Mindscape 140 | Dean Buonomano on Time, Reality, and the Brain

Patreon: / seanmcarroll
“Time” and “the brain” are two of those things that are somewhat mysterious, but it would be hard for us to live without. So just imagine how much fun it is to bring them together. Dean Buonomano is one of the leading neuroscientists studying how our brains perceive time, which is part of the bigger issue of how we construct models of the physical world around us. We talk about how the brain tells time very differently than the clocks that we’re used to, using different neuronal mechanisms for different timescales. This brings us to a very interesting conversation about the nature of time itself - Dean is a presentist, who believes that only the current moment qualifies as “real,” but we don’t hold that against him.
Dean Buonomano received his Ph.D. from the Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Texas Medical School, Houston. He is currently a Professor in the Department of Neurobiology at UCLA. His lab studies how the brain perceives time and constructs models of the external physical world. He is the author of Brain Bugs: How the Brain’s Flaws Shape our Lives and Your Brain is a Time Machine: The Neuroscience and Physics of Time.
Blog post with audio player, show notes, and transcript: www.preposterousuniverse.com/...
Mindscape Podcast playlist: • Mindscape Podcast
#podcast #ideas #science #philosophy #culture

[@globaldigitaldirectsubsidi4493]

it is so frustrating to see that high quality content just doesn´t get the attention it deserves on these social media platforms.

[@AdamAlbilya1]

Awesome podcast, intriguing right at the beginning! 8:00 As for nueronic errors: no problem, there is errors in bits too; what we do? Accumulated grouping for mininimize error rate (several neurons represent 0/1 via connection to minimize error for all to fail), plus errors correction mechanism (e.g. checksum). Neurons: flip-flop time bits + hard memory representation (can be done either flash memory or hard memory via feedback loop of weighted [neurotransmitters] flip-flops net). As for the "amazing effectiveness of math" or something, i.e.: how come we can describe the world by models, which we put together using imaginary formal languages we invented? Because it is describable; for the fact of being existing. After all, the phenomena itself, is the most perfect model which represents a description of onself characteristics. From the phenomena itself we explore in science for how to describe its behavior and nature, using an increasingly percise models for approximating reality with better an better precision and prediction power. How come we can describe it using pattern? Because it's entailed by the fact that if we can perceive it -> it's describable using a models the brain represented via recursive sign language, developed by evolution for communication between brain's modules/senses etc. Why? Well, our senses, eyes, ears, etc; what they do? Describes their interactions with objects, encrypting the characteristics of these interactions, and delegates it for the brain to recognize patterns and assign labels for patterns its recognize in this information; including a baggage representing experience as what to so next time this pattern achieved again, with respect to survivability value etc. It does it according to a hard coded computation (dna, evolution); it's progresses via feedback loop of (roughly) immediate hard coded genetic program interacts with its environment, and retrospective which changing the program for 'how to interact next time'. Program reacts immediately first by its characteristics entailed by the current brain's activity pattern (no 'freewill', already happened), then it transfers the description of the action it took, to be evaluated by the judgmental retrospective module (thus feeling as if currently occures by self); so the action performed by the braon at moment t-1, can be further explored for how it was resulted, consequences, what to do with it, compare to labled-baggage ("experiencs") on memory from past experience, and change the program/memory/brain etc with resolutions for next moments. Well I wrote much more on the subject, but that's too much for now; lol gonna continue watching. Edit: 20:45 Wait, So that solves the problem he raises before; trivially. That feature makes it natural for creating a physical mechanism pattern serving as a damn accurate calculator. Need more reliability? Just add connections minimizing errors up to arbitrarily negligence factor.

[@nilshellblom2629]

Really liked this one. Nice change with more of a debate.

[@mam2szczury]

I would love to see discussions at this level on public TV. God bless internet.

[@LLlap]

I would love to see discussions at this level in theatres.

[@protoword10]

Great interview among many others on MINDSCAPE! To me, Sean is better interviewer than many journalists, because of his scientific background! Old saying said: “To have right question, you have to know alredy half of the answer”! Great questions to exceptional guest! Thank you!

[@origins7298]

Would have liked to hear a mention of savants. Such as the real life Rain Man. Some people are born with extraordinary calculator like abilities, that are not learned or gained through learning a method but rather seem to be innate. Similarly people have extraordinary Savant like abilities to reproduce music. Almost always there is a deficit in normal functioning abilities. Anyway would have been interesting because this pretty much contradicts what the guests said. It certainly seems like the brain can do calculator like mathematics. But it just doesn't normally wire this way, so clearly there's something more going on then simply a difference in kind between digital and biological computing. Anyway I think that kind of goes against what Sean's guest was saying

[@jeremydoerksen5988]

I absolutely loved this episode, Sean! Thank you for continuing to make the podcast; and for keeping the podcast both informative and interesting! Listening to new episodes of this podcast are among the highlights of any of my given weeks!

[@darioamir2577]

I know it is kinda randomly asking but do anybody know a good place to watch new tv shows online?

[@caidenkenneth6857]

@Dario Amir Flixportal :)

[@darioamir2577]

@Caiden Kenneth Thanks, I went there and it seems like a nice service :) I appreciate it !

[@caidenkenneth6857]

@Dario Amir you are welcome =)

[@junkjunk2493]

hey sean , thanks for your work this stuff helps itsa strange world

[@JonCandlin]

yay, new one

[@raybeeze5522]

great discussion. great guest. please put put him (or this topic) on the short list of return guests and topics.

[@aaron2709]

Oh boy, this one was awesome. Dean is very clear, well spoken.

[@andrear.berndt9504]

Thank you for the new episode!

[@fulmarmusic1413]

Now this is what I'm talking about; that's right.

[@domtg1597]

As Stephen hawking said thinking three dimensionally is already difficult enough

[@sirilandgren]

Letting our subjective perception be the tiebreaker with regards to presentism vs eternalism - isn't that what Smolin does with his insistence that time flows?

[@booJay]

Those were my thoughts exactly when I heard Dean's argument. I thought science was supposed to be objective? Yes, we don't know the answer, but we shouldn't be relying on our personal experiences to reveal what the underlying truth about reality is.

[@daverei1211]

My wife always comments that it seems to take longer to go somewhere new, but shorter to get home.

[@SandipChitale]

There is a middle way in which Sean and Dean are thinking about simulteneity and presentism. Dean was focusing on presentism that is local at specific given point and only that point. Sean was talking of lack of simulteneity as defined from the perspective of a point with respect to all other points across the universe. But a third or maybe middle way of thinking about presentism is - the. present moment for each point from its own perspective. This is basically along the lines of present moment of proper time on the world line of each point in space. I think it would be illogical to say that a given point is at two different moments on its own world line. I subscribe to that notion of presentism. I mean each point in universe at one moment along its own worldline.

[@StayPrimal]

Thats gonna be a great one

[@hoaxuan7074]

If you build a neural network out of analog electronic components and place an on off switch at the output of each dot product together with a +- polarity indicator you can manually compute the net. Starting at the first layer flip on the switches whose polarity indicator is positive, flip off the switches whose polarity indicator is negative. Then do the second layer and so on. The neural network resesrchers don't understand their ReLU activation is such s switching mechanism. That is not what is expected at all so they can't see it.

[@imperialcereal3]

great episode! also please consider anil seth as a guest! love your podcasts and how broad the perspective is :))))

[@alexanderjohnson2309]

How did I not know this was on KZbin?!

[@chrisgutkind8625]

I have this theory about why time slows speeds up as you get older, probably others have mentioned this, that it's because, for instance, a day is a huge percentage of your life at 1 or 5 or 10 years old, so it goes slower, but when 30 or 40 or 50 it gets smaller, so it goes quicker simply because it's a smaller part of your life. Remember those so long months at 5, now how do they feel at 20 or 50?

[@TankorSmash]

This was fantastic, it felt like it ended as soon as it started

[@JustOneAsbesto]

"Give me an example of your cat thinking about the future."

[@royalbloodedledgend]

My black cat siting silently in the dark at night plotting my demise

[@wolfgangoppenheimer2905]

The cats were named caliban and ariel hmm so sean is prospero I guess.......

[@casteretpollux]

My cat lies under a bush staked out for hours until he gets a bird.

[@life42theuniverse]

15:35 Speaking for myself I like to try to cancel simple common prime factors: 360/(8=2^3), 180 90 45. This does require knowing some prime numbers 2 3 5 7 11 13 17 19 23 29 31 37 ... 47:00 Sometimes people speak a bit too slowly or with many verbal utterances 1.5-2. At other times speaking with a UK dialect or dense topics 1-1.25.

[@THOMASANDERSON1]

ESTE LIBRO ESTA EN ESPAÑOL?

[@woody7652]

Thanks, Sean!

[@ekalavyain1131]

What's the time now you see this video? 8:25 pm, 29 - 3 - 2021,Monday

[@nidhinsreenivas9172]

10:08 pm, 3 - 3 -2021, Saturday

[@richardbrucebaxter]

The issue regarding eternalism relates to the nature of the empirical method; there is nothing in our measurement of the physical universe which suggests the existence of an objective present. However not all assertions/beliefs are empirical assertions. In order to conduct empirical science one accepts certain axioms including logic. These assumptions may also include a mapping/correspondence between observed reality (eg neural network activation) and subjective observer (internal experience) but this assumption is not in principle required to objectively describe any complex system. Whether or not an organism/computer adamantly states "I am conscious/I see red" is irrelevant to our ability to mechanistically/mathematically model that system.

[@cashkaval]

Nice episode Sean!

[@Life_42]

47:20 I do listen to 1.5x speed most of the time. Faster talkers I slow down to 1.25x and slower talkers to 1.75x.

[@leomarcus8845]

Why did the question about memory evoke a response about learning....? Related topics certainly, but not obviously.

[@nathanaelsmith3553]

Squirels store nuts for the winter

[@aaron2709]

One could argue, several animals can project their thoughts into the future an entire year. I can't think of any that can project more than one seasonal cycle. I wonder if there's an argument to be had differentiating the 'instinct' to store nuts and the more abstract, flexible planning of a vacation next year.

[@nathanaelsmith3553]

Squirels store the nuts - remember where they are, then come back and dig them up when needed later on. Skeptics would argue that they are just following instinct and seasonal cues and can't predict the future but we cannot know for certain that they don't learn to predict the seasonal pattern over time. It seems especially mean spirited to say that of animals like dolphins and chimpanzees with big brains like ours. That seems rediculous to me as we acknowledge their ability to learn and as their survival is affected by the seasons.

[@aaron2709]

@@nathanaelsmith3553 That's reasonable but I notice differences to human thought, most notably creativity. Collecting nuts for the winter is incredibly repetitive. Squirrels do the exact same thing every year with no variation, no invention of novel ways to store food or new food sources. The lack of creativity/variation/development is what makes it look like instinct, programming.

[@nathanaelsmith3553]

@@aaron2709 regarding creativity I have only one word to say in response : bowerbird. You could argue that the bowerbird's creativity is driven by instinct - but then you can also say that of humans when they adorn their own nests and themselves. Humans can be very creative when attracting a mate. Regarding being able to perceive time beyond one seasonal cycle, elephants have large brains and are famous for traveling to an 'elephant graveyard' to die. It's not inconceivable that a young herd animal might become aware of the aging cycle among older herd members. Again - another natural cycle - but one longer than a year.

[@aaron2709]

@@nathanaelsmith3553 I'm familiar with the bowerbird... the closest thing I've seen to art in the animal world. Its sculpture is pure aesthetics (or so it seems).

[@davebewshey1549]

Put the ads at the beginning or the end please take a note from lex Friedman it does not break the flow of the conversation

[@fulmarmusic1413]

56mins. We're close to the big bang like we're close to quantum physics. We can see it's singularity, with instruments, or rather, predict it's position in the case of the big bang. We can't see the full waveform of the universe, though. It's very strange that it's unfolding backwards.

[@TheEtAdmirer]

In contrast I would have to say some people are no good at reading and writing. However are very good at calculating multiplication even calculating statistics in ways that they don't even understand. But I imagine you're either one or the other and it is impossible to understand how somebody else's brain works we are limited to our own experience.

[@captainzappbrannagan]

A great conversation here. time is such an interesting concept and how a biological creature interprets it is amazing.

[@aaronclarke7732]

Maybe the invariance of grids evolved both in our brains and in mathematics because it reflects something about Nature generally. That it’s a good way to navigate the world because it reflects something about the world. How many other forms of navigation could have evolved?

[@atxlax]

What’s dean’s thoughts on deja vu?

[@xtratub]

It's short circuit

[@gr500music6]

Sean, since you have a Presentist present (I think I'm one too), I have a serious question: if we assume (and I think this is a valid assumption) that observation can only occur in the present, how do we know that it is observation "collapsing" the Wave Function and not the Present?

[@TheologyUnleashed]

But what about the people who can do calculations in their head?

[@bendavis2234]

I misheard your cats name as “Taliban” at first, glad I’m wrong hahaha

[@johnphil2006]

Different subject. Interesting !

[@alexander_andrush]

About biological hardware: there are some people, like Rainman, who can make very complex calculations in fractions if a second. They are probably not as good as machines, but far far better than an average human. So, potentially our brains could do maths much better.

[@NerdyRodent]

It’s a hardware problem 😏

[@globaldigitaldirectsubsidi4493]

Software can run on different hardwares...

[@cameronidk2]

look i've said this for at least 5 years now .. time is a wave .. .. space is not .. when time flows threw space .. it becomes space time... since we are inside of Space time, we can never experience space, when time is not present.. maybe time is always Present. Seconds minutes hours, the rate at which we measure time may not encompass the actual cycle of time flowing. Each peak is a moment with properties and/or information, time as it flows threw space interacts with energy causing it to change from one state to the next in causational form. Time is the original causation, every wave of time is the force that moves energy in to the next state. Gravity when strong enough can change the length of the time wave in any give section of space time causing time to change locally while leaving the rest of space time fairly un effected .. theoretically it would be possible to change the polarity or direction of the wave which would then cause space time to travel backwards .. again conserving all the known laws of Special relativity .. .. but what do i know .. i got no fancy letters infront of or behind my name ..

[@ChiDraconis]

Theoretically yes but RH Forward Bias? Consider your wave theory as a dissonance which has a limiting value with "steep-curve" limiting bounds such as would be with a { • | ◘ | • } center lambda such that time as the instant "now" is a disharmonious resonance which comes with the fancy letters that you append to your screen name to impress budget committee → Once you are "inside" ST ( from your post ) inside of what??? Skipping all the illusionist "hologram" stuff and noting that our observer platform is a body which evolves from animal origins the notion which is given by time is an observation of the dissonance that I claim from whence the appearance of order of events remains "stiff" ( immutable ) due to "locality" ( in the common sense ) ○ We find the Bangers getting excited with parallel resonances separated by a distance of thickness of fingernail lasting log ( near zero ) with equipment scattered in many nations all of which has tonnage of equipment ~ Yet if any action at a distance parallelizes they call it spooky? · Changes to or effects of Gravity on ST bring to mind the 17 arc-seconds precession of the orbit of Mercury

[@cameronidk2]

@@ChiDraconis the Budget committee section put me straight .. i'm in your Debt but only in LH Spin

[@davidferrer6771]

Gee golly gee willikers awesome 🤯

[@smashu2]

If you can visualise a 4 th dimension than yes you can and if you can't than no you can't train it.

[@spikarooni6391]

58:40 :3 awwwwww

[@travishamiltontattoos4635]

How am I the only person that has commented about how this dude sounds exactly like Alan Alda?

[@SanoopAI]

Brain would like more connection the next evolution 🧬 is augmentation

[@btipton115]

Question..: can squirrels think in the future ?

[@ChiDraconis]

No; The abstraction thing is nearly singular to humans; There is something to be said for such though alternate reality-based explanations abound and generally are safer ◘ Neurobiology in general is not within the reach of Joe Normal whom has no interest in something such as Muon g-2 or Tau Neutrino ▬ Some-not just one-reports such as animals getting squirrely can be explained by Piezo electric effects of Geologic minerals prior to movement under stress ○ This matches well with an "electric" model of the brain & CNS yet descriptions of ethereal interactions are limited or sparse at best

[@antifajesus]

Did Neanderthal play the hollow tree trunk drums. Music is what made us ....

[@laxr5rs]

I disagree with Dr. Buanomano that our "interfaces" are pretty good. I am serious audio hobbyist. My main source of fact for audio phenomena regarding amplifiers and speakers is measurement. The reason I am biased this way is because the human hearing system is very unreliable in attempting to tell fine measurements that affect sound quality. However some, who have a kind of built in bias, believe their ears are better than the best measuring equipment we have, that can reliably measure down to the noise floor. The human hearing system changes drastically in frequency response at various audio levels. As far as the eyes, and considering the Electromagnetic Spectrum we are almost completely blind. We have little balls in our heads that we swivel around, and we call it - seeing. As far as language and speaking, we all know how easy it is to be misinterpreted. We're one step away from being blind, deaf and dumb. Also, why is the brain particularly difficult to understand? Why would the difficulty come from "we trying to understand ourselves?" Wouldn't it be more accurate to say, "the brain is mathematically complicated," or "structurally complicated." What does our understand of the brain have to do with our frustration or difficulty with it? We don't know what dark matter is, and that is vexing, but it has nothing to do with us. Why should the fact that our brains are in our bodies cause us to say, "this is particularly difficult - because it is us?"

[@singularonaut]

Because the maind it's emergent fenomena, and trying to understand brains by putting wires in it, slice it, scan it, as difficult as understanding a source code of programm running now on pc, by measuring heat an electromagnetic waves around it. And why did great job to understand some patterns of it and making some neurointerfaces for manipulation some outstanding devices only by thinking right thoughs)

[@smith5796]

Then how do you explain Deja Vu?

[@globaldigitaldirectsubsidi4493]

He compared it to a digital computer. Computers can't recognise faces quickly. Of course we evolved in order to survive. Certain purposes are optimized.

[@singularonaut]

@@smith5796 yeah, deja vue it's misleading or lag of comprehension of reality, some scientists sad that it's can be released by stress and low oxygen in blood steam. Just go to wiki link about it

[@MrPDTaylor]

I don't have a calculator on my watch :(

[@davebewshey1549]

It is crazy annoying having to stop and fast forward through when you are intellectually locked in

[@booJay]

So Dean feels strongly that our biological hardware reveals some truth about the physical world through correlation, yet admits that our brain evolved to be attuned mesoscopically to Newtonian laws, which we've proven aren't completely accurate. How does that square with his presentist views when both Einsteinian and quantum physics reveal deeper truths and are more compatible with eternalism?

[@singularonaut]

If eternalists are right, right now must be infinitely many copies of me, separated from each other by tiny Planks time) And somehow I am here right now and the one who is write this comment, why I am here but not tomorrow now, and not 30 years from now? On those questions eternalists doesn't have answers. But presentists does, because from the beginning you are the only one and live in eternal now and evolving with it by time, and time passes so much that you are here, and you are not in yesterday or tomorrow, because tomorrow is depending from now, and tomorrow just another word to describe evolving now and you within from 24 hours from now) therefore I am on presentists side 😇

[@kencreten7308]

Illusion. The underlying physical reality of "what the eyes perceive," may not be an illusion, but the presentation "layer" for consciousness, or what is constructed out of the phenomena is... an illusion. The perception - is an illusion. We have a interface with "reality." We do not see - reality. Our perception - granting our failing understanding and word games we play in an attempt to explain reality to ourselves, is a presentation. A show, and the brain often fails at this. The best we can say is the brain's output to our "consciousness," is a representation of an underlying reality. All someone has to do is have a brain injury to completely upset that presentation. The presentation is not... reality. Therefore, it is an illusion, much like a magic trick. It is not an "illusion," in the sense that "it is not real." It is real, but fake, just like a magic trick.

[@kencreten7308]

@@lepidoptera9337 You are underthinking, which is generally a sign of great over-simplification. Now we have exactly the same evidence for our opposite sentences.

[@haohaohao6188]

The difference of the color and the chairs is the color itself has zero dimension.

[@xtratub]

Why zero? It can be encoded in numbers

[@nuriagiralt617]

The brain is born with naive physics.

[@salmanuel4053]

IMO a neuroscientist thinking "Wow, time really does slow down when you're about to die" is an observation of high validity.

[@SandipChitale]

There are three forms - exists, existed and will exist. Therefore IMO, presentism simply follows from it, unless we want to change the definition of "exists". It is true that traces/effects of events in the past do exist in the present, but that does not mean the event that caused the trace exists (now). IMO we need to separate the event from its traces left in the universe.

[@onlyonetoserve9586]

We got big anser for big brane man. Pleese take our frute infinit nolege.

[@msc.carolinabenitez2432]

Poor favor traducir al español.

[@leomarcus8845]

Please don’t equate arithmetic with mathematics. Actually humans do mathematics much better than computers!

[@ciprian1979]

You know what's ironic and funny? ... the fact that the brain, which invented numbers and counting, doesn't do very well with numbers and counting :)

[@skynet4496]

I always love thinking about reality vs what we think is real. The irony is that we will never truly be objective. It's like free will, is really free won't. Ps.... I like the show and the host is great but his microphone annoys me sounds very muffled, lacking range. I think most people tune that out (or subconsciously fill in the blanks), but my spider hearing picks it up, helps a lot with troubleshooting machines 😆

[@dadaimiza]

😍🙏

[@drzecelectric4302]

Crypto dualism rules