David Eagleman - Is Time Real?

[@michaelcorenzwit8118]

The ability of your guest to convey difficult concepts so clearly and succinctly is rare and remarkable. Having an ambassador of science to the public is very important. He and you are doing important work. 🙏

[@davidjames2083]

Compelling stuff RLK. My old late physics teacher here in Britain, Mr Barrowman (and I am myself now 67 years old), once explained to me that if I were a photon that had travelled to a telescope here on earth from a star billions and billions of light years away, that from that photon's perspective the journey would have taken zero time --- it would have been instantaneous departure and arrival whatever the distance travelled, and the journey would have involved zero distance travelled too as far as the photon was concerned. This was completely fascinating but quite baffling to me, and my brain still struggles to get a grasp on this many, many years later --- but thank you and David Eagleman so much for such a fascinating video, and I shall keep on trying, with the help of people like you 👍.

[@michaeltrower741]

Yeah, time just ceases to exist at the speed of light.

[@yellowcottagetales]

I love how Robert actually usually knows more than the guests. He's too much a gentleman to describe it that way. Part of the reason he knows more is because he takes is knowledge from so many fields. I try to never miss an episode.

[@brothermine2292]

Unfortunately, his politeness often prevents him from asking tough follow-up questions when his guests spew bs. I don''t understand why he bothered to ask a neuroscientist about objective physical time, unless he hoped to show us that neuroscientists can tell us only about the subjective perception of time constructed by the brain.

[@yellowcottagetales]

@@brothermine2292 Not sure about the guest's publishing history, but he may have discussed these things somewhere in his work. Philosophers, neuroscientists, mathematicians, AI/virtual world developers, historians who study the history of science...any of these, and more, can have an interesting POV on time, or the nature of reality. I think he asks follow up questions, he just avoids hammering them to make them uncomfortable.

[@stoneysdead689]

@@brothermine2292 Because this neuroscientist's work centers on seeing how that subjective internal experience connects with actual physical reality. In this case, his point was that it connects very loosely- which tells us that our subjective experience of time isn't correct- and may even be a complete human construct. This connects very closely with the work of physicists and cosmologists, whom he spoke with in previous shows, who are now saying time is possibly 100% a human construct, that it actually emerges from something more fundamental but does not exist as we experience it. Which describes the block universe- where the past, present, and future all exists simultaneously and which one we experience depends on our reference point. Relativity proves this beyond doubt, and we've tested relativity to the point of exhaustion. Space may also be a construct, very akin to time- relativity tells us they're the same thing after all. One reason we've started to think this is because if something is objectively real then we should be able to talk intelligently about any amount of it- but that's not the case with space or time. We eventually run into the Planck limit- and anything smaller loses the properties that make it space or time- it now becomes something unintelligible that we can't say anything about- because it doesn't really exist. It's like you've gotten to a space so small the constituents that combine to give us the emergent property of space and time can't do it's thing- whatever that is- so we lose the illusion. What if space and time are actually vibrations in a field, and if you just keep looking at a smaller and smaller spaces- you eventually are looking at a space smaller than the wavelength- so you no longer see the emergent property- you see the field it emanates from?

[@brothermine2292]

@@stoneysdead689 : Your reply appeals to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, not to Neuroscience, to argue that objective time & space are different than how we subjectively perceive them. You're essentially making my point, that Neuroscience can't tell us about objective reality. By the way, Relativity does NOT imply space & time are the same. It implies there is a relationship between them.

[@stoneysdead689]

@@brothermine2292 Nope- I disagree with you completely- nice try though. Personally, I think neuroscience, which explains the lens through which you experience time- is just as important to understand and at least half the equation. You want to know about objective reality- then you have to understand and decode the lens through which you experience it. Neuro science ha plenty to tell us about objective time. Namely- how we misinterpret it.

[@sharathchandra7862]

I'm new to this channel but this is probably the best interviewer i have ever seen. The way he's engaged in the conversations instead of asking scripted questions is outstanding.

[@madness198648]

More interviews with him please

[@b.g.5869]

When do you think this interview took place? This week? You know this is is from _years_ ago, right? This interview is approximately 10 years old. The last time Eagleman appeared on CTT was in 2017, which may or may not have been filmed in 2017 (CTT reused old interview footage a lot).

[@tales-from-this-crypt]

@@b.g.5869 yeah but time doesn't exist so y'know ....

[@mattsven]

@@tales-from-this-crypt 😂

[@alideeb7906]

@@b.g.5869 Arabic news aljazira

[@b.g.5869]

@@alideeb7906 I don't understand why you're mentioning Al Jazeera. What does that have to do with this?

[@mihirnakar4513]

Anyone who enjoyed this will love the talk between David Eagleman and Sadhguru. HIGHLY RECOMMEND!

[@SolidSiren]

Nah, it isn't a given that people interested in philosophy, psychology or physics will like or agree with Sadhguru. For example, I don't agree with most anything he says.

[@RogerioLupoArteCientifica]

@@SolidSiren if you look only for people you agree with, how open you are to new or challenging ideas? Sadhguru is quite intelligent, and among loads of bullshit he says, he may provide some very insightful thoughts. You don't need to agree to enjoy a good talk. C'mon.

[@randygoodwin2885]

The first thing I did before watching this video was to reflexively check the running time to see if I had the time to watch it.

[@BarriosGroupie]

I'm so glad you had David Eagleman on. His documentary _The Brain_ highlights the incredible intelligent creative power locked up in this remarkable organ of ours.

[@James-ll3jb]

😅

[@blackraven8805]

Time perception is absolutely personal. Different from other old people I know, time is extremely slow for me. I usually feel one week as long as it was a fortnight or even more. Strange but not disgusting.

[@johnfromleeds]

My favourite video on Closer to Truth I've seen, and I've watched hundreds over the years.

[@Eronx]

Really? What was exactly so good about it? I mean he didn’t told something unexpected. I’m asking that because I maybe missed something about this interview.

[@protector808]

Another beautiful convo, thanks Dr. Kuhn!

[@ccdj35]

Thought provoking conversation 👌

[@amooser5839]

yes, it's about time.

[@JamesWarrior]

I'm not quite sure why but that interview made me laugh with joy.

[@randomone4832]

Time is memory, and arguably completely a conscious construct. It necessitates remembering a previous state and comparing that with a present state and observing some change. Without something to keep track of change, the world is only a bunch of presents, no past no future.

[@ponder7507]

I couldn't agree more

[@IndustrialMilitia]

My Birth does not exist within my memory, neither does my Death. Time is a condition of Life. It's not mental; it's ontological.

[@randomone4832]

@@IndustrialMilitia In the scientific sense yes, but as it applies to conscious experience, and therefore everything that really matters (at least to each individual), time only exists when paired with memory of what came before. Practically speaking, to you, your birth and first few years of life never happened from your perspective. It’s as if you “time traveled” to the age of four, because you had amnesia for the first few years. Your birth may well be a grand conspiracy.

[@tonygreenwoodN10]

Fascinating! Great interviewee!

[@cesarjom]

David Eagleman is one of my most favorite researchers who can communicate their work and findings to the public. He is extremely skilled at giving us keen insights into our neurobiological systems.

[@turnerthemanc]

Just once in my life, I got Tea when I had asked for Coffee. It took 7 or 8 seconds and 2 slurps before I realised. I had already decided the outcome, taste and experience and initially it tasted and smelt of coffee. That absolute now moment was a total illusion.

[@frontsidegrinder6858]

It's this expectatation thing and it feels bizarre. Once i had this with milk and buttermilk.

[@Vicky-fl7pv]

How high were you?

[@ShannonMcDowell71]

Fascinating and enlightening interview, thank you for sharing!

[@scambammer6102]

complete rubbish, as usual for this channel.

[@PeterXiao1]

"Now" is felt, but flow of time is reconstructed according to physical laws because no one feels flow of time. It's a story we build to give us meaning of life

[@Traderhood]

There is no flow of time. There is only now.

[@renko9067]

All this moment does is change, from low to high entropy. We misperceive that as time flowing. When we move at the speed of light, it’s not time that slows, it’s entropy. But in reality there is only this moment in constant flux.

[@frasermackay9099]

Everything occurs in the “now”. The perception of time is a construct of our brain. “Now” is constant and will never change.

[@bazyt1]

This guest is awesome, really fascinating. Such a tricky topic to even start unpacking, but he does it.

[@James-ll3jb]

He fails completely. He's all mastery of the obvious. Nothing new here

[@abduazirhi2678]

Fascinating and delightful conversation ! Thank you

[@ujjc001]

I've been thinking a lot lately about time, and am leaning more and more towards it not existing.. It's wild to conceive what that means!🤯

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

It means... it seems to me... there are only lumps of stuff existing. A lump moves relative to other lumps and not absolutely. 'Relative' means movement is not a property of a lump. Movement is not a lump nor a property of a lump but without lumps there can be no movement. One might say, lumps are the 'substrate' of movement. There is no mention of time in any of this because the concept of time is derived from lumps and movement. I go even farther and assert everything for which there is a noun is derived from lumps and movement.

[@TheFos88]

Interesting discussion. This guy is definitely in love with what he studies!

[@James-ll3jb]

He's in love with the sound of his voice. Thats all😅

[@MrWuster]

Intriguing and delightful conversation. And very consumable and understandable.

[@binbots]

The arrow of time points forward in time because of the wave function collapse. Because causality has a speed limit every point in space sees itself as the closest to the present moment. When we look out into the universe, we see the past which is made of particles (GR). When we try to look at smaller and smaller sizes and distances, we are actually looking closer and closer to the present moment (QM). The wave property of particles appears when we start looking into the future of that particle. It is a probability wave because the future is probabilistic. Wave function collapse happens when we bring a particle into the present/past.

[@jamesfowler415]

That was very interesting and very eloquently presented. Thank you

[@gingrai00]

Great interview!

[@ewo2754]

It's interesting that in exploring the question "is time real?" the majority of this basic discussion revolves around how long (how much time) it takes for the brain to react...can anyone reconcile that and explain the paradox?

[@douglasking9383]

Vision Ad: this ad illustrates the most everyone can be bought.

[@KeithCooper-Albuquerque]

Thought-provoking interview.

[@kuyab9122]

Asking "Is time real?" is like asking "Is meter real?" "Is celsius real?" "Is kilogram real?" When you try to measure moment, time is the result.

[@8thsinner]

Finally ppl are getting what has been understood for thousands of years in spiritual circles. Next is to understand the two parts of time perceptions, the individual frequency of consciousness creating it's own reality, and the programmed matrix, the lowest base frequency of the collective consciousnesses developed through standardised and taught belief systems. And of course that that collective is still priorotised to individualis to the ppl you have additional etheric connections to, over the matrix itself.

[@tunahelpa5433]

Mind....BLOWN!

[@louiej.3219]

Amazing interview! Thank you!

[@franciscoarellanos5346]

For us as intelligent beings our perception of time exist as the collection of the multiple changes we witness (change of energy, movement, state, etc.) which our brain interprets as events, which the form our sense of time.

[@gingrai00]

I have been mostly persuaded that a presentist account of reality is correct and it was my fondness for presentism that caused me first to wonder if time was real… I think, maybe, it is not real. I think time might be a mental construct… it is a way of understanding what has happened and what might happen as distinct from what is happening.

[@theotormon]

Time is just one thing changing relative to something else. Every new moment is a change in arrangement.

[@dennisgalvin2521]

It isn't time but events that is one thing changing relative to something else. Every new moment is a change in arrangement but moment isn't as it's defined i.e. "..a brief period of time" because moment comes from the latin momentum which is an event related term meaning that moment is actually a "..very brief period of an event" this also reduces period to being an event related term i.e. ".......period of an event".

[@rizdekd3912]

The best way I think of time is that it 'keeps everything from happening all at once.' That doesn't mean it 'controls' things or instructs events from not happening all at once, but rather it is the default separation of events at the same location. If anything happens in sequence, that sequence becomes time.

[@frontech3271]

Time is, "Everything happening all at once". Space prevents this.

[@rizdekd3912]

​@@frontech3271 "Time is, "Everything happening all at once". Space prevents this." Prevents what? Prevents time? Or it prevents everything from happening all at once?

[@FalkFlak]

I think thats the most reasonable approach. Just because we need certain variables like time to make sense of it all doesn't mean nature has any use of that concept. Its the same with heat or temperature. Does it exist? We can explain classical temperature just by thermodynamic aspects without ever using a thermometer.

[@ethigrown]

Incredible ability to explain.

[@alexandervocelka9125]

Time is an emerging abstract description of causality, which is enabled by changing energy potentials. Inertia slows down potential changes and thus causality.

[@johnrobinson4445]

Okay, this guy is my number-one candidate for the guy who will actually build a Time Machine. He has that look.

[@TactileTherapy]

RLK is a master at asking the right questions

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

*"RLK is a master at asking the right questions"* ... _Time will tell_ if he gets the answers he seeks.

[@alittax]

Yes he is! A very bright man, and hardworking!

[@anxious_robot]

Time is just speed and movement. Like if we go the speed of light time stands still, and if every object in the universe stops moving (speed 0) time stands still. So it's not really a thing at all. I talk about this all the time on my channel. Oh, and we live in a computer. So a computer is going to have a "clock" for it's own absolute time and all that. So what we're dealing with is relative to that, too.

[@kcopara1]

7:16 What both are not accounting for is that there are more nerves (afferent) going from the heart to the brain than nerves from the brain to the heart. As well, the heart has 40,000 neurons (Armour et al 1991) and dictates to the brain what to do (McCarty et al 2016). Moreover the heart's electrical field is 60 times greater than the electrical field generated by the brain and the heart's magnetic field of the heart is 5000 times greater in amplitude than the brain's magnetic field (McCraty et al Braden et al). Hence why the heart dictates to the brain what to do (McCraty et al, Lipton et al Dispenza et al Braden et al).

[@ZatoichiBattousai]

Time is a measurement of movement over distance...

[@sabarapitame]

This one is gold.

[@moosestubbings1853]

I figured this out on a treadmill,when I had a clock in front of me I perceived the run as being longer,but then I ran a mile without a clock,same exact time,same exact distance(+-5sec),but I perceived it as being shorter in my mind.

[@MrVikingsandra]

Oh I'm fascinated with time, I love it when you ask them about this topic

[@IsraelDavid-z8g]

Thought provoking conversation . Interesting. Love to see an interview on relation between reflex and time..

[@techteampxla2950]

I would love to see a duo discuss both sides , David E and Tim Maud , wow to see what would come of the two discussing time !!!

[@2kt2000]

New entry into my top 10 CTT speakers. Well sail descriptions on the tough to discern matter of time, compelling. Dig up more of him.

[@b.g.5869]

He appeared in 4 episodes. You can see which ones on the Wikipedia article on CTT episodes.

[@2kt2000]

@@b.g.5869 I really appreciate you.. & will use the information. Thanks a bunch!

[@msmd3295]

It is safe to make certain assumptions about the nature of time. Even if different brains perceive time a little differently, the basic nature of time is related to "causality", Caust < Effect relationships that occur in the real world. Things that exist outside our brain. For example, making a road trip. Time might pass for different travelers but certain empirical events are happening and one thing causes another thing that causes another thing, etc. So time does pass simply as a result of causality.

[@m_nikitin]

I love that you refer to a tenth of a second as "a long time ago" 👌

[@user-ij6vg8xq2r]

Is the idea of space and time being stitched together as "spacetime" no longer taught? (Is time separate? Can it be quantized?) Does time "all" already (and forever) exist? I thought philosophers were crazy - but physicists take the prize!

[@chyfields]

Often people who are involved in or who witness an accident will tell you that time slowed down in those moments, like a movie in slow motion

[@markfuller]

The present moment is the only thing that's real. Everything else is a story we tell ourselves. I think this is the start & end of what Buddhism is all about. We can't divorce ourselves from the story we tell ourselves (as a car hurtles toward us). But, we give a lot of space in our mind to the story that doesn't matter. It's noise to drown out the present moment. It's ego (to make the present moment conform).

[@xaviervelascosuarez]

Time is a succession of present moments. A present moment is an opportunity for change. When we say, "I wish time would stop," we really mean, "I wish nothing would change." In those moments we get intimations of eternity, the absence of time, which is just one unending present moment. But things change because time allows for it. We long for eternity when we want nothing to change, but we long for more time when we seek change. Time might not be just an illusion, but it's probably not what we tend to think when we use expressions such as "time flies." Anyhow, maybe time is not what is fleeting, but everything else. Maybe time is like the trees by the side of the road that seem to hurry past us. Maybe time is the still background on which we're able to perceive change. Maybe time is not the hands moving around but the face of the clock. And that's why our subjective perception of time can be so variable: it depends on how fast we're changing. Days seem to go by faster the busier we are. The faster we go, the faster the trees seem to fly by. In this sense, I think time is an illusion: it seems to move, but it is everything else that's moving/changing. Change can happen and be perceived, because time is the fixed background.

[@bryandraughn9830]

There are good reasons to assume that it's us who are moving relative to a background of "events". If you take GR seriously, that's exactly what it says. That would make "now" a perspective as one moves along through the "block", it would allow the physical laws to appear exactly as they are, and it would make causality a geometric phenomenon. I suspect that Einstein didn't push the idea only because it was so obvious to him. It's still "time" but it's not the typical impression we get from it. It seems odd that we would agree mostly with Einstein but not on this consequence GR. That's like accepting GR but not the mass energy equivalence. I'm not uncomfortable with the idea that my worldline intersects with the universe at one point after another. So, maybe the whole thing is 5 dimensional? That's not super crazy or anything. :)

[@topsyche3066]

The discussion about the human perception of time and the discussion about whether time exists seems to be two different discussions. The objective reality of time is independent of human perception. Things are born, they age and they die. My telomeres get shorter with age. My body deteriorates over time and that is independent of my experience or measurement of it. What am I missing?

[@jussiakerberg5742]

Just what I'm wondering here, are we talking about the same thing? Time might be an illusion, but ageing is not. So how is ageing explained?

[@dennisgalvin2521]

Chronos was the original word for time. Kronos is the Greek god of time who is described as a destructive all devouring force. Which is how people in general view time today but time isn't the culprit it's the destructive, devouring forces of erosion and ageing that are, time just tracks and measures the process. I got this info from an article on reddit r/time from 12 days ago titled "A brief mystery of time". Worth a read.

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

2:00 "Maybe the whole thing (time) is a construction of the brain" There is a way of thinking that transforms the "Maybe" into an absolute certainty (not as absolutely certain as that I am conscious but pretty darn close).

[@msf559]

no way all of physical theories are based on tiem e.g, string theory where strings vibrate at plancks scale...and these laws and theories exist independent of our brain

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

@@msf559 Please clarify as I am unable to extract any meaning from your comment.

[@msf559]

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL i mean atvery fundamental level you need time where strings are vibrating at 10 to the power -34 seconds...thats why it cant be result of some quantum phenomenon or brain processing....

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

@@msf559 I understand. You are starting with the assumption that there is an objective mysterious 'something' called 'time' which 'drives' the movements of all material existents. My understanding is somewhat opposite, to wit, we unconsciously synthesize the concept of time from our unconscious thoughts about the relative movements of all objects. In effect, the temporal concept enables us to think extremely efficiently and conveniently about the relative movements of *all* objects in collective fashion. The temporal concept is ubiquitous in our language, one cannot even form a sentence that does not have a tense. This ubiquity and the way we are taught about time is responsible for why the majority of humans believe as you do. (Aside: Einstein's Relativity is based on the *relative* movements of objects. I am at rest relative to the earth but relative to the sun I am zipping right along). (Your understanding of time strikes me as analogous to those who hold there to exist a God whose effort actively maintains the universe in existence and believe should this effort ever cease, the universe would revert to nothingness. The difference is, you imagine without time there could be no existents or movement, that time is a fundamental prerequisite for material existence, i.e. if something does not exist 'in' time then it does not exist. From my perspective things simply exist and move and that's it. To me your thoughts put the cart before the horse). Imagine a universe with absolutely nothing in it. I suspect you imagine it would make sense to assert that nevertheless, time is a property of such a universe. Of what would time consist in it? Of what does time consist in the universe we inhabit? Can you confidently list any of its properties?

[@WildMessages]

I like to watch a good "is time real" video to start my day ... In case I'm late for work I'll have an excuse my boss just can't argue with :)

[@aminomar7890]

2:40 that is incorrect: it’s related to the arena and psychological atmosphere within but it is the same strategy (same principles and method used in both brain and physics)

[@dennisgalvin2521]

I have an issue with what he said around this part of the discussion aswell, but overall he was very interesting to listen to.

[@friedpicklezzz]

Fantastic interview

[@buckyohare4341]

Wish youtube had mostly content like this ... great stuff

[@aminomar7890]

There is a big difference between what happens in the brain during dreams and during driving, shooting,…etc where humans can reach perfection, that will match physics calculations, for instance using robots in driving, shooting,…etc

[@jeanious2009]

Sad how this video deserves MILLIONS of views within 24hrs yet only got 17K says a lot about the state the world is in at the moment.

[@fredlettuce7962]

Fascinating and articulate

[@grijzekijker]

This interesting conversation does ignore that the same timestamp has a huge influence on many different individuals. Around midnight in the timezone of Denver, Colorado, some perpetrator killed 5 people and wounded many more in a gay nightclub. This event is irreversible. Something similar happened elsewhere in the past, and might happen again, but this event in Colorado Springs will never occur again.

[@pabonfusionist]

Interesting. Love to see an interview on relation between reflex and time.

[@stoictraveler1]

Fascinating, thank you.

[@wi2rd]

It has been discussed for a very long time whether time exists or not. 🤔

[@dennisgalvin2521]

Although it was never discussed before the invention of time.

[@petermartin5030]

Our body and nervous system is distributed over space and can only coordinate at neural speeds, which are relatively slow . About every third of a second we subconsciously make a calculation of what us optimal to do next. Within the third of the second we automatically process inputs to outputs as fast as possible to control in accordance with that decision.

[@johncarter1150]

In minimal time the comments are proliferating! Interesting thing about time and this video segment interview is that it happened 6+ years ago. Imagine that!

[@frontech3271]

Question : does "Motion" require Time? Does Perception? Can we perceive three dimensions without motion?

[@jacobalexander560]

This is what keeps me up at night but it’s what also helps me sleep if that makes any sense.

[@brothermine2292]

I think I know what you meant. My unsolicited advice, based on my own experience, is to try fiction audiobooks (or radio plays) to help you fall asleep. If you wake up frequently, choose a player that will let you quickly rewind to a point in the story that you remember. (KZbin on my phone is an adequate player for free youtube audiobooks.) The trick is to choose stories that are interesting enough to suppress your own thoughts about the previous day's events and the next day's upcoming problems, but not so fascinating that they will keep you awake. In my experience, fiction works better than non-fiction for falling asleep. The audio tracks of tv episodes that you've watched before can work well too.

[@jacobalexander560]

@@brothermine2292 thanks! I’ll give that a go. I’ve had sleep problems all my life. Some nights are great others are not.

[@Littleartcottage]

This is so fascinating

[@Garflips]

Well it took me a tenth of a second but I really enjoyed that... ... as I do every episode.

[@aminomar7890]

5:10 Time calculations is very complex process, what I have mentioned is just the meaning of time, but its mechanism is far more complicated, it’s connected to space, action, ….. 5:30 that is related to the wrong understanding of time. they think that time is a thing! does exist doesn’t mean that it’s necessary…..! to concise: time is a process,…!

[@micheleshave323]

Is it possible to have more of the interview? Longer interviews would be wonderful 😊

[@justinlinnane8043]

I think there are longer edits on the website ?

[@flymflam27]

@@justinlinnane8043 sorry, there is no time for that

[@b.g.5869]

There definitely _is_ more to this video. It's just a clip from a longer interview from the original television broadcast from over 10 years ago. These are all just clips from a television show that ran on PBS in the US off and on from roughly 2000 to 2020; this isn't Robert Kuhn's personal KZbin account.

[@nicka3697]

B. G. man I was so sure that video happened just now. Ten years ago. Wow my brain was totally fooled.

[@b.g.5869]

@@nicka3697 Try exercising, doing crossword puzzles, having a healthy diet, and taking a multivitamin every day; that could potentially make you less stupid 😉.

[@brettkeeler8822]

Mind blown-at some point in time. Not really sure when that point is….

[@paolomanzo2007]

I enjoyed every second of this extraordinary interview!!! Time to watch it again, this time I will get it quicker! 😉

[@dafunkycanuck]

Really good! I love this kind of stuff.

[@kenhtinhthuc]

Consider this fact: the ratio of brain fibers from center (the brain) to the periphery (non-brain body parts) is 10-1. It tells us that our perception is more top-down than bottom up. “It's all in your head, Alice.” ― Lewis Carroll.

[@votingcitizen]

"...how fast your are going..." doesn't 'fast' require time? Interesting insight about processing time of different sensory inputs and the coordination/synchronization to perceive as a specific event. This means that each person experiences different time and that can be significantly (measurably) different based on biological variation of sensory response.

[@JohnAutry]

Best guest yet🐦🐦🐦

[@thomasdowe5274]

'Time' is a concept we apply to 'Processes' we undertake or wait on to happen; e.g. stalking our next meal, preparing it on time, or watching it grow.. Measuring those processes allows multi-processing...when (time) appropriate. It isn't real, just a counting exercise...but can be charted :)

[@thomasdowe5274]

I can prove I did everything On-Time with this chart!!! That's why figures can lie and liars figure (always with charts :)

[@danielolsson2668]

Also if you look at a person you talk to, light got its "top" speed so there is actually a small lag... also sound would lag even more... then we got the eye/ear to brain lag aswell... we lag a lot! :D kinda disturbing that we never can see or hear the "NOW".

[@rajatchauhan8802]

Great.❤ 👍 This Channel is Great asset and treasure in field of consciousness research.

[@earllsimmins9373]

It's always happy hour someplace. One second is 1/60th of 1 minute, one minute is 1/60th of 1 hour, 1 hour is 1/24th of the day, one day is approximately 1/365 th of a year, one year equals one rotation around the Sun. If our civilization developed on any other planet the measurement of time would be completely different. Does that change time? So a light year would be completely different on each planet does that change the speed of time or just how it is measured?

[@dharmatycoon]

Great chemistry between these two

[@etienne753]

This was so awesome

[@tdiddle8950]

The only way one can ever understand reality in a whole and satisfying way is to see the incontrovertible truth that is...the only way to make sense of this world is to first understand that the main predictor of intelligible experience is to take into account the validity of the basic experience of the entity itself that's having that experience in the first place.

[@glynemartin]

Just like mathematics, time is a very useful invention/ concept from the mind of man...

[@dennisgalvin2521]

Very true. Maths, time and money are only inventions to help make sense of things

[@HeavenlyWarrior]

Short answer: no. Long answer: read Critics of Pure Reason to understand why and I have my own explanation about it to complement to Kant's reasoning although not yet published. But yeah, time is a mental construct like he said and like I discovered 15 years ago.

[@brianstevens3858]

7:29 It's because control systems are more informationally intensive than sensors.

[@jonathanhaehnel5421]

Wow last 2 minutes were amazing

[@r2c3]

1:29 local variables don't seem to have much effect in their surrounding system...

[@jasperjenkins7729]

I read David Eagleman' book "The Brain" It's Absolutely Fascinating. Better than the Bible, AA, Mindfulness, or "Self Help" book I've ever read. (Just my 2 cents)

[@wayneasiam65]

Finally someone who doesn't give shortshrift to TIME. Has any quantum event taken place without TIME already there to greet it? MaybeTime is the progenitor of all.