Henry Stapp - Can We Explain Cosmos and Consciousness?

[@sustainabilityaxis]

Simply brilliant. Wonderful and very humble way of expressing his opinion about something very complex and making it understandable for a common man. Definite sign of a great mind. Thanks for sharing, Closer To Truth Team and the honorable guest.

[@Jacobk-g7r]

3:20 i can tell you why its instantaneous and faster than light, nothing is separated and the differences share. Like how we share consciousness, you are aware of differences but have some overlapping so we can understand and align in most respects and can share expanding the potentials between us. Like how we imagine a dogs position because we can see the dog and see things they go through and also relate differences we experience and all sorts of stuff. Everything is sharing and thats why when we see the light and differences we can see patterns and such and follow and see how things are connected and sharing. The same with space, the distance is real but the absence between is not, there is always something between even if we dont see it or feel it and thats what dark matter is, the stuff that is hard to interact with similar to how xrays hit bones but dont really impact certain things with certain structures and compositions and such that share. The dark matter is like water that doesnt mix with us and is all around but we cant really detect it easily and interacting is hard as well. So when looking at spooky action at a distance, its instant because of how the things arent lost and the differences shared on the quantum level can be faster than light kinda like a wave because the wave isnt one thing but sharing differences so its not the wave that moves but the energy shared through the pieces. I hope that makes sense to whoever reads this. The unreal doesnt exist and space like an absence doesnt really exist but things can imitate absences like how the noise canceling headphones listen with a speaker and then play the noise back to cancel the waves.

[@JamesBS]

Finally a scientist that is open to a non physical cause 🙏 And another scientist, Bernardo Kastrup, has a great model to explain this bigger mind. Definitely worth checking it out.

[@RogerioLupoArteCientifica]

8:20 his response is that "it can't be a physical process" [which allows quantum entanglement and its instantaneous effects]. I don't think so. My answer would be that entangled particles are not separate, except in our three-dimensional view. They appear to be separate, but they could be one and the same particle. We cannot understand how they can be separated and yet be the same, and likewise, hypothetical creatures of the two-dimensional world wouldn't be able to perceive that two spots of the same arch are one and the same object (they cannot see the whole arch, but only the spots of the arch that touch the plane where they exist). Creatures who exist in two dimensions cannot understand anything beyond their limited view of their flat dimension.

[@TheSpeedOfC]

ooh interesting, like the ends of the particle/tube/whatever are poking out through our dimension

[@michaelrogers4834]

Wow. Stapp is 96 now. The only way I want to live to 96 is if I age like that.

[@peaceonearth351]

Never would've guessed 96. Wow.

[@brianlebreton7011]

My ChatGPT says this interview took place in 2013. Still he would have been 85 back then, damn!

[@Ekam-Sat]

You do know that age is relative right?

[@michaelrogers4834]

@@brianlebreton7011 I didn't think the interview was 11 years old.

[@michaelrogers4834]

@@Ekam-Sat Yeah, but I don't think he's moving at a relativistic speed to Earth. seriously, I thought the interview was much more recent than 2013.

[@Meditation409]

Wow! That was a very smooth way of making a huge profound statement! His very last words were great! A grand mind ...a much bigger mind

[@JamesBS]

Check out Bernardo Kastrup if you want a very coherent explanation of this bigger mind

[@Ekam-Sat]

@@JamesBS No I won't.

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

Henry stapp is a man of great scientific research. His every words are valuable for reference. 🎉

[@dr_shrinker]

Regarding Entanglement. How can they measure faster than light speed, and how can they measure the reach of particles pairs when we cannot put detectors on the other end of the universe? The spin of both particles is predetermined before the waves collapse. If I know a coin lands in heads, I can tell you the other side of the coin is tails without having to measure it. That’s not faster than light information exchange. That’s sub light information exchanging from parts of my brain, to other parts of my brain.

[@simonhibbs887]

it's worth taking the trouble to read up on the details of the actual experiments and theories involved. When we measure the spin of a particle the setting of the detector has an effect on what angles of spin we can measure. That decision affects the angles of spin that we can measure on the other particle, regardless of how far away it is from it's twin when we measure it. The statistical characteristics of such experiments were laid down by John Bell in the 60s and were verified experimentally to very high precision a few years ago. So we know this isn't a case of the spin being determined when the two particles were created. If you don't believe me, and the interviewee, and Kuhn who clearly is aware of this result as well, as I say, please do look into the details yourself.

[@peaceonearth351]

@@simonhibbs887 Do you know about hidden variables? Edit: How many angels may dance on the head of a pin?

[@dr_shrinker]

@@simonhibbs887 👍I did. I looked for everything I could , before posting my comment. There’s nothing out there to demonstrate “how” they verified entanglement using experimentation. (at least nothing I can find) But! There are 30,000 videos and websites that just explain what it is and offer ‘probable theories.” Which is not what I need because already know all that. I am looking for the fine details. As for this video and the host…… I don’t "appeal to authority" to just take their word for it.... especially when the authority says they cannot explain the phenomenon. There are a few things that the “professionals” get wrong, like thermodynamics. Some physicists claim the universe is a closed system, and other physicists (experts) argue GR implies the universe is drawing energy for outside itself, violating the laws of conservation by an expanding universe. So. Someone is wrong because it can't be both ways. Here's the thing.....if they measured two particles, there is no way they can separate the two particles far enough apart to measure the "instant" aspect of the faster than light information transfer. (that much I am positive of) So far, the farthest thing we have in space is Voyager and even that is not far enough away to make an accurate test case; even being in interstellar space at this point. On a more practical matter, if they put a particle in china and Montana, that's still not far enough away to confirm the theory. But. Let us say they "could" put the paired particle on Mars or even Uranus, then how would they compare the test results of the two, considering relativity would alter/distort space-time because of gravitational differences, There is no synchronized time to say the result is "at the same time." Moreover, there's no way to calibrate and synch the test equipment/sensors to such a fine degree to measure down to Planck time, which would be the standard for "instant." This is because the energy transfer (synchronized communication) between the two monitoring devices could never bridge the two particles fast enough to clock the results.... It is almost like saying you could never measure between two points in a universe which expands faster than light, because you could never reach from one point to the other.... If paired particles exceed locality laws, and the monitoring equipment does not, then how would they be able to verify the results happened at the same time, over arbitrary distances? That's my point in a single sentence. I think there's some reliance on "theoretical physics" and I am not against TP, but I don't take every theory as gospel, especially if the theory is untestable. I thinking of string theory and many worlds.... So far, all I found was the experiment demonstrating that photons can be entangled, using polarized lenses; by measuring the various angles to get the percentage of coincidences and Non-coincidences, which is great. But. I see no definitive proof/experiment that demonstrates entangled particles break locality laws. I'll keep looking.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

"How can they measure faster than speed of light" "Faster than light information exchange" "Sub light information" "Parts of brain" "The spin of both particles" "Predetermined before the wave collapse" "Measure the reach of particles pairs"

[@simonhibbs887]

@@peaceonearth351 That’s what I’m talking about. Local hidden variable theories, of the kind in which particles have a defined state from the start, have been ruled out. There as a Nobel prize for that a few years ago.

[@catherinemira75]

The weirdness of quantum physics with its implications encompassing an observer is bound to have some different powers to classical physics. It feels like another world. Another world in need of something other than purely laws of physics. It's weird...

[@ManiBalajiC]

Things we don't know are considered weird, we would eventually find how it's interconnected but maybe not meant in our lifetime

[@SCIENTIST-X]

It is illegal to be bored in such interesting universe

[@Fundaykidzz]

It “plaqued” him his entire life ? So he just can’t say “ I just dont know yet”

[@gavaniacono]

Such a simple set up to arrive at a larger question. No need for knot-tying.

[@samrowbotham8914]

Stapp is a brilliant Idealist!

[@bretnetherton9273]

Awareness is known by awareness alone.

[@ronhudson3730]

Even if we are in one of an infinite number of universes, at least one was configured for life. Whether by statistical certainty or design, we exist. The reasons do not matter. The takeaway is that reality allows for self-consciousness. We ares o quick to deny our specialness. If we were the only self-conscious life in the multiverse, if that exists, we become infinitely more special, not less.

[@josephhruby3225]

Yes . . . Another brilliant conversation . Thank you

[@barrymarcus3425]

If a tree falls in a quantum, forrest and there is no one there to observe it and collapse the wave function, did it make a sound?

[@simonhibbs887]

It would have caused vibrations in the air around it.

[@spikespiegel9919]

What tree?

[@dr.satishsharma1362]

Excellent.....❤ thanks 🙏.

[@georgegrubbs2966]

Bell addressed quantum entanglement. Could quantum fields be the answer? What happens in one part of the field is know instantaneously in all parts of the field. There is too much appeal to "mystery" in the video as if there is a "cosmic" intelligence involved.

[@evaadam3635]

it's IQ entanglement with dark demonic influence being ruined by Godlessness..

[@S3RAVA3LM]

You're a coward george

[@TheSpeedOfC]

As in the particles somehow still retain the wavelike nature which means its still basically one particle?

[@peaceonearth351]

Not necessarily.

[@georgegrubbs2966]

@@TheSpeedOfC In reality, they aren't "particles" - they are fluctuations in the field. "A Particle Is a 'Quantum Excitation of a Field' In addition to photons - the quanta of light - Paul Dirac and others discovered that the idea could be extrapolated to electrons and everything else: According to quantum field theory, particles are excitations of quantum fields that fill all of space."

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

since light travels through space, electromagnetic quantum field could connect vast distances of space with superposition, entanglement and other quantum effects? what is going on with electromagnetic quantum field as light travels throughout universe?

[@lenspencer1765]

This guy makes sense

[@ryu7560]

Information is the basic unit of reality that makes everything and is infinite, also the universe was imagined into existence by Nature itself which is self-aware and is the collective consciousness of the cosmos.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

does electromagnetic field have virtual particles of quantum probability produced by quantum gravity wave function?

[@wmpx34]

Nice, hadn’t seen this one before.

[@Jalcolm1]

There’s things we don’t understand. We do understand mind. Mind doesn’t explain spooky action at a distance. Mind isn’t a substance.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

with vision awareness through light, might electromagnetic quantum field have consciousness?

[@stringsseeds]

Henry said there is a mystery in classical mechanics where initial conditions are required. But in string theory, initial conditions are naturally part of string theory's "mechanically" process. Henry thought something akin to mind is creating the initial conditions. It is clear and simple:- string theory is theory of "mind". A conscious being is a set of string theory with M-theory as its anchor and each being has its own Seeds (string) and hence infinitely many (10^500, 10^27010, or more) Calabi-Yau Manifolds. Each set is a personal mind, but all beings' M-theory (8th Consciousness in Yogacara Buddhism) are interacting with each other - this is what some people call "collective consciousness" or bigger mind. which in reality Buddhists' view of being centric universe. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYOsopVnbciFla8

[@sonarbangla8711]

Cosmic consciousness and 'spooky action' refers to the same Anthropic Principle-divine design.

[@nyworker]

Couch Pillow Philosophy

[@mikel4879]

Henry Stapp comment shows you exactly how a new religion is created.

[@todrichards1105]

Yeah, except physical laws can indeed, potentially, explain how the physical constants are the values that we observe. We just haven’t puzzled out what those laws are yet. Oh, and entanglement doesn’t give rise to instantaneous transfer of information, and anyone who says it does needs to go back to quantum physics class.

[@kennethmalafy503]

No. We have little or no perspective on either of those phenomena. Our data is extremely limited on both. What kind of understanding can you proclaim to have from such a limited data set as a scientist, c'mon now..... Doesn't mean we shouldn't seek to understand, just that we should understand our limits.

[@wagfinpis]

10 to the 500th thumbs up's!!! Very fine job of etching out the borders of classical knowledge and the fog of quantum observations! I personally in 1995, space-time, had a distinctly sobering metaphysical experience that let's me personally laugh at the false confidence of the staunch materialist. A trained and experienced doctor is not the same as a skilled doctor and the same followes for philosophers, proprioceptively skilled athletes, and practitioner's of meditation. The origins and the truth of physics and reality itself are beyond all our common notions and common intuitions about space-time and mechanics. Physics is only one piece in the puzzle. Once the egos of academia and "the sciences" begin to accept that reality is waiting beyond what is presently empirical, they will begin to become competent explorers of reality.

[@hubertlavelle7554]

' maybe there's a bigger mind' . Is this what we call god ?

[@RichardJohn-u3w]

No.

[@TheCosmicRealm3]

​@@RichardJohn-u3w Yes.

[@djacidkingcidguerreiro9780]

"Can We Explain Cosmos and Consciousness?".....sure, everything can be "explained".....god did it. yahweh simply waves his magic hands in the air. All mysteries are "explained" just by invoking the (man created) name of god.

[@tedgrant2]

Primitive man did not understand lightning. Maybe there will always be things we don't understand. I hope so, otherwise there would be no point in worshipping Brahma.

[@tedgrant2]

We've already got perfect explanations for everything ! It's all in an old book called the Bible. We don't need to look any further.

[@Yousefmesef]

LOL

[@SandipChitale]

The classic tired move. Consciousness is mysterious, QM is mysterious so they must be connected. The only connection I can see is that any chemistry and therefore electro-chemistry inside the brain depends on QM. And brain electro-chemistry generates conscious phenomenon. In fact the QM is involved in every aspect of electron action in chemical bonds. So, BFD. Not even sure why is that a big deal. But the connection is not because of mysteriousness for sure. Just to be clear consciousness is required/necessary for collapsing a QM wave function is a 40 year old idea and has been discarded by physicists, which unfortunately people refuse to correct and keep pushing that connection (Deepak Chopra). Many times Sean Carroll, Brian Greene and others have made it clear that a video camera can collapse a wave function. The quantum computer labs do not protect their quantum state from the consciousness of lab personnel. Ask quantum computer developers. So, there goes that misleading connection.

[@peaceonearth351]

New studies also claim that you're not locally real.

[@justinotherpatriot1744]

Cognitive. Theoretic. Model. of the Universe.

[@windfoil1000]

Humans have minds so the answer to the mysteries of the universe must be a super-duper mind? Isn't that just self aggrandizement?

[@holgerjrgensen2166]

Rainbow mirror the Naked picture of Cosmos and Consciousness, and also our physical body-structure and Day/Night-Circuit. So, Rainbow is the Naked Key. The Basic-Analyses is Simple, but the Eternal World Picture, is a very extensive Study, and not everyone is ready.

[@kimsahl8555]

- no, but we can explain the property of Cosmos and consciousness.

[@svendtang5432]

Two things that is not to be mentioned in one statement at all…

[@Dion_Mustard]

Consciousness is MORE than brain. This I know through my own Out of Body Experiences (these were not drug-induced or hallucinations). You have to experience it first hand to know what I am talking about.

[@robivogi]

"In the beginning was the Word."

[@peweegangloku6428]

Now, this is objectivity.

[@sivaprasadkodukula7999]

With in few years,every thing can be explained by physics(information transformation like internet, computers and robotics.)At the same time it explains the limitations and the reasons by physical laws.

[@User-vbhhnvgjmt]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqKQfWaMeLihrbcsi=sxqkfXYHU8-WfaYv

[@oldrusty6527]

If you want to bring God into science, you will have to define God. Are you sure you want to do that?

[@ansleyrubarb8672]

...I would like to offer the thought that Time/Space flows as a Turbulent Flow, resulting in Eddie's & Vortices are created & experienced. Also please do not overlook the fact that we are Observing from within, respectfully, Chuck...captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings. We become entangled in the Whole Universe. How Wonderful & Beautifully is GOD Creation of Man, All Every & Every All...

[@povilaskimutis1409]

not a single thought new

[@carlosenriquegonzalez-isla6523]

Estos dos nomas estan hablando de oidas. La conciencia no tuene nada que ver con la mecanica cuantica excepto en que el cerebro esta hecho de atomos.

[@johndoolan9732]

Ok imagine our subconscious or for me our souls move on to next existence being able to still observe our universe aswell as past lives this knowledge would be invaluable with the ability to tap in

[@sarunas8002]

Instantanious action? Pseudoscience, ok

[@BaronReed-rj9rz]

In the beginning, GOD....

[@lenspencer1765]

I agree but which 1

[@aaronrobertcattell8859]

11 there is a good reason for that (2^2+6^2+9^2)^(1/2) = 11

[@HewhostandsFIRM6]

Cosmos and consciousness are all one. Consciousness determines your next lifes journey meaning the person you are and how you treat others. You create your own heaven and hell. There are levels in this life right here and jow. If you have a good life goid wealth and health then its because you are deserving of it which is a state of heaven, but if you dont have any of those, then you are in a state of hell. The karmic wheel is real. Prison earth doing a life sentence of good and bad which is why they both exist right beside each other.

[@heckle9]

How have you determined this to be as you state?

[@Ekam-Sat]

Can We Explain Cosmos and Consciousness? Yes. One. Yes. It is not good to be alOne.

[@gsr4535]

Big Jewish Sky King? 🤔

[@stoictraveler1]

This guy is coming close to the real deal, I suspect. We may find God through the back door.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

God, however, is not an explanation. Explanation only exists in ignorance or in conditioned state, and explanation is of a process, therefore entails time and space. God is not circumscribed to time and space. All you'll ever discuss concering time and space what is phenomena. Don't you want to acknowledge the principles? You might posit the principles and God as an explanation of the phenomena - fine, here's your starting point. There is a difference from contemplation or realization to explanation. I see that "why" question aren't to be informed but discovered by one themselves, when they're of fundamental questions. When persons ask why questions, they don't really want an answer, especially if they've not realized it themselves or discovered, to some degree, a similar realization. "Why the cosmos" right? .....one might ask...why do you care?

[@S3RAVA3LM]

​​​​@dr_shrinker c'o'w'a'r'd's have no say. Remove your reply or reveal yourself. The government already knows me.

[@peaceonearth351]

@@dr_shrinker Lol You know there is a possibility.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

​@@peaceonearth351the possibility isn't in question. Of course God is. Only the theory of is up for debate. And because these sophists who have hijacked the science circle, they need to be dealt will immediately - in fact, they're playing a part in this cabal and communist agenda. They don't have a say. They're not experts. They're not researchers. They're not wise. They have no right to influence anybody or anything. Therefore they are doing injustice. Ones sentiment or influence must be harmonious with all, it must be universal and if it isn't, it's folly. They need to be dealt with now. And all the shills and affiliates that work with them will be paying a price. We have it all on record. Only a matter of time.

[@harrystein2000]

God intends for us to be astonished and moved by the wonders of creation, not merely for the sake of the creations themselves, but to draw our eyes and hearts to Him. All the most brilliant minds (Penrose, Faggin, Hoffman, etc.) say “we don’t have the foggiest idea how and probably never will” regarding what was before the Universe was created, what is outside the edge of the expanding universe, what is consciousness. For believers, through the beauty, majesty and unbounded complexity of what God has made, we are left to contemplate His own nature and greatness. A time will come when the awe we feel won't stem from the limited understanding of our Universe and consciousness. Instead, our admiration and praise will be solely for God. All our wonder, reverence, and devotion will focus on Him alone. I choose to do that now. Creation serves this purpose: to direct us toward God and ready us for the moment when we will finally see Him face to face. Are you prepared?

[@mikel4879]

Henry Stapp comment shows you exactly how a new religion is created.