Episode 28: Roger Penrose on Spacetime, Consciousness, and the Universe

Blog post with show notes and transcript: www.preposterousuniverse.com/...
Patreon: / seanmcarroll
Sir Roger Penrose has had a remarkable life. He has contributed an enormous amount to our understanding of general relativity, perhaps more than anyone since Einstein himself -- Penrose diagrams, singularity theorems, the Penrose process, cosmic censorship, and the list goes on. He has made important contributions to mathematics, including such fun ideas as the Penrose triangle and aperiodic tilings. He has also made bold conjectures in the notoriously contentious areas of quantum mechanics and the study of consciousness. In his spare time he's managed to become an extremely successful author, writing such books as The Emperor's New Mind and The Road to Reality. With far too much that we could have talked about, we decided to concentrate in this discussion on spacetime, black holes, and cosmology, but we made sure to reserve some time to dig into quantum mechanics and the brain by the end.

[@M.-.D]

So incredible to see Professor Penrose win the Nobel Prize. One of the greatest minds.

[@pauldavidhaynes8243]

@Pisstake ?

[@CMVMic]

@Pisstake How did he disprove the idea?

[@CMVMic]

@Pisstake haha slow on the draw there! Yeah Frank just epouses sophistry

[@243david7]

I had a tear come into my eye when I heard that RP had won the Nobel prize 55 years after his paper on gravitational collapse. Glad it wasn't too late.

[@simesaid]

Same. You summed it up well 😌

[@davidseed2939]

nobel prize needs two things apart from excellence. observational confirmation amd a living author. compounded by competition.

[@justcuzcuz4687]

​q11222❤m.m😊

[@justcuzcuz4687]

❤❤❤

[@dabanmohamad3782]

Sir Penrose just won Nobel Prize in physics. Congratulations! 🏆

[@user-qj4xq1vf2g]

Ш Ты чем занят как себя вести вести в Москве на работе в😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅

[@donfox1036]

Given his genius, a remarkably humble human being.

[@megamillionfreak]

Contemplating unending aeons does that.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

when you are infinately smart you don't even have to show off.

[@continentalgin]

When he casually said, 'I didn't know that much about neurobiology, so I thought I would just learn it,' I could just see Sir Roger plopping 6 or 8 grad level, neurobiology textbooks on his desk and getting cracking, speed reading them!

[@toastie8173]

If anyone ever tells you their IQ unprompted, you can be sure theyre actually an idiot.

[@DanielFoland]

28 Episodes Later: good show, Dr. Carroll. Mindscape has become one of my favorite corners of the internet.

[@chrismccorkle3130]

It’s not a corner now it’s the whole block!

[@zero132132]

This is the first time I've wished a podcast came with an overhead projector and some transparencies.

[@tomatoso27]

#teampenrose

[@gregbrown3082]

Oh my God. This ^ Exactly.

[@snuzebuster]

I agree but I think most of what they projected would very much be over-my-head.

[@quantumcat7673]

Me, every single time I stumble on one.

[@kiran0511]

hahaha 🤣🤣

[@VaidyanathanPurushothaman]

I never feel tired in my mind, when I listen sir Penrose because he brings in so much clarity and simplicity to the discussions so normal people like me can follow even the complex subject.

[@randallrogers6350]

He reminds me of Richard Feynman in his interesting clarity of complex ideas

[@Alistair_Spence]

Incredible. What a privilege to be able to hear this discussion. Thank you.

[@michellediamond8268]

Sean, I love your podcasts! Thank you so much for all this democratization of information. Your tone is so gentle, neutral, humble, patient and caring, it really comes through on your podcasts and talks. Thank you 🤍

[@continentalgin]

It's so true, Sean sounds like a very caring medical doctor. Well done!

[@deansundquist9601]

As someone who recently found this channel, I’m enjoying exploring all these previous episodes. Thanks Sean your work is very deep and forever a trove of content on KZbin.

[@colossalfart]

22:50 "...except it's not that big. It's a small compact thing you can't see." "That's right, it's pretty small... 4 million solar masses... I'm not sure how big that is, but it's not huge." "It's less than a light year. Right, yeah, it's pretty tiny."

[@JWY]

It's about 40 light seconds event horizon radius. W|A: 2 G (4 million solar mass) / c^2

[@mauriceedwards4298]

@@JWY It takes about 20 seconds for a radio transmission to go between Earth and the moon, right? So this critter is approximately twice the size as the distance between the Earth and the moon, right? Just trying to wrap my head around it using stuff I experience on an everyday kind of basis

[@JWY]

@@mauriceedwards4298 I checked with Wolfram Alpha (the free online supercomputer AI at www.wolframalpha.com) and "light travel time earth to moon" is 1.35 seconds. So 40 light seconds is about 30 times the earth moon distance.

[@mauriceedwards4298]

@@JWY Got it - thank you! Especially for the free supercomputer part. That's a nice bonus for the day :-) But that still means 40 light seconds is pretty small on a planetary scale. It puts some scale in the word "tiny," especially considering scrunching 4 million solar masses inside. Earth would traverse that distance (about 7 million miles, right?) in about 4 1/2 days.

[@fullondeep7176]

PAHAHAHAAA :D gosh:D:D:D

[@brent4138]

I could listen to Sir Penrose all day long. Thank you Dr. Carroll

[@murraywebb8070]

Freakin love both these geniuses. They are both so brilliant and grounded, humble, yet all powerful simultaneously.

[@joyecolbeck4490]

We are so looking forward to listening to this. Sir Roger, a knight of the realm in conversion with our favourite thinker. A great birthday treat for my hubby, we'll listen and eat cake. Perfect. Thanks

[@88_TROUBLE_88]

Conversation* Also, how funny that this was my most anticipated podcast guest yet and my bday was the 5th.. Co inky dink

[@hubrisbliss6810]

I still remember the moment I comprehended Gödel's incompleteness theorem as well. It was one of the most memorable moments I had at University, both wonderfully meta and terrifyingly nihilistic. Watching Sir Penrose on Joe Rogan's podcast left me wondering if his and Dr. Carroll's relationship would be adversarial. Corrigibly, Dr. Carroll once again renews my hope in humanity. Mindscape quickly became my favorite podcast. "Hello everyone" brightens my day every time.

[@glutinousmaximus]

I felt much the same when I discovered what Kurt Gödel had been up to in the 1930's! He upset a lot of people like Hilbert and Russell and the whole mathematical world really. Axioms, as exemplified in Russell's _Mathematica_ are abstracts which may work wonderfully well _within_ math and allied logic; but have problems outside that milieu. You mention Joe Rogan - who I never really felt to be very funny, is an 'all-American' muscular kind of guy - but too many muscles instead of brain matter :0)

[@YanusDV]

Why nihilistic? If anything, Gödel theorems tell us there are infinite reserves of creativity

[@hubrisbliss6810]

More the moment than the theorem. The theorem is not actually nihilistic, but first interpretation brings that feeling, that even a buttoned up theory has inconsistencies baked in. It makes me doubt that a theory of everything is achievable. It's not a proof that it is not, but it adds to the doubt. I'd like to note that that feeling is subject to woo exploitation, similar to many quantum physics concepts being exploited. It is important to not let emotion cloud the rigorous structure of math. However, emotion is sometimes the spark of insight.

[@firstal3799]

Godel is. A bit bla bla

[@colebowman2833]

@@hubrisbliss6810 Emotion always has something to do with that. Without it, what is the point in anything?

[@megamillionfreak]

This man is an absolute treasure.

[@tombombadyl4535]

I appreciate your capacity for letting the interviewee speak. So many interviewers these days can’t seem to shut up. I imagine it’s easier when you have guests like Roger Penrose. Good job.

[@FreemanPresson]

I agree, Professor Carroll is a great interviewer. He talks just enough, guides the conversation with a light touch, and doesn't argue with his guests.

[@viswavijeta5362]

1:18:25 Consciousness

[@SolSystemDiplomat]

Thank you Sean Carroll

[@SolSystemDiplomat]

Enter the Braggn' no clue what you mean bud

[@therugburnz]

it's ok the got more thinking to do

[@PhillipYewTree]

This conversation was enlightening and inspiring. Thanks to both gentleman for recording it.

[@notexactlyrocketscience]

Thank you. This is some very high quality content you put out here for free. Excellent interview, don’t think it could have been done any better.

[@hireality]

👍 The brilliant and lovable Roger Penrose, thank you indeed Sean Carroll for interviewing the legend! I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve listened to this episode of yours via the Apple Podcast ❤️

[@ZZ-vl5nd]

"It's damn hard to bore a photon" - Roger Penrose

[@ZZ-vl5nd]

@fynes leigh you underestimate my power to bore Wednesday 😁

[@FreemanPresson]

It's true! Photons don't experience time, so can't get bored.

[@triumphoverdeath]

Thank you Mr. Carroll for the knowledge you bring to us.

[@continentalgin]

I love listening to all of you cosmologists and astrophysicists, even if I don't understand everything. What I do manage to get a glimpse of is full of wonder. Thanks for all you do.

[@papa515]

I have been 'saving' this video since (JANUARY 7TH?) and it not only met by wildly exceeded (no blew away) my expectations. My two favorite Cosmologists ... Of course, I have the latest book. I think I have almost all popular books each as written. And folded in the back of Penrose's book is a print out ( version four) of his ArX iv paper. I have downloed many of their ArXiv papers and have read them. ONLY TWO THINGS TO SAY NOW: [1] Thank you Professor Carroll [2] Thank you Professor Penrose

[@mattblack6736]

Literally the top person on my list for people i'd want to hear talk to you.

[@88_TROUBLE_88]

#MeToo

[@TheShootist]

Dyson.

[@MrJamesdryable]

To me?

[@lurb1557]

me too!

[@barlart]

Prof Sir Roger Penrose and Prof Sean Carroll are my two favourite living physicists. I read "The Emperor's New Mind some 30 years ago and Prof Penrose seems to be as extraordinary as he was back then. Remarkably interesting podcast. Best I've watched for a long time.

[@zair_salahuddin]

Wow, just the episode notification (mentioning sir Penrose) had me excited to get home and listen! I'm finally diving in! Edit: Fantastic podcast! Sir Penrose is one of the coolest, smartest f(x)ers in the history of the science. He has the freshest cosmology, proposes the chillest theories and hangs out with the hottest physicists.

[@Bix12]

I dig his Orch Or theory w/Dr Stuart Hameroff....and the AI fanboys hate it, which makes it even better!

[@brettonwoodsvsbtc1217]

Just listened. Best mindscape ever. Thank you.

[@houndofzoltan]

Best episode yet.

[@robertchristiandau1090]

The best episode so far!!!!

[@733eel]

one of my favorite speakers and I just found your channel :)

[@AndreUchoaUSA]

Fascinating! Thanks, professors!

[@shahlaahy4372]

Great listening! Thank you!

[@twirlipofthemists3201]

Really great interview, thanks.

[@stevenshiver4614]

When I 7cked out ro be rourtured7c5skeo get a course by Mr. Robotsidtorwdiztorted skulld skull Dirac hesolving his f7nction for molecular wlectr9n irbital shapesshapes and nergiesblnwries of dlectr9n orbital he gave 8mpressi9nmpr3ssi9n it was bot so much suoepos8ti9n here ther as was popping inout if existence not as wa pop8ngs 8n out of existence 8n8n differ8ng places or 7nnique quntum dield number states .s. So was not the dame particles her or but new different things.ugh!

[@MattAngiono]

This theory gives my heart huge relief.... I always thought a cyclic universe made more sense than everything springing from nothing in a single instant..... This is way more comforting, and I wish it had been around when I studied physics a decade ago. The insistence on the big bang (justifiably) along with acceleration of space expansion never felt like a very complete description. Anyway, love this podcast, I just wish it had video (I know that's way more work)! Thank you and keep up the variety of guests. Perfect for both my creative and analytic minds!

[@continentalgin]

In return for giving up Steady State, you get steady cycling, not a bad trade off.

[@jayrashamiya2810]

Amazing Podcast!

[@vegn_brit5176]

Another wonderful podcast. Thanks Sean!...It's hard to understand why anyone would give this a thumbs down.

[@jach8047]

Sir Roger is my hero. Great podcast! Thank you, Professor Carroll.

[@yingpang9627]

thank you prof. Carroll!

[@meizhongbai]

Still looking for that AMA. Love your podcasts. Thank you for taking the time to do this! Also, if you have a website like with a monthly subscription fee I would support you there. I'd even build it for you! But seriously on the AMA, I've got theories and questions! Nevermind about the website. You mentioned it, I'll check it out!

[@chrisrecord5625]

Penrose will be 88 in August. If you look at his family tree, his grandfather, father, uncle, brother and children are all singular. Between Dennis Sciama and Penrose, their graduate students at Oxford and student descendants dominate many areas. Sciama was the dissertation adviser to forty Ph.D. students including, Hawking, Martin Reese and David Deutsch. Penrose's thirty students and 164 descendants are likewise impressive. It's hard to calculate both Sciama and Penrose's long term impact ; one or both should be a Marvel character.

[@chrisrecord5625]

Like Penrose, how many times have I said, "this is a crazy idea that won't last a week" (referring to inflation) and; "Of course I need a theory for that" After that my similarity to Penrose ceases.

[@rosedragon108]

wow how did i miss this one? ty @sean

[@almcdonald8676]

Amazing interview!

[@JumpingCow]

So awesome! What an amazing person.

[@shawnhenry8230]

Simply amazing ive been wanting this for a while two of my favorite people on earth ... now you both need to talk to Eric and his spinners to see how it holds

[@NerdyRodent]

Oh wow! Amazing!

[@monikafibonacci4233]

Fascinating convo!!! Never realized how Universally talented Roger is! ..... unlike H. Everett.

[@continentalgin]

'I think I'll just learn neurobiology.' Classic!

[@bikashthapa7316]

who else want to hear leonard susskind?

[@deandeann1541]

Susskind is my favourite plumber.

[@asylumofglass]

Yes or Juan Maldecena or Nima Arkani-Hamed! Thanks for the podcasts Sean. I love them.

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

Love Lennie! :=D

[@philipgebhardt3453]

I love Susskind-he is awesome

[@americalost5100]

Yes. Maybe on the possible role of quantum entanglement in quantum gravity -- if that's still cobsidered a viable area of enquiry

[@expchrist]

this was one of your best shows.

[@ronaldvasquez6488]

I concur

[@charlieb8735]

Shortest hour and a half of my life. I feel like could’ve listened to another 3 hours between these two

[@byronmundo]

I am about to hear it, this is just amazing to of the greatest reunited.

[@zack_120]

Such an enlightening talk! It confirms to my hypothesis that the Eon is INFINITE!

[@realcygnus]

Superb Content !

[@MixedFruit876]

Very interesting! Especially the part about consciousness. Maybe you can get Stuart Hameroff on the podcast as well :)

[@itsnotme7859]

Thank you for this

[@Stadtpark90]

Maybe I’m willing to get his book on cyclical cosmology now. - I’m not sure I understood how he gets to the “ring” seeds in the next aeon’s CMB: first he mentions mergers of supermassive BHs (implying that the messenger in the transition would be gravitational waves) that he somehow thinks as reappearing as DM in the new aeon, and for the smaller structure he mentions Hawking-Radiation as the origin. - I mean I do get the general idea from particle physics that energy can transform into all kind of new particles / waves in quantum fields can transform into other waves in other quantum fields, but I was under the impression, that there are clear pathways for everything, and that the probabilities for those pathways in the standard model are exceptionally well known (allowing the Higgs to be found by applying enough statistics etc.). - What I’m trying to say: fitting one gap in our understanding with another gap is not very convincing to me, especially in the case of consciousness, while the case for cyclical cosmology sounds less far fetched, it again sounds like using a gap / placeholder in our knowledge for another bold claim. - I am empathetic with his teleological impulses: when the end of our aeon has similarities with the beginning, you want to find a way to tie it together and make it cyclical. Or when he concludes that our mind would not work on a computational basis by combining the idea of Gödel’s paradox with the idea of solutions that are uncomputable on a Turing-Machine, and plugs it with the unsolved problem of the collapse of the wave function (- for which itself he makes an interesting proposal,) and tries to give it a biological location to happen (micro tubulars). - But the fact that the creative associative thought process in his mind decides to jump to the seemingly next free unoccupied niche in the topology of idea-space does not make it necessarily a “true” idea / the next best description of the world. Still it is an appropriate thing to do for a scientist who still wants to connect the dots in creative new ways, and can afford to do so. - When you think about it: after all this time and thinking and conversations he not only sees more dots than most people, he also knows how the lines of that big picture have been drawn in the past by large amounts of important people, and yet he is still able to see it differently - that seems like a rare gift. Granting accomplished scientists more artistic license still seems quite affordable to me in the grand scheme of things.

[@amyk6403]

Maybe the ring "seeds" are the remnants of Hawking points? But why do they persist into the next aeon?

[@continentalgin]

@@amyk6403 Because they are what's left, just before ignition, they leave a footprint in the form of circular patterns when ignition occurs. Scaled up, we see them in the cosmic microwave background like tossing a pebble onto the surface of a pond. Contact creates ripples that travel a ways outward from the points. I'm not talking about a brane bumping into the field, as that's an entirely different theory.

[@HonkletonDonkleton]

Just read the book mate

[@dlabor1965]

Sir Penrose for Nobel Prize!

[@vishvishwanathan2040]

Excellent. As usual.

[@jaykingston2171]

Just think how many subscribers this channel would have if there was video or if it was live. It would blow up, there'd be hundreds of thousands if not millions of new subs.

[@discreet_boson]

This channel is so underrated

[@akumar7366]

Every word is like gold dust, incredible.

[@leonenriquez5031]

Hey, so Stuart Hammerof is in the same room?? Where's the podcast with him!!??

[@DrDoom42]

Very insightful.

[@eoinoconnell185]

Would have loved a video to go along with the audio.

[@vaskoMCL]

Sean thx! this was a great one, Penrose is a brilliant mind with original ideas and pls have Dr. Joscha Bach (MIT Media Lab) for a diff prospective on the universe, consciousness and AI.

[@matthewrichmond4139]

This podcast was fantastic! After watching Joe Rogan's feeble and lackluster attempt at interviewing Dr Penrose, this was a big breath of fresh air. I'll be revisiting it a lot as there is so much covered and so much to be studied. Thank you so much Dr Sean Carroll. Now back to Sean's Multiverse lecture.

[@matthewrichmond4139]

@@robbie_ it was the definition of feeble and lackluster. Rogan didn't have a clue what was being said. It takes two to tango baby.

[@dokuzi6]

what's the song that they play at 3:57? Sounds cool

[@nyrdybyrd1702]

I like the visitants being unannounced; Sir Penrose was a great surprise & is an uberfantastic guest. 🥳🥳🥳 Tops on my wish list would be neuroendocrinologist/primatologist Robert Sapolsky.

[@dixsusu]

Hi guys,, great podcast Sean,great guest Sir Roger Penrose .Would be nice to have video too,so we all could watch ! Who is for a video podcast listeners ? Lets ask for it please !?

[@salmanuel4053]

This is one of my favorite podcast channels. Penrose mentioned finding a possible mechanism for quantum coherence and consciousness when he was contacted by Stuart Hameroff (1:27:25). Perhaps you should bring on Hameroff for a chat.

[@spinning-around]

It would be nice if Sean Carroll posted premium courses here on applied math and quantum physics.

[@Altobrun]

Your comments in the prelude made me wonder about who will be the greatest scientists of my generation (current masters student). I look forward to seeing them start to show up in popular science.

[@krpcannon123]

im a grad student as well and i deeply worry... everyone these days seems way 'academic' and there's a lack of genuine love and playfulness in the subject

[@jimmynox8257]

Infinity in a finite place, Schelling’s definition of art.

[@continentalgin]

I wrecked my Infinity and had to get a new one.

[@SauceGPT]

A dislike? Haha somebody couldn't follow the brilliant conversation presented

[@rjt98]

Great podcast, If you had video and a few slides to help explain, that would take it to the next level.

[@Krypto_Knite]

Nice one

[@anguswiebe]

Thanks man!

[@WarrenPeace007]

Beautiful

[@OmegaGodBahamut]

I think of Mobius Strip when I listen to Sir Penrose speak of stretching infinite infinitely, outside of time itself allows the light to escape infinite gravity and the Aeon. Proto consciousness? Need to learn more about that : ) That was amazing!

[@firstal3799]

Small thing, there is nothing called time.

[@contemplatico]

As a 'layman artist' (working with object design in 3D CAD software - 3D 'Euclidean space' - for 10+ yrs) ... To me 'intuitively' - Penrose's images or explanations of the 'space-time' geometry seems 'infinitely' more plausible (pardon the pun) than what comes from the somewhat 'mysterious' interpretations of QM. The 'superposition' statement of QM - that a thing can be in two "places" at once - is inherently 'geometrical' it seems to me. To talk of two "places" you must be able to distinguish them apart. They must be separated by 'space'. This is by definition what "geometry" is all about. So if QM is simply 'ignoring' the space-time "geometry" it seems paradoxical to me; like ignoring an inherent feature or aspect of the thing 'probed'. Or deliberately blindfolding yourself to some extent - which seems much like the 'Bohr approach'. - A little thought experiment: If everything in the Universe was in a state of "superposition" - how would you define "space"? If no 'position' can be distinguished from any other position - there is no notion of "space"... Or at least it could not be 'defined' or 'measured'. As soon as you introduce the notion of "two places" - you introduce the need for "geometry" - and thus the need to account for the preceding gravitational field or the history/evolution of the 'space-time-geometry'?... At the 'moment' (or 'interval of time' rather) of your "measurement"? Even if you imagine 'measuring' the very first pair of particles that emerged from the Big Bang... This would apply? Imagine 'the first' particle... a single one. How would a 'measurement' even take place? What is the particle 'relative' to? If there is only one 'measurable' thing in the Universe? Comparing the 'designing' of cosmological theory, to a 'creative' design-process. This would be equal to saying: Its OK to focus on the tiniest of details - and just forget about the overall design or 'shape' of things. Something that any artist will tell you - tends to yield bad or 'ugly' overall results. Yielding perhaps a number of sublime details... but not 'coherent' or 'beautiful' as a whole. In the creative design-process it is essential to keep 'zooming in and out'. You may zoom in on a detail and change it or 'refine' it... but always 'zoom' back out and review the whole 'shape' when you do so. Perhaps its time for QM to 'zoom out'? ... if only for a while... you can always zoom back in. :)

[@lurb1557]

Interesting!

[@dru4670]

Space according Sean and QM is an emergent property, and all these fields that correlate to the "geometry" you're talking about are just due to localisation (think gravity) just bodies in relation with other bodies. Trying to explain this classically with many variables doesnt seem to be very helpful. So I've heard.

[@JahTzu]

This is a response and elaboration on the ideas proposed by Sir Roger Penrose in the lecture ‘The Problem of Modelling the Mathematical Mind’ given at the Alan Turing Centenary Conference in Manchester, 2012. Here he clearly demonstrates what mathematical understanding is by combining his own understandings with the good work of both Alan Turing and Kurt Gödel. He also goes on to describe Consciousness as having something to do with this particular type of Mathematical Understanding G(R) in combination with intelligence and awareness. He states that this usage of words seems natural and integral to consciousness, yet to him the words intelligence and awareness remained undefined and not yet directly correlated with mathematical understanding. Here in this paper I hope to provide an elaboration and definition of both intelligence and awareness but also a unifying framework for the utility of both the Universe and Human Beings. Please take the time to first familiarize yourself with the following information put forth by Sir Roger Penrose in these two short clips: Mathematical Understanding Vs Calculation kzbin.info/www/bejne/g5CnaWpqadprj7s Mathematical Understanding, Intelligence and Awareness kzbin.info/www/bejne/q3XdeZVqjpVpn5o There is also a relationship that should be further explored between Dr. Robin Carhart-Harris's research on Brain Entropy, the Feedforward vs. Integrated phsycial systems of Integrated Information Theory, The Fixed vs. Growth Mindset research of Dr. Carol Dweck, the Empathy research by Dr. Dacher Keltner, Mathematical Understanding in the context of Alan Turing, Kurt Gödel, Oka Kiyoshi, Roger Penrose, Love 2.0, a General theory of Love, and what is presented here. For now I would like to focus on three forces of our intrinsic nature: Mathematical Understanding, Physical Intelligence and Biological Empathetic Awareness. drive.google.com/file/d/0B6EZh8Iqx5npRlRBMkxjX1B3ZFk/view?usp=sharing Please keep in mind this paper hasn't really been updated since 2016, so it's a wee bit outdated and slightly stupid but i think a descent lil picture is painted...

[@StayPrimal]

Woa nice one

[@americalost5100]

It's somehow so interesting to listen to a brilliant mind even if you're only understanding the general ideas and almost none of the details

[@continentalgin]

You're not alone.

[@thealexanderbond]

It's crazy when you see that his Joe Rogan interview got 2 million views, while this gets 150k.

[@yvesnyfelerph.d.8297]

That's because Carroll is a repulsive being. His whiny voice makes me cringe and his belief in many worlds makes me question his sanity

[@Galathea000]

4:15 "hello, quiet peasant" ? Didn't know sean carroll did quiet farm work on the side.

[@jainalabdin4923]

What are some good alternatives for Inflation Theory? I'm with Penrose with this: It seems like such a band aid to make the Big Bang Theory plausible and explain the smoothness of the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation.

[@raresmircea]

Consider Terrence Deacon, David Pierce or Giulio Tononi for a conversation over consciousness, self and moral implications.

[@nickknowles8402]

YOUR VOICE IS AS ICONIC AS MORGAN FREEMAN

[@mauriceedwards4298]

Hey, so one question comes to mind. As a black hole evaporates, I see a point at which the density no longer keeps the mass below the Schwartzchild radius. Is that a reasonable line of logic? And if that happens, does what was once the black hole then begin a period of further expansion, perhaps even rapid? I'm wondering at what happens to the weirdness of the event horizon once the mass is no longer capable of sustaining it, if that ever happens. Or would the mass simply whimper into a neutron star? And if so... I better stop. I got questions :-)

[@frat0r]

too short.

[@88_TROUBLE_88]

For certain.. I could listen to these 2 for hours and then still want to hear more!

[@palfers1]

This was a top quality show. Sir Roger retains his considerable marbles and we are the richer for it. Kudos. The interplay between the 2nd law, gravity and the evolution of the universe is mighty fascinating. I had to replay parts of that talk to get a handle on it. He truly is an original thinker. His "infinite cyclic spacetime" model is aesthetically pleasing. But what if (I thought) we take this idea of sticking infinite future boundaries onto big bangs - which results in a spacetime tube or "block universe" of infinite length - and bend it so that we get a torus? With even one more extra dimension, we could tie a frickin' knot in it! Hang on. Is this recursive (fractal?) string theory?

[@adampitts9156]

excellent.

[@deeplearningpartnership]

Awesome.

[@naimulhaq9626]

'A model of the universe' in which early entropy, will get properly explained, if the universe is considered as a QC according to Maldacena ( but it will take a long time to get a proper theory accommodating self-error correcting mechanism of QC, leading to fine tuning the parameter space) which will explain the entropy puzzle, but the true interpretation of MBR. Mathematics of QC not only gives us insight into superposition of the state 0 and 1 but all intermediate states, an insight to multi-dimensionality. We damage 50-70 billion cells daily, which are repaired/regenerated at 99.99% efficiency and at lightning speed, implying that life is a self-error correcting QC. The second revolution of QM goes deeper, revealing the mysteries of consciousness, ID and much more. Feynman's QFT implies that he field can self-simulate intelligent conscious 'observer', collapsing the field into particles (matter) and the universe, with probability ONE and with perfection, eliminating randomness and chance, implying a possible theory to prove the Anthropic Principle.

[@monikafibonacci4233]

Sagittarius A black hole is about 2.2 10^7 km in D. 1 light year ~ 10^13 km

[@showmewhyiamwrong]

Here is something I have wondered about lately. Where does the "Space" go that was a part of the Atoms of Matter that falls into a blackhole. If The Singularity is a theoretical point of Infinite density the there has to be a lot of Space that moved somewhere else. Could it be connected to the observed rise in the amount of DE. If Spacetime itself is "something" and that something is a conglomerate of Space and Time then when matter is compressed by the Gravity of a blackhole or even something like a Neutron Star the the Space portion of the Matter has to either move or be destroyed.

[@dakid3429]

HNY SC, Another good one, tks.

[@adamrspears1981]

Penrose diagram!