What Exists? | Episode 1710 | Closer To Truth

What exists? Lots of things exist. But what’s truly fundamental? The challenge is to discern the minimum number of basic categories that explains the entirety of existence. Featuring interviews with Sean Carroll, David Wallace, David Chalmers, and Don Page.
Season 17, Episode 10 - #CloserToTruth
▶Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer To Truth host Robert Lawrence Kuhn takes viewers on an intriguing global journey into cutting-edge labs, magnificent libraries, hidden gardens, and revered sanctuaries in order to discover state-of-the-art ideas and make them real and relevant.
▶Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Closer to Truth presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
#Existence #Cosmos

[@TetsuoTheAwakenedOne]

I am totally flabbergasted by the quality of production, topic selection and especially the content of the talk. Nothing but respect.

[@daithiocinnsealach3173]

"Am I allowing hope to distort reason?"-Robert Lawrence Kuhn What a great question to ask yourself when approaching the big questions in life.

[@vhawk1951kl]

Lest thou shouldest ponder the paths of life, her ways are moveable that ye may not know them" - Proverbs 5:6.Hiope is a form of dreaming.

[@wingflanagan]

Love this. Love this series. Love the open-mindedness combined with intellectual honesty and rigor. Most refreshing!

[@oscar3490]

Yawn.

[@Peakfreud]

This series is what I had hoped the internet would be collectively Back in the 90's when it was first launching. But instead it became the comment Above mine.

[@trashbot5675]

@@Peakfreud ^

[@jasonholbrook8845]

This is my third day in a row binging off the channel all day past 3 days. I’m hooked

[@wayneasiam65]

The brightest minds of humanity still struggle with fundamental existence. And have differing beliefs.

[@ronnie237]

Why?? If there is a question, three must be an answer. Who or what holds that answer? That question actually is the answer.

[@timreagan777]

The intro to this is EXACTLY me all day every day and often even while dreaming at night.

[@timreagan777]

@Lincoln Colt interestingly written work of fiction

[@timreagan777]

Yeah... I looked it up... Not for me... But I appreciate the suggestion 👍

[@DrumminDoc]

Fascinating to see someone, Kuhn in this example, have a publicized existential crisis....

[@gregorspv]

Once again physicists save the day! Nice to see Chalmers so relaxed in this interview. Thanks for this episode!

[@janethayes5941]

This has always been such a favorite and fascinating program. He has such respect for ideas and is so open to different views. Thank you for this.👏👏👏

[@raymondreddington6317]

I am so much blessed to have this channel in my list of subscription, Thank You.

[@rambiss89]

When all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail.

[@yanassi]

I enjoyed that post.

[@slappop7082]

But these aren't your nails, are they? Because all you have is a hammer...

[@zagyex]

except the hammer.

[@daithiocinnsealach3173]

_I_ AM THAT *HAMMER*

[@ReligionlessFAITH]

@@slappop7082 most carpenters are unionized and work for large construction companies the carpenters do not own the nails, yet they get hammered anyway. part of the unified theory kzbin.info/www/bejne/aHWniXpjma2oncU

[@amyper0012]

Thank you for taking us along to this conference!

[@n8thal718]

This was a beautiful "Question" Thank you for providing these videos and challenging questions. From a Spiritual believer and Journeymen... 💛💛💛

[@HyperFocusMarshmallow]

“When we talk about reasons, causes and explanations, these are again ancient words that we repurpose, and maybe these don’t apply in modern quantum physics” - Sean Carrol

[@adamsno6761]

Reason and causality simply mean (logic) , how can one denies logic and at the same time calls for logical interpretation!!

[@HyperFocusMarshmallow]

@@adamsno6761 Reason and causality does not equate to logic. The concepts are different at least in technical discussions.

[@BrettHar123]

Typical twaddle from Carroll, he he needs to stick to his podcast, and find real philosophers like David Albert or Tim Maudlin to do the philosophy.

[@HyperFocusMarshmallow]

@@BrettHar123 Could you elaborate a bit? I.e why do you think it’s a “twaddle”?

[@renupathak4442]

This is a phenomenal channel thanks to Robert Kuhn. God bless him. Sean is superb and convincing.

[@rumorady5136]

I love being open-minded I feel bigger then life no matter what. The energy I've always had and still have is amazing. My spirit I feel, will go on I'll never die. This is based in what I've learned by this time from wisdom and knowledge with lifetime everything day by day experiences .. An education would have been the cherry on top but, it was not in the cards for me. Recently, I learned what I never understood ..I was diagnosed with major adhd along with some kind of personality disorder. Yes I suffered. I grew up with a loving family who never knew I was suffering cos I managed to just get through life living by the moment. Someone once put it after handing him my personality test.. He took me aside and gave me my results of that test.. . How puzzled he was he said I'm like a lost spirit wondering just floating around . 15 years later after moving back to that state..I took the same test again.. And got the same reaction... The exact same words to me amazed again.. Wow to begin what he said again..

[@johncormier]

This show is just incredible to watch. Just brilliance.

[@sirilandgren]

Love your videos, thanks a lot for making them available!

[@danruizmd]

Thank you and thank you for amazing series and inquiries about ultimate truths!

[@rahulbosebose1]

Most important thing I learned from this video. I need to visit Banff atleast once.

[@jasonholbrook8845]

One of if not the best channel on KZbin

[@michaelchaisson2331]

I am very happy to find the CTT epasodes here ,and best of all it's free. Thanks. I used to watch this on TV :)

[@techteampxla2950]

My two favorite gentlemen in the world, guys , you two really need to do more content together. The conversation was one of the most iconic discussions some one can touch on for the future of our species. Evolve people to understand these epic questions we have. Sean was amazing, but also all the other speakers are amazing , your all amazing people who sacrificed your lives to evolve mankind.

[@garybalatennis]

Thanks for another thought-provoking episode. Here’s my take. Within the observable world and space-time matrix that we humans (at our state of evolution) live in: all the categories mentioned in the episode are parts of our apparent reality or existence in one form or other. If, in our local universe, we ultimately live in a quantum wave reality, then it all emanates from that, including consciousness and abstract entities such as mathematics or morality such as a John-Leslie-style “goodness”. If our local universe is a Wheeler “participatory universe”, then it all emanates from consciousness which brings it into existence; the consciousness itself brought into existence from the evolving universe (a kind of backwards causation). But either way, in a deeper sense, there needs to be another more fundamental explanation. Why the quantum wave function law itself - or why consciousness itself? What’s behind it? And why? Is it even fair and proper to ask “why?” (I happen to think it is.) We need to keep probing, thinking, analyzing, philosophizing . . .

[@douglasfaichnie6931]

Thank you Thank you Thank you - I am learning (slowly) how to think critically and entertain viewpoints I once struggled to face. Open minded, sincere, respectful and as always pushing the envelope. Thank you RLK et al. at Close To Truth. 👌

[@482jpsquared]

Robert, you closed on the narrative masterfully.

[@davidvaught5194]

Totally love this show!!

[@trumpelstiltzkin9068]

Humans and human contiousness is the catalyst we are the bridge between existence and reality

[@dawsoncollins9368]

This video is awesome . Thank you for keeping me curious during social isolation 😂

[@mallikareddy4948]

Hi

[@nothingness3]

This is simply a great programme

[@HyperFocusMarshmallow]

Can I like this twice!!! Great video 👍

[@kquat7899]

Sean Carroll summarised it as well as is possible. Far too much is made of consciousness. However, Don page is a good example of the unusual ways in which the mind can work.

[@trignal]

After watching several of these episodes (which I love), I can't shake the feeling that everyone is saying the same thing but with different vocabulary: First cause, Quantum wave function, God etc. etc. I can relate to Kuhn's quest which mirrors my own for a very long time but I'm afraid I might have to wait until passing on to the other side (if there is one) before any answers are found. I hope he goes into the realm of psychedelics for some direct experience with altered states of consciousness.

[@MQartGallery]

Do not wait! There is no coming back! You need to believe in Allah now! The other side is "Judgment day"! When you will be held accountable for your belief and deeds in This life.

[@vhawk1951kl]

there are fairly sound reasons for avoiding universals which are so screamingly obvious that they are readily apparent even to a two-year old child. There are several billions of beings on this planet that comprise the universal "everyone", are you seriously suggesting that you have canvased every single one of them? Have you no more profitable endeavour with which to occupy your time? All universals are imaginary.

[@ishikawa1338]

Is it hard to believe that in the infinite eternity of time and space reality etc that there is only one go and u don’t remember ever after u die or it repeats Or u believe in a second eternal life which simply may be not alive ur gone for ever only here in a blink of the universe

[@vhawk1951kl]

@@ishikawa1338 Why *"believe" * Anything*?

[@trevorcarterva]

Here's an idea for a show: What is knowing? Does it involve only objective reality or do we account for subjective experience?

[@catherinemoore9534]

When pain hits you you know it exists. It takes all the space and energy you got.

[@drchaffee]

It seems peculiar to view consciousness as being fundamental when it seems to have arisen from a process billions of years in the making.

[@kpoppaganger3831]

We talk about "fields" like the "Unified Field". Recently, we found the Higg's Field which gives mass to particles. Why not a "Field of Consciousness" where complex systems, once they meet the criteria, can connect to a variety of levels within the conscious field itself? It can be a rock at one level, a butterfly at another, while an infant child at another, and so on. As each system evolves to meet a greater level within the realm of criteria, the connection is made stronger and consciousness grows accordingly. The criteria can be as simple, or as complex, as increasing the neuron-network within our brains. This happens when an infant develops into a small child and on to an adult. In light of quantum mechanical systems, such as the uncertainty principle, entanglement or the measurement problem as seen in the double slit experiment where consciousness gives rise to reality, I can't see where the existence of such a field would be implausible. In the case of entities who are self aware, for instance, we grow and develop while, over time, through the aging process we decline, leaving the connection to consciousness to also decline. This can be a long and drawn out process, or it can come quickly until, at either case, the connection is dissolved and the complex system returns to the elements, which, of course, is a construct of consciousness itself. This is also true of "things" that exist at lower levels of consciousness within the field. While things come and go, consciousness continues. Is this Pan Psychism (I made that word up) or just the abstract thinking of a man who doesn't have much to do. If you should ask, "Where does consciousness come from?" well, that another discussion for another time. Just something to think about.

[@xspotbox4400]

What is a wave function, if we take a grain of salt and keep on dividing it into half's, it will split into nothing at certain level. When we probe space where last molecules of salt were, we can find some debris there. So salt has not vanish from existence, just became to small to be seen by a microscope or touched by anything material. But then comes a problem, salt doesn't split only to molecules and those into atoms, it became quarks and energetic particles. Further more, when we probe energy of those particles, machine itself can change, transmute those energies into particles that were not in a box before. And there's no clear border, those signals are indistinguishable from energy of a box and probing machine. So salt does disintegrate into nothing, it's just nothing is full of energy pulses, with distinctive properties. This is why professor Carroll said it's all a wave function deep down, every atom is part of this energetic thing we call reality. And energy is just a difference between potentials, it's not stuff, it's not here and now, it doesn't have defined shape. We can go backwards also, create a box with bunch of potentials and material things will start to pop into existence. If we want to build an atom or a molecule, machine will use ever more energy and became larger and more complex, but in principle, we could another universe from nothing. It would be awful, very chaotic, unstable space, but still a sort of material reality. What nobody knows how to do is a real, stable space with all this features we know, not everything could be created by our simple, flawed mechanical constructs, just a part of what we know is materially real. This is important because there are two known kinds of reality, ordinary material and a live one. Everything would be OK, if universe would be just matter, doesn't matter what kind or how much, nobody would notice anyway. Science constructed a good, detailed model how life came to be. It was a puddle, a soup of organic chemicals, those started to bind in stable ways and begin to replicate. Why and why only than and here, nobody knows, it just basic logic according to what was preserved on this world. We also know what makes human special, nobody is born as an animal, world is not a jungle anymore, we grow up in artificial environment and are thought in symbolic language. Words enable us to think, create, use and most of all, we can remember, we can describe ourselves and the world. Forget words, destroy all universal symbols and art, human would became just another animal again. But does this mean consciousness would also be gone? Not really, human animal would still think, imagine, meditate and dream, only civilization will exist no more, at least for a long period of time before some human animal tribe would reinvent universal symbols and art again. So we have at least 3 things at play, physical space, material life and consciousness. Why is consciousness so special, it's because conscious creatures can build worlds.

[@Red-cc8fk]

Also creativity is unique to humans.

[@patricklaw9951]

Consciousness is one thing. How conscious is another.

[@simplyme4247]

I believe your conscience creates even the process of your thought and action creating the physical and all around perspective and creation..

[@rh001YT]

In the 1780s Immanuel Kant, in his Critique of Pure Reason, noted that the human mind, via it's faculty or reason, has the ability to ask questions that it is unsuited to answer because the faculty of reason has it's limitations. Reason, he noted, does, as it probes, require cause and effect all the way down which will most likely wind up at a dead end. So I say it is worthwhile to probe as far as one can go but don't be surprised by reacing a dead end....a point of inconclusiveness. Beyond that point nothing is possible except wild speculation.

[@cmvamerica9011]

Something is all there is; nothing by definition can’t exist.

[@Helen-jw6yb]

You needed to explain what a wave function is to start with! But thanks for this. Some of us are new investigators.

[@AsifMehedi]

It's not possible to explain the quantum wave function in a few minutes. But there are videos explaining quantum physics on KZbin. I find it a challenging topic to grasp, though I'm fascinated by its bizarre nature.

[@OzoneBhaguan]

here is how i would correlate these four categories. 1: physics objective 2: Consciousness subjective 3: abstract ideas interaction 4: god purpose, intention, meaning, memory 1: Quantum wave function 2: Collapse of wave function 3: Patterns in the wave function 4: recording of patterns within the wave function. 1: Brain: physical 2: Mind: non physical 3: Idea: abstract (phenomena) 4: Purpose: meta physical (edit: emergent phenomena) Edit: 1. Causation (deity- pre existent cause) 2. Manifestation (reality) 3. Perception (abstraction) 4. Emergence (interaction) 5. Transcendence (entropy- transition-phase change- unknown phenomena yet to be classified, things we don't know) next reiteration of physical phenomena

[@manog8713]

Thinking of the existence of conciouseness as an independent entity is an bastraction itself. We only know of our conceiousness, which is hard to define but it is dependent on our physical existence. The best one can think of conceiosueness is, to think of it as a consequence of outr existence. Those advocating for the platonic existence of conceiouseness need to tell us what they mean by the notion of conciouseness. Pehaps it is our inherent lmitation in the use of language, taking us all on a circular path with no escape form infinite regress.

[@toddheidrick5573]

You should interview Klee Irwin at Quantum Gravity Research regarding Emergence Theory. They seem to have the best concepts, ideas, and solutions to all these questions.

[@kcleach9312]

i have watched hundreds of shows, lectures, debates and documentaries about the universe and reality and ive noticed every single one of them have one thing in common , it all leads to language ! they just use different ways to describe their theories but at the core foundation its the same thing!

[@johnsaunders3364]

It’s a quantum field we live in. Waves are just what we can see. It is all individual, whilst we see agreement we are perverting each other’s contribution. The challenge is finding balance and acceptance of each other.

[@jmanj3917]

16:20 I like David's self-check here. It's important to pump the proverbial brakes now and again; It is doubly so when you are predicting anything. Go Bluejays!

[@Two_But_Not_Two]

Awareness. Everything else is a subset to awareness.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

Experience exists, and gives meaning to reality; although not know how this might evidence physically?

[@xspotbox4400]

What exist, as far as any human being can say for sure exist is a Large hydron Collider, located in Switzerland. This is as far as our machines can go, when we build better machines, sure some other stuff might join our awareness of reality. Ligo is not same kind of machine, something is shaking, machine can detect that, but can describe what are gravity waves made of or are they even real. It could be something else, but LHC can always produce same particles, so whatever that machine can produce must be real and anybody can replicate it.

[@constructivecritique5191]

So the whole universe is a unit! I think most people know this.

[@xspotbox4400]

This unit might exist together with entire past, maybe even the future. It's a 4D thing, light from beginning of material universe is still shining from above, therefore influencing what exist today.

[@patterson-pros.]

Recommended reading- ‘The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect’ by Roger Williams

[@jaimel2037]

Yeah Carroll and Brian Greene to masters of the realm that have the skills to speak this quantum magic with laymen 😎

[@dansigmon1559]

No matter where you go there you are. No matter where you were there you aren’t.

[@suemurphy1317]

Wow this is fascinating👍

[@theway5258]

The existing itself is relative. All things are changing either slowly or rapidly. It includes our perseption and understanding of everything as well. Universe is a nonstationary itself. What exists is eternal motion of matter.

[@griotolu7040]

Sean Carroll 09:17: David Chalmers ( Philosophy of Mind) 15:09: David Wallace (Philosopher Of Quantum Physics ) 21:47: Don Page ( Quantum Physicist)

[@jurisgalvanovskis540]

A single and simple entity can create all the complexity of what we see around us. There is an example for it. Mathematics starts with a number one and nothing else. To find out what it leads to you may try to get acquainted with any branch of modern mathematics. Beyond the slightest doubt, you might be amazed. As well, beyond the slightest doubt, a single and simple entity underlies the existence of the physical world. And it is obvious what this entity is. I leave it as a homework, for everyone interested, to name it!

[@yanassi]

Sean carroll sees the physicals things, in their simplest forms. But in it’s present form the yanassi theorem led me to think that fundamentally two things were created in the big bang. Those two became the categories of all that exists.

[@sharonjuniorchess]

Here is my take: Our brains are actually two brains operating together and consciousness is the quantum effect that comes out of the brain functioning. So I can buy into the first speakers all encompassing assertion as it permeates everything (and we are a part of it too). One thing that physics seems to be ignoring is electromagnetism in astronomy and how it seems to explain the massive forces that we have so far been unable to explain. It took people 200 years to understand Maxwell's equations & develop Radio & television. Maybe we are on the second cusp as we discover what and how gravity is related.

[@lucemiserlohn]

Now, sorry to point that out, the latter part of your post is rubbish. First of all, Maxwell's equations have been understood quite quickly, but it was the case that technological development was lagging way behind scientific discovery. Second of all, electromagnetism does not cause much of anything on astronomical scales; locally, electromagnetism is comparably strong, but on large scales, it is not. This weakness in effect on larger scales is a result of the inverse square power law electromagnetism obeys. That is why on the large scale, of all the four "elemental" forces (even though gravity actually is not a force), gravity is the strongest and locally it is the weakest. On astronomical scales, gravity is the only "force" that clearly dominates the dynamics of the very large. Now, you might argue that "dark energy" must be even stronger and is "unknown"; first, yes, on very, very large scales, the effect of dark energy, namely the accelerating expansion of spacetime, dominates and exceeds even gravity. But the effect of dark energy is not a force, as it is uniform everywhere and only acts locally; what we perceive as the effect on the large scale is the sum of the many, many small local actions. Second, the actual nature of dark energy may be unknown, but we know how it works and which way we can describe that; this is by the way of the cosmological constant in Einstein's Field equation of spacetime in general relativity - and that is clearly _not_ Maxwell's electromagnetic field, and as a consequence, if it were, dark energy would be photons, which it clearly is not.

[@sharonjuniorchess]

@@lucemiserlohn Thank you for your response. It just confirms to me that physicists still do not really understand how these forces actually work. They are still stumbling around trying to describe different parts of an elephant in a darkened room. A lot of what we see in the universe looks very similar to electromagnetic effects. Just because we keep seeing things one way does not mean that we are right...yet.

[@lucemiserlohn]

@@sharonjuniorchess Electrodynamics is really well understood and if there were misunderstandings involved, we would have run into problems in the technological applications long ago. Electromagnetism obeys an inverse square law, there can be no denying that, as experience confirms this, and all physical theories need to be falsifiable by experience (read: experiment). But maybe you can elaborate upon which phenomena in your theory look like electrodynamics, and why?

[@sharonjuniorchess]

@@lucemiserlohn I understand electromagnetism I am a radio ham. But physicists are still unable to come up with a grand unified theory. Just because we understand one part of the elephant does not mean we understand what it looks like in total. They are still grasping at staws.

[@lucemiserlohn]

@@sharonjuniorchess If that is your understanding on how scientific research works, "grasping at straws", it suggests that there is a misconception here. A GUT does not fall out of the sky, there are many theories out there that are candidates, but they either have problems, and thus are incomplete or wrong, or are untestable (strings, anyone? but that one has problems, too, namely a reverse sign for the cosmological constant they can't seem to get rid off). To put this into perspective, it took the better half of the last century to have testable experiments for predictions made by theories that originated much earlier and that have thus been accepted, but untested; e.g. General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, the existence of the Higgs Boson and thus the Standard Model, ... If your dissatisfaction stems from a seeming lack of progress, well, patience, these things take time. There is no grasping at straws, as you call it. Nevertheless, you still didn't answer my question, what phenomena in your opinion do look like electrodynamics?

[@jasonard3225]

There was one creator that split itself off into separate pieces of consciousness to experience itself. Duality, positive and negative/good and bad is a way for the creator to know itself. Once our consciousness goes through these 8 densities, we then merge back with the one creator m. We are now in the third density which has a 90,000 year reincarnation cycle. The 3rd density has the veil of forgetting so that in each life we make an honest choice to follow the positive path which is the service to others path or the negative path which is service to self path. Both paths serve the one creator in knowing itself. So at the end of the day experience is the only purpose to anything.

[@DoesNotGiveAF]

The creator theory despite the self indulgent magical grandiosity doesn't answer the question to begin with, the questions just shifts to what is a creator, where did it come from and why? What's the point or purpose of it and therefore everythings existence? It just raises more questions without actually answering anything.

[@billnorris1264]

Another excellent show! The new format is outstanding. Sean Carroll presented the clearest definition of reality that science can offer.. Elementary particles AREN'T conscious, so Chalmers is out, although I thoroughly enjoy hearing his perspectives. Last, although I'm a staunch supporter of the scientific method and the power that QM has allowed us to wield, I'm finally having a ROBERT moment.. A single Quantum wave function doesn't feel satisfying....

[@harlesbalanta2299]

Mr bill, you mentioned that particles are not conscious, still I didn't see the method or measurement to differentiate what is or what is not conscious, allow me to expose an idea, memory is essential for consciousness, and entanglement is something like that, the grid created talks about the connections and interactions of that particle, all particles are entangle. All particles are connected, and that connection could be consciousness itself.

[@billnorris1264]

@@harlesbalanta2299 Thanks for your response.. the universe could very well be an entangled quantum wave function...Heres the problem .. the SAME equations you are using to bolster the concept of universal consciousness, also show us it is IMPOSSIBLE to use entanglement to convey ANY information other than the quantum spin of a single Elementary particle.. Not Communications, and therefore NOT the basis of a conscious mind.. It is improper to pick and choose parts of scientific knowledge and then IGNORE other parts.. One man's humble opinion. Peace friend.

[@billnorris1264]

Ps.. Electrons are NOT neurons!

[@harlesbalanta2299]

Mr bill, I'm aware that electrons are nor neutrons, I don't see why you mention it, still there is not difference on which type of particle we are referring to, the collapse of the wave function does not destroy the particle, just define it, it will refer to how but not to what and why, that's the reason I find Dr Carroll approach to be insufficient.

[@billnorris1264]

@@harlesbalanta2299 I get your point friend, and it is well taken.. I mention the electron/ neuron thing only because I'm open to the idea that a neuron could be a BIT of consciousness, I don't see how electrons could be.. On the other issue, one might say that particles arise as perturbations in the quantum wave function. At this point, they fall under the influence of electromagnetism and gravity, the result of which is me and the couch I'm sitting on.. All of that works fine, and has mathematical support. The REAL and most mysterious questions are on the NATURE of this all pervasive Quantum wave function ?. What is it? Why should it exist ? How can it be intrinsically enabled to produce all of the complexity we see? Relevant existential questions aside, consciousness in electrons seems to be an unfortunate misdirection from the parts of quantum field Theory we CAN understand.

[@TetsuoTheAwakenedOne]

Incredible.

[@gireeshneroth7127]

All you need to understand is that it takes an existent constant for a temporary subsequent to derive its existence from.. And the temporary subsequent can never not be the existent constant itself. Consciousness in a mind posture is living itself as the universe. The mind is what stands between pure consciousness and the illusory universe.

[@wadudesilva7903]

How can something exist, if everything is changing every microscopic fractions of a second? On the other hand, Change is only a transformation from one form to another and in total it sums up to the same. Does it exist? Is it relative?

[@hybridamerica]

Weird... the troubling questions at the beginning of this episode... I immediately knew the answers to them all. Is this really something people struggle with?

[@joseperez2515]

Do they exist? Maybe there's a God and that God is asleep. We are his dream and one day he will awaken and we will just cease to be just like the reality we seem to live in our dreams cease to exist when we get up. So, enjoy your life and make the best of it while you can.

[@billvokey4221]

The rabbit hole gave birth to this man.

[@kimsahl8555]

Nature exists. Nature is everything, so everything exists. Nature = the lifeless nature + the living nature.

[@andynew2]

"It's a free country!" Not now it isn't!

[@arthurwieczorek4894]

Existence exists and consciousness is conscience. Ayn Rand. From the perspective of experience, they raise mutually. Philosophically one is primary and one is derivative.

[@brydonjesse]

We are all the same soul, we just expirence diffrent things creating ourselves

[@machida5114]

The philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce stated his own version of objective idealism in the following manner: The one intelligible theory of the universe is that of objective idealism, that matter is effete mind, inveterate habits becoming physical laws.

[@johnaugsburger6192]

Thanks

[@bokchoiman]

Have you done an episode where you talk about Conway's game of life?

[@SandipChitale]

"Multiplicity" of categories that have sensible members can be said to bring us closer to the truth, not the "Diversity" for "Diversity"s sake. The members in "Diversity" still have a requirement of being sensible, rational, plausible. Not all members that were put in the "Diversity" were equal.

[@zTheBigFishz]

The conscience entities sample the wave function to create reality

[@docsoulman9352]

The problem I have with materialism and physicalist is simply that a universe comprised entirely from non-conscious matter is essentially nothing in the complete absense of consciousness ..it knows not of it’s own existence..were it not for what materialists consider the “accidental weak emergence “ of consciousness…the whole thing would not be experienced…it essentially would not exist…It can Only exist if it is experienced and witnessed buy an observer….I believe it is emergent from consciousness….not the other way around… It’s conceivable that consciousness could exist without matter as it would be the observer of itself…non-conscious matter cannot do the same for itself…In life we conceive an idea then make it material…not the other way around.

[@JamesRendek]

Sorry, I can't watch any more of your videos until you prove to me that I exist 😘

[@ChrisStewart2]

I think that existence can be reduced to two components. Positive and negative space. First of all we can observe that the universe in energetic. To be energetic means that there needs to be a fundamental imbalance. The minimum number to create an imbalance is at least two. Therefore logically if we are trying use a reductionist method the best guess is two things. What exactly positive and negative entails I do not know -I am not referring to electron flow. It is some underlying property of space. Where it does not want to be in a rest state.

[@benjiedrollinger990]

That’s the miracle 😂😂😂 3:53

[@esosaiyamu2581]

Best KZbin channel..

[@rekososa3175]

True mature intelligence is being able to keep two opposing ideals in your mind at the same time such as the wave function has a purpose or the wave function or the universe has no purpose

[@metalrock2112]

In order to know the nature of the reality you must first know the nature of consciousness.

[@benjiedrollinger990]

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

[@NaturalFuture]

Robert, Sean Carroll's reaction to your desire to find the origin of of the "wave function of the universe" tells me that he refuses to expand beyond a comfort zone in which "nothing more need be explained"---including and especially the existence of a creative God as the ultimate cause for the wave function, or anything else approaching the level of foundational or bedrock reality. In essence, the wave function is his attempt to replace God as the Source of creative agency. You can't find answers to ultimate questions---regarding anything beyond the physical---from someone as wholly dedicated to the physical as is Sean Carroll.

[@switchhit3774]

Do we not have evidence through the double slit experiment of the decoherence the wave function into particles??

[@jamesthomas1244]

Last night I dreamed of a chaotic life. I awoke to a chaotic life. Perhaps I haven't stopped dreaming.

[@jamesthomas1244]

@SAMURAI 武士 What if we are dreaming that we are but a dream of God herself?

[@kimhoward7116]

Maybe anything conscious had to come buy/thru the unconscious is which it’s input is from conception to death while taking information in thru all our senses in to the unconscious, made conscious thru our first and many experience, we have the knowledge before we actually evolve it to conscious

[@realcygnus]

Again imho Bernardo Kastrup's flavor of idealism is thE superb alt to physical realism.

[@gyro5d]

Wave function of the Aether. Everything is Dielectric Hyperboloids, Electron/Positron Vortexes and Magnetic Toruses of Aether, connected to the Inertial plane.

[@bentonpix]

The condition of infinity applies pressure to all infinite points in space through lines of force. This is how the "inertial plane" gets its force or inertia. Though I haven't heard that term before. But lines of force in a row would certainly make a plane.

[@rikimitchell916]

'all that can exist does exist which is a singular thing...the universe'

[@iamBlackGambit]

At 15:18 You cant tell me he dont sound like stewie!! 😂

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

That the wave function evolves in time, does that mean either time develops from the wave function, that the wave function comes out of time, that time and the wave function are two different things, or maybe something else yet?

[@kzeich]

Damn it I just ate 3 100 grand bars I'm going to have heart burn tonight

[@first1nameknows396]

😄 it's good to laugh now and then and step out from rigid absolutes

[@bjmcintyre5080]

I think is evident that the rules of physics exist. Which means math exists. For example, would our rules of physics exist in every other universe.? I don’t think so, therefore, it is easy to conclude that it exists in this universe as much as the physical things it governs. What else is existence besides something that is there/is a part of reality ? Not only it is part of reality it has an impact on it.

[@freethot333]

How can we be sure that the "short term" morality is the best path for "long term" human flourishing? What "time scale" should we be using" ...decades, millennia? ;/

[@ZeroOskul]

Well, if everything relative to you is the past since light has to travel over time to meet you, then you exist at the end of time, so why not go with the here-and-now as a timescale to really worry about? The future will unfold whether we are there or not. Keeping us alive, right now, assures we will be there, then.

[@freethot333]

@@ZeroOskul Since 2 days have passed since your response zeroskul, and I'm still here, evidently I "did not" then exist at any "end" of time. ;) It may have felt like an end to me then, but it is clear to me now that it was not.

[@ZeroOskul]

@@freethot333 Oh, you exist at the end of time relative to your perspective and I am in the past, as you see it. It is ALWAYS the end of time. The way the past changes as observed in your present is the way the presentr changes over time as the future unfolds. Everyone is the end of time from their own perspective and everything is one billionth of a second in the past. Also, we are both still alive in the present and I think it's because we were alivew before and survived till now. Keep staying alive in the present and we'll have another exchange in the future. And there is no future but what we make for ourselves in the present. Keep rockin!

[@ZeroOskul]

@@freethot333 Is your last name pronounced "Lou-Ellen" or "Shoe-Shine"? It's Welsh.

[@freethot333]

@@ZeroOskul :) I've heard the name pronounced "Lou-Ellen" and "La-wellen"...I use the latter.. and occasionally the ladder.

[@medusaskull9625]

Do we exist because there are empty space within us? Or, do we exist because there are stuff within us? It's like if you are using tiles to shape a dog. You can do it in two ways. One way is obvious, you lay out the tiles to shape a dog. Other way is, you layout all the tiles in a square and then start removing tiles until the empty space shape a dog. Now, you can recognize both as a dog shape but one is with material and one is with lacking of material. Back to the original question, do the world exist because there are fundamental physical substance or do the world exist because there are lacking of fundamental physical substance? The answer is you need both tiles and empty space to shape the dog.

[@KDBTANMAY]

Give Indian Philosophy a go. Especially the Buddhist and the Vedantic ones, especially Aesthetic Vedanta.

[@n8thal718]

Very good point... I think that perspective may help contribute to the expansion and challenging questions. I think that part is missing in his presentations and questioning.

[@KDBTANMAY]

@@n8thal718 Thanks, Nathan.