willebrand factor for clotting. How do we know that a similar algorithmic system isn’t inherent in the worm? That it has a system of identifying a primary subject and using it to its advantage? And if it’s algorithmic is it intelligent on the cellular scale? Or is true intelligent the moment a new algorithm is created? If we could see these cells create an entirely new process then I’d say that they are intelligent.

[@NAD33N2.0]

I need more from this man. I'm amazed by everything he said.

[@charlienestle5468]

he has an academic channel where he has conversations with other academics like chris fields

[@The-Well]

There's more where that came from! Stay tuned, we've got another 3 videos with Michael in the works.

[@LM-yn5xq]

Same!! 🤯🤯

[@LowenKM]

You bet, and kudos to the folks at Well for making Levin's ideas so concise and 'understandable'! BTW, if you take Michael's concept of 'intelligence' all the way down to the level of quantum 'probabilities' (aka, 'choices'), it sounds like an awfully good argument for universal consciousness and 'panpsychism'!

[@themeeseman6950]

He has a very good podcast with Lex Fridman if you want to hear more, highly recommend

[@TheSockMonkeyGuy]

Many years ago, my uncle said something that has stuck with me. I reproduce it here as best I can remember it. "We know that a cell of an adult mammal, when placed in an appropriate environment, can arrange matter around it to form a copy of that mammal. This cell is composed of chemical structures, which are composed of molecules, which are composed of smaller elements that, taken separately, are generally considered to be devoid of life. "These elements, in their turn, are composed of subatomic particles which are composed of still smaller particles which, at the most basic level, appear to be nothing more than localized distortions in the fabric of spacetime which continuously flicker in and out of existence in ways that I don't pretend to understand. "So, we have tiny regions of twisted nothing, surrounded by lots more nothing, interacting in regular and increasingly complex aggregations until they display the characteristics that we call life, and ultimately, intelligence." This started me thinking: At what point along this cosmic scale does "life" exist? At what exact point are the chemical interactions between molecules, which are simply obeying the deeper laws of physics, considered to be the voluntary actions of a living being? And then, at what exact points do these same chemical interactions become "consciousness" and "intelligence?" I submit that any such markers that we define along this continuous scale are ultimately arbitrary. I submit further that if life, consciousness and intelligence can be said to exist at any point on this scale, they must exist at ALL points along the scale, albeit in widely varying degrees. It follows from this that life, consciousness and intelligence are intrinsic properties of the entire physical universe. We merely recognize life and intelligence when the elements of the universe are condensed together in a sufficiently large and sophisticated arrangement to allow us to see it. But life and intelligence already exist distributed throughout All-That-Is. Thus, we are indeed the Universe observing itself. Or, if you prefer, all living things are inseparable parts of the One Being.

[@itsnotu-its-me]

Fascinating. Finally an engineering approach to cell biology that scales.

[@bobrussell3602]

That was brilliant ! Keep 'em coming ! It's good (for me at any rate) to be able to stretch my mind & take in fascinating new knowledge. I did find it easier to grasp what for me, were quite challenging concepts, when the music was turned down from time to time. I've subscribed !

[@patham9]

There is a huge difference between simple state-machine kind of things even when arranged in a very complex structure, and what psychologists would count as cognition. Our organs don't think like we do, it's not just about quantity, but quality. There is an entire world between the cognitive capacities of our liver compared to that of a bumblebee, and another one between the bumblebee and the crow, and another one between crows and humans.

[@SumNumber]

In my observations through the microscope , I have observed activities that clearly indicated intelligence in a fluid environment . Thanks for the share. :O)

[@Self-Duality]

Where “thought” is generalized to the input-to-output attribution native to any process, yes, cellular processes are “thoughtful”. However, this generalization involves a full-scale update of our ontology.

[@dinomite592]

"As above so below." People make the mistake of thinking "above" is the higher frequencies of space and stars and heaven. Actually "above" is the higher vibrations of cellular machinery. If you can tune in to cellular frequencies you connect to Earth.

[@RobertRodgers-r5h]

Outstanding presentation! Thank you for making and posting this.

[@The-Well]

Our pleasure!

[@Rafi2002M]

Michael Levin is a genius

[@protect-free-speech]

True story and it blows my mind to this day... In 2005 I had a life threatening motorbike accident. My injuries included a ruptured bowel and diaphragm. By chance my last meal before the accident was a seeded bread sandwich. For months after the accident I would see poppy and sesame seeds in the contents of portex bag from my chest drain. Even after the chest drain had been removed, the wound stayed open and more food debris came out. Eventually, this became less frequent and after about a year the wound healed. I asked my consultant during one of my visits "how does the body know how to do this?" "We have no idea." was his reply. So yes, cells do have intelligence, I have witnessed it with my own eyes. If I didn't have the photos and medical records to prove it I would honestly doubt myself and think that I had gone nuts!

[@The-Well]

This is an incredible story; we're so happy you healed and are able to tell it!

[@Derby08]

Great info but sad you had to experience that. Hope your doing well. Thank you!

[@richardsarabi2064]

So your body kept "spitting out" the seeds? You have no way of proving that? Your ideas are no proof of anything. I wish you people would stop emoting the truth.

[@kiranjoshi2025]

Thanks for sharing

[@EviLPlayeR04]

I feel like the two defining aspects of intelligence that are described here tend towards creativity a lot. In order to find a goal, you can follow others’s goals but then it’s not really a goal, it’s repetition. Finding a way to get to the goal without local interaction is fully linked to creativity as well if we think about it. Too bad the current academic system trains young students to learn and repeat in exchange for a fictive currency… I always tell my friends and family that a goal is one the most important things to find in life. Without one, life is still great but empty of sense.

[@richardsarabi2064]

We're heading this genius make up ideas about organs "thinking" and you take a huge digression. Why?

[@EviLPlayeR04]

@@richardsarabi2064 Because we’re just like the organisms making us. Of course we’re way more intelligent than a single cell but the basic need to find a goal is still not achieved for a considerable part of our society (the local environment). A lot of people (or I should say collection of organisms) still have trouble stabilizing themselves and being in control of themselves. This often leads to addictions and lack of awareness to what happens around them. Anyways, I know I’m going far with this but the organisms making us are us and we are them, that’s why I digress so far. Because one’s limitations is dependent only on how his quantum self interacts and learns. But maybe I’m wrong, please let me know about your thoughts!

[@richardsarabi2064]

@@EviLPlayeR04 quantum self? You see, more ideas with no proof. How are you ever going to provide evidence for any of this.? This is bad, at the very least because people will lay done of their hopes on these discussions! This guy acts like an expert, but he CANNOT back any of it up.

[@richardsarabi2064]

@@EviLPlayeR04 this guy also mentions the planet being like this. Is he trying to sneak in the Gaia hypothesis? That the earth is alive?? Really? If so, then it must hate people. It kills humans in so many ways everyday. This guy is talking pseudoscience until he can provide FACTS! He brought something interesting about the planaria and barium, but has NO IDEA how the organism is doing what it does. Conjecture only.

[@EviLPlayeR04]

@@richardsarabi2064 yeah maybe not the best word, you’re right. I’m not an expert in the field either, indeed. Sorry for sharing my opinion

[@nycrsny3406]

Love hearing Levin talk about microbiology.

[@The-Well]

So do we!

[@isatousarr7044]

Cells do not possess consciousness or the ability to think in the way that animals or humans do. However, they can respond to their environment through complex biochemical processes and signaling pathways. This responsiveness can sometimes be seen as a form of "decision-making" at a cellular level, but it's important to clarify that this is not thinking in the traditional sense. Cells process information through physical and chemical changes, allowing them to adapt and react to various stimuli.

[@SEJay-gj2cv]

"Cells process information through physical and chemical changes, allowing them to adapt and react to various stimuli." Just like neurons.

[@catalystcomet]

I'm kind of uninclined to listen to humans when it comes to absolutes about what others whether they be things or beings, can and cannot feel or experience. We kind of suck at that as a species. I'm not running around sharing ideas or conspiracy theories particularly about any of that, but I know better than to believe and absolutes when it comes to what we think we know as a species, especially when we think we know it for certain. The only thing I feel certain about is that as a species we should not be certain about anything. We have been wrong far more frequently than we have been right.

[@the_eternal_student]

These are probably the best presentations of Michael's work. Perhaps you can create another series simplifying the explanations of Nobel lectures in physiology/medicine. You can look at the space time lectures on nobel prizes in physics if you want a reference.

[@tadcotadco6344]

Intelligence is everywhere. We are surrounded by Intelligence. One must be completely blind by mind not to notice that

[@OnlineMD]

There is an excellent 2015 book titled "A New History Of Life" by Peter Douglas Ward, a biologist. He talks about evolution using the same theme that you speak of. He emphasizes energy in this process. I need to read it again, as it was kind of heavy reading and I don't believe I got a full understanding of what he is talking about! ;)

[@McD-j5r]

I am normally too busy trying to decipher my own insights. My cells will have to do their part right now.

[@michaelwalsh9920]

Mike Levin asks the tuft questions! Thank you Mike!!

[@CoreyChambersLA]

Cells do nearly 100% of the thinking for us. We don't have to think about breathing, coordinating constant movements, cellular growth, cellular repair or the product of more than 60 chemicals that your body produces.

[@SubhasisMukherjee]

So informative and so small. It could be at least an hour or more longer of explanation for our brain to adopt sir. This is one of my most interesting topics. You have beautifully explained it. Still, some questions are peeping in my mind.

[@kristine6996]

And you can repeat this insight to all living creatures on earth. What a wonderful world 🫶🏼.

[@rodschmidt8952]

I would expect that cells have exactly the amount and type of intelligence that is appropriate for cells.

[@ziggyfreud5357]

Definitely worth a like - cheers dude - well articulated

[@jerry23w]

Imagine the survival advantage of being able to feel your bloodstream - how did we miss out on that one?!

[@jorg3leon]

Great video! Do anyone know of any good books about the subject discussed in this video? Has Michael Levin written any books? Your answers are very much appreciated.

[@arthurghahramanyan3279]

Regerding Barium, I think there IS a stressor in the nature that works similarly to it: maybe there are cases when the overall concentration of salts in water is increased, so the worms have adapted to it by the means of different gemes for different ion channels.

[@romanieo]

Mike's Amazing. Liked & Subscribed!

[@Alarix246]

I got surprised that finally someone on youtube dissects questions which I thought only I could waste my time to ponder over. To me, it came perhaps with the old question "what was first, the hen or an egg?". It was so obvious to me that the egg is the predecessor single cell organism, which, during the evolution time trials and errors, "thought wise" to organize itself into a hen. How did it organize itself? Is the brain the master of every single cell, or is it subject to our cells wishes? Innthe concept of self-organizing it is therefore clear that it was the cells who needed the brain to serve the common good, not the other way. It wouldn't even work the other way! There must be a way that the cells tell the brain what is good for them and what is bad. Why would the cells relinquish such control, if they themselves needed the brain? I would imagine this control system as some kind of voting: if the body does what is good for the individual cell, it creates a little bit of some dopamine or other "feel good" substance and sends it as its voting card to the brain. Same happens the other way, sending their dislikes when it hurts and so on. We should therefore think about ourselves as a multicellular organisms rather than an individual. Recently the studies in gut biome shown that the bacteria in our gut can influence our food choice and its quantity. How would they do it? But yes, there is this nervus vagus as one of the possible avenues, the gut has neurons, and yet we know next to nothing about how this works. So if the non-human bacterial cells in our gut can get what they need, the human cells must have even better access! And funny thing is, when you apply this logic, what comes out is eerily similar to many ancient teachings, although they might have a supernatural element in it, or other body mechanisms (think about yoga, meditation practices, power of prayers etc), but at the end (there being no time and space to go to deeper detail here on youtube) it is all similar and makes sense.

[@luxushauseragency]

"If you treat a clock as if it had a complex intelligence, you're gonna waste a lot of time!!" Great line at 4:17

[@tecsonics]

It completely ignors the fact that it took intelligence to design and make it.

[@spamm0145]

@@tecsonics Exactly, a stupid statement when a clock cannot exist without the intelligence required to not just construct the clock but understand time is a concept using numbers that can only exist in a mind.

[@nelsonnunes5930]

Michael Levin is taking science to its 'Renaissance' 2.0.

[@howardcurtis9138]

I was telling my sister I thought the killer Coronavirus realized it could proliferate more if it killed fewer people and therefore became less virulent. She corrected me: viruses can't think like that. The lessened virulence was due the operations of natural selection. I stood corrected. But now, I wonder...

[@JustWojtek]

are there any sources or recommendations where I can read up more on this? I've seen there is at least one paper by the name "All Intelligence Is Collective Intelligence"

[@sayhellobryan]

Michael Levin in general is studying some of the most eye opening things in biology. You should look into his work on bio electricity

[@richardsarabi2064]

By definition a cell is not a collective. That's makes him automatically wrong.

[@thewiseturtle]

@@richardsarabi2064 Um, a cell is a collection of proteins and other molecules and atoms, which are, themselves, collections of protons, neutrons, and electrons, which are themselves collections of quantum elements, which are themselves collections of fluctuations in... something. And who knows if it ever ends...

[@isatousarr7044]

Thank you.

[@acdenh]

That flatworm head regrowth is just creepy, I really want to know more about that.

[@Dilmahkana]

Self-transcendence could be attribute of life too. Every organism looks to trascend what it is in some way. It's almost creativity as opposed to just efficiency. For example, bacteria and amoeba are completely efficient in their goals and 'reproduction' and can adapt to their environments, and for a huge chunk of years they were the only life, then through some self-trascendence: boom, more complex life. Also Gregory Bateson's concept of Mind fits in well in this discussion too.

[@ElephantWhisperer222]

But why does life have the ‘compulsion’ if you will, to transcend?

[@Dilmahkana]

@@ElephantWhisperer222 That's the question that we'll probably never know. But we must understand it, or at least understand that it does, and maybe, in time, learn to perceive it.

[@BROWNDIRTWARRIOR]

This helps solve the time frame problems with natural selection in Darwin's theory of evolution if genes are able to cut to the chase.

[@AlonsoArayaAudiovisual]

beautiful.....simply beautiful perspective. Every piece does it's job professionally and this way you get complex structure of organisms like us.

[@adnandada7458]

Michael, saw you first on Lex's podcast. You've got game bro. Love your work

[@cat52]

I wish Michael Levin would do an in-depth document on the steps of human development with focus on the fetus eventually turning into a human baby.

[@thewiseturtle]

I don't think human development is Michael's forte. You might be interested in some of the book "Behave" by Robert Sapolsky. His work is about how decisions are made in human life, starting with the present and going backward in time, with all of the various causes that lead to effects.

[@lmiones]

Very instructive on a difficult but highly relevant topic ... Intelligence, empathy, problem solving etc. are general phenomena exhibited by cybernetic systems (built of many "elements of circuit", like VLSI etc). And then there is the relation individual-collective (plants are connected in a network, Cleave Backster's experiments: they are empathic etc.), and how individuals may learn from the collective ... and same "patterns" can be identified at micro and macro scales. Life is qi flow (EM) in Networks processing info and taking action. Beautiful topic! Thank you

[@WideCuriosity]

Very thought provoking. Well worth watching. I'm not totally convinced we are seeing intelligence rather than simple reaction/adaption, but would be interested in a presentation of the results of further research giving greater insight. A future video perhaps.

[@bottlekruiser]

finally a sane person in this comment section

[@LingsmaEUB]

garyx6481 / MisterBattleKruiser Do you assume 'something' (diety, spririt) is steering cause and effect? If not, why make the distinction between reaction /adaptation on one side and an intelligence-spectrum on the other?

[@granthurlburt4062]

I don't think it is intelligence either. He calls it "agency" as if cells are making decisions versus trained stimulus responses. Training by selection

[@WideCuriosity]

@@LingsmaEUB I don't see a necessity for it to be steered by a diety, but who knows ? One makes a distinction because thry differ. One requires thought & decision, the other merely occurs inevitably.

[@LingsmaEUB]

@@WideCuriosity Thanks for your reply. As I see it, thought and decision are also 'inevitable' in the sense that they occur within the set of all chains of cause and effect. The laws of nature are enough to 'allow' atoms to arrange and rearrange into complex structures that give rise to so called intelligence. The argument is, that there is a spectrum here, from the simplest cause-effect billiard ball bounce so to say, via a mechanical clock to complex cause-effect pattern formation such as agency /inteligence. On the other hand, if you believe intelligence is a 'magic spark' caused by a diety /spirit parallel to the laws of nature and this chain of cause and effect, then it would indeed not make much sense to talk about a spectrum.

[@m.q.m.39]

That's how each of the part of our body will become a witness of what we have been done.

[@maini51]

It’s the environment that makes you, makes the cell and everything else.

[@hs7921]

Can we go back a step here? If a complex molecule is attracted to another complex molecule and they start trading bits, can we consider that a precursor to the behaviour of what we call life? There is clearly an intention and a valid outcome. Are the forces that direct the mutual attraction another facet of what we call life? There is so much animation in the behaviour of even basic molecules. The whole thing just blows my mind every time I think about it.

[@gerhardusvanderpoll]

Please get your volume up a bit....Thanks

[@thewiseturtle]

My own work has started to categorize the specific levels of problem solving, each with 2 possible preferences/designs for taking good care of things - protecting old good stuff and randomly creating new stuff. Recently, I realized that current culture in younger generations, with their rapidly expanding identity/gender terms is very likely a way to express complex combinations of these different levels of personality/preference/genetic-design in themselves, far beyond the simple gamete production type. Michael is looking at the smaller levels of problem solving, both that protection of old good ideas that cells revert to when under stress, and the generation of novel ideas when cells are healthy and able to experiment with new approaches. These younger generations are culturally exploring the array of larger scale levels of physical/material, emotional/relationship, intellectual/community, and philosophical/universe level problem-solving styles. And the more traditional concept of a dimension of problem solving types is the one of "male" and "female" where one creates new DNA (father) and the other protects existing DNA (mother), and both are necessary for effective evolution on a genetic level. It's turtles upon turtles all the way down (and up)! It's problem solving levels everywhere, nested, and interdependent, allowing evolution to continue to solve problems from the tiny to the galactic, eventually.

[@rudolfpitcher503]

That's a really interesting perspective in general but also under the spotlight of current societal developments.

[@rudolfpitcher503]

I thought about it, and it is somehow liberating to think about societal changes as an evolutionary process, but it is also scary because no one can possibly know in which direction these changes will evolve. I personally hope for a slow change and am curious about what the future holds for society/us.

[@thewiseturtle]

@@rudolfpitcher503 Evolution does move in a specific direction/pattern, given the laws of physics (entropy, aka, diversity + collaboration, always increases). One can't know the specifics of what one's own life will be, but the overall pattern of more effectiveness in specialization (individuals serving some unique role in the larger system) will continue infinitely into the future.

[@Ejeby]

1:50 multi-scale competency architecture- we’re not just nested structurally cells > tissues > organs > bodies > societies ; each has problem solving competencies in different problem species: metabolic, gene expression 2:55 every level shapes the behavioral landscape of the levels below; the levels below do clever and interesting things that allow the levels above not to have to micromanage 3:15 “emerging field of diverse intelligence” 3:40 we’re bad at recognizing intelligence in unconventional embodiments 4:05 as an engineer, you have to look at a system in a way that doesn’t over or under estimate its intelligence; if you treat complex intelligence like it’s clockwork you’re going to miss everything about how it works if you look for complex intelligence in a clock you’re wasting your time 4:35 intelligence 1) some ability to use different paths to get to the same goals 2) ability to take actions that are not completely determined by local circumstances ; systems that have scaled up nonzero levels of agency 5:25 imagine if we had a primary sense of our own blood chemistry 6:00 barium is a non-specific potassium channel blocker - cells don’t like it, it blocks the ability of cells to exchange potassium with the outside world, especially neurons - neurons love to pass potassium The flatworms’ heads explode; it’s called head deprogression 7:25 metabolic -> physiological -> transcriptional -> anatomical

[@johnphil2006]

The man who deserves a Nobel prize!

[@WalterSamuels]

The Nobel prize is a stupid concept.

[@ElephantWhisperer222]

@@WalterSamuelsFor real, Obama got one for merely existing.

[@itzakehrenberg3449]

For being a Black President.@@ElephantWhisperer222

[@prestonforayter7747]

Amoebas can think. While observing one in a microscope I poked it twice. The first time I poked it it moved slightly. The second time it moved much more violently so it must have a memory and some kind of intelligence.

[@williambrandondavis6897]

I was a single cell once and I can confirm that I was thinking.

[@itzakehrenberg3449]

You remember, eh?

[@videos_not_found]

This is the most profound Thinking I have seen im my entire life. I am so grateful to have stumbled on your work by an intelligent algorhythm😂

[@The-Well]

We're so glad you found us! Thanks for being here!

[@infinitygame18]

everything is live here in the light of consciousness, developing some extra awareness is the key of understanding

[@tenabarnes3269]

Did you see the science articles and news reports on transplant patients that had donor recipients hearts or lungs and suddenly had musical talent or woodworking/ carpentry or other skills that were not known beforehand? The organ recipients later discovered their donors were skilled in the talent that the recipients possessed. This was from a documentary on cell memory.

[@granthurlburt4062]

I don't believe this for a second. Citation?

[@skit555]

Individuals have a single biased POV while a swarm need theur POV to be synthesized through modern tools like "distributions" to extract a mean and see that the swarm's average is smarter than the biased individual; quite a lot of construction is required and the swarm can be biased as well per sampling or size.

[@Juju_Vidya]

Lols...we have known this in both the Vedic and Yogic sciences for 15000 years, it has been written and detailed and this knowledge has been available to all.

[@pulsar22]

Great video, normally I have a criticism or two in the videos I watch. This one is refreshingly zero defect!!!

[@EO-ej5gg]

Amazing ☺️ we have so much to do with this discovery big thanks to the team lovely 😘

[@LinsonJoseph]

Red ants on latitudes close to the equator or the ones that I got to observe, were put in a refrigerator for 24 hours, in a packet of noodles they managed to pierce into. When taken out they were motion less for about 3-5 minutes and then started to chomp on the noodles as if resuming from where they started their hibernation. Many of their ancestors have never faced a freezing condition yet they had the skill to pick back their lives which seemed to have gone from them. I then repeated the experiment with a black variety who were sipping some dissolved jaggery. However, this time I put them in the freezer for 5 min. Sadly, I saw only three of them coming back to life from the ordeal they suffered. I guess some of them may have drowned in the icicle they got trapped in as it melted on them.

[@contecrayononpaper]

Though the word 'intelligence' seems most appropriate, perhaps people get hung up on their own casual use of the word as brain-related. Perhaps another word or term is available that, with time and exposure, would provide an image that doesn't immediately invoke 'brain power' --- and we can then be comfortable within a new paradym encouraging better understanding of biological processes.

[@frederiquecouture3924]

A worthwhile video. Thank You.

[@zhing836]

just when I see "hidden intelligence" and a arrow is pointing to cells, I knew it is him, that Michael

[@torguttormsyvertsen9088]

“When asked what characteristics Nobel prize winning physicists had in common I cannot think of a single one, not even intelligence” ― Enrico Fermi (1901-1954)

[@GinoTheSinner]

Joscha Bach Michael Levin bromance gonna lead us into the future.

[@Rhymeswithreasonbunbuichi]

Ancient philosophers and mystics recognised this and went further to say not just societies but our local nature, global nature, solar system to universal which gave rise to astrology. Funny how things come back round.

[@MichaelMartin-rg3if]

If one cell can think? How many cells does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Sure hope they can talk to each other. There's a lot of atoms to lift and turn a bulb into the lamp socket. Don't think they'll get it done today if ever. . Maybe a cell can turn on the light afterwards, but I have doubts. It's going to be awhile until the first can make a hand if they communicate well enough, then work together. People can't even do that. Awesome cell structure there.

[@bradhombre6912]

The worm part was mind-blowing. … what led to that experiment?

[@slotenmakerdenhaag]

Absolutely brilliant! Reminds me of 'The Tree of Life' by Varela and Maturana ... This approach may also have some application in understanding mental states and especially 'disorders'

[@pedromoya9127]

great ideas about cognition biology!, on the same track of Maturana and Varela autopoiesis. Language of Nature.

[@yajy4501]

I was happily at peace as nothing for billions of years but that darn single-celled organism just had to replicate and now I have to have a job 😂

[@apepiada]

May I know the soundtrack of the video whose it is, thanks

[@HR-op2cq]

So when is he getting the Noble prize for biology?

[@BaguaDude]

Perhaps there exists a cellular network which precedes the cells allowing them to communicate and behave with intelligent dynamics.

[@tobyfjelstad1]

I wonder if they have better service than Verizon

[@sohail7728]

This solves my green elephant problem.. thank you so much

[@yp77738yp77739]

I’m not sure what is supposed to be particularly revolutionary about the point he was making here. I’ve been away from cell biology for many decades but I thought that was all obvious.

[@o_o8203]

Science confirming ancient knowledge, once again. In my opinion, animism is how our ancestors understood this concept.

[@Biocog]

Intelligent design. Compelling discussion. Profitable frontiers.

[@FreeEagle991]

It's not us that construct our body nor our mind but God the only Creator of everything that exist. He has just to say "Be !" and it is !

[@consciousmeandu]

WOW 🤩 amazing explanation 🙏

[@piccadelly9360]

This means that every single cell has consciousness

[@sveinunghoset6623]

May I ask, what is the reason for specifically referring to us as the Oocyte and not the sperm? Is it because most they happen to contain most of the extra-nucleic information? Would it be wrong to rephrase it to "we are initially just sperm"?

[@hanskraut2018]

I like the definition 1 & 2 think they would be useful.

[@ET_LWO]

I appreciated the whole video, BUT we should remember that we do have a natural inclination to anthropomorphize things.

[@RussAbbott1]

Great video, but how do planaria figure out which genes to turn off/on? I want an answer!