Our Quest to Understand the Cosmos - Brian Greene in Conversation with Jo Marchant

[@tombock336]

The thing about Dr Greene that has always amazed me....he speaks with no "extraneous" words. He communicates the most information, with the least amount of words, in the most direct and clear path possible, of any scientist I've listened to. An incredible skill to be this articulate.

[@mattyice5425]

I find Dr. Brian Cox to be very much the same excellent and articulate communicator of very complex topics.

[@Dr10Jeeps]

I could listen to Brian Greene for hours. Oh, wait, I already do. Also, thank you RI for your fascinating talks. This is what makes the internet so valuable.

[@PaulHattle]

Brian Greene is my favourite communicator. His books are always beautifully written.

[@MrBendybruce]

His ability to communicate complex ideas as clearly as possible, and without ever talking down to his audience make him a genuine gift.

[@paxdriver]

He's great, for sure. I also love Cox, Krauss, Feynman, Tyson, and Sean Carroll especially.

[@tiadiad]

I am team Sir Roger Penrose.

[@MrBendybruce]

@@paxdriver Sean Carrol is the only person I currently support on Patreon. I enjoy his podcasts so much I felt I had to put my money where my mouth is.

[@paxdriver]

@@MrBendybruce huge kudos for doing so. I really hope one day I can contribute too. Not many better people to sponsor inho

[@curedtheaddict1461]

I'm not an intellectual but I like the way Brian explains things it helps me get through it without a headache 😆

[@MrBendybruce]

Although I've alwasy been involved in a technical and intellectual field, my genuine, interest in science only happened over the last few years, and I think Brian's comments touch strongly as the basis of why that interest has blossomed. I've seen perfectly healthy and happy individuals pass away with little or no warning, and after a while, one starts to be confronted with the fleeting and fragile nature of life itself. I realised, with considerable disappointment, how much time I've wasted on trivial self absorbed issues that did nothing to expand my consciousness, or tap into the potential to understand, and be filled with wonder about the deeper details of the reality we seem to live in. I think all humans have been gifted with a remarkable talent and intellect to be curious, and to seek answers to very difficult, but not always impossible, questions. We have a gift of the mind which may well be very rare, if not unique in the universe, so lets treasure it, respect it, and do our best to make the most of it while we still can.

[@ramaraksha01]

This is what Hinduism says is Reincarnation - you have been Reincarnated several times in just one life. Once you were a baby, unable to survive without your mother, then a child, then a horrible teenager, then a young person full of dreams and aspirations, now maybe some of the dreams have died, now you are a different person - you were all those people and yet you are not

[@johnpetkos5686]

Brian Greene is the best explanator of science in the world. His books are an unbelievable alloy of genius thinking offered in sublime eloquent fashion.

[@milesbiermaier932]

Brian Greene should get his own show like Cosmos with Neil Degrasse Tyson. It would be epic, no it would be legendary!

[@fvckyoutubescensorshipandt2718]

He did do a few series on PBS/Nova a long time ago (back before he had grey hair).

[@MoRiley9]

Greene’s series is called “The Fabric of the Universe.” I can watch it over and over.

[@jigneshgc]

He has his own foundation also has a KZbin channel, World Science Foundation

[@twt2718]

It should be run in primetime on network tv so it can reach as many as possible

[@andersask5503]

Yes, he is brilliant at explaining complex topics in a way a humble layman like me can understand. Plus hes pleasing to listen to

[@mayflowerlash11]

The feeling that life is futile can be compensated by an understanding that the probability that we each exist is vanishingly small. We should be grateful that we have won the lottery of life and bask in the wonder that we have life even if it is temporary. When we die we will not know we have died or even existed. It is only the fear of the process of dying that troubles us. Live your lives fully until your last moment, then go to sleep without fear of the future.

[@BlastinRope]

Some say its a small chance we ever existed, others say we exist infinitely many times, one man even says that we live infinitely many times but every time its exactly the same.

[@mayflowerlash11]

@@BlastinRope I know of no evidence that indicates we live multiple lives. Sorry to be such a downer. Enjoy the life you have now.

[@calliph]

Easy to say if you're not being oppressed on a daily basis by the ruling class. I'd love to live my life to the fullest, unfortunately, this entire system is stacked against the vast majority of us.

[@stevenshedlock8352]

@@calliph so what can we do to help?

[@stevenaustin8274]

@@calliph would a Lamborghini help you to live life to the full then ?

[@Seba_World]

Carlo Rovelli - Me eventually I know this italian physicist 2 years ago. "The Reality is not what it seems" - this book really changed the way I look at world now. Reading this kind of books changes your mind for sure. Cheers from Poland 🇵🇱

[@user-wu8yq1rb9t]

One of the best science book I ever read, is *The Hidden Reality* by Professor Brian Greene, I love it. As Sheldon said: *BIG FAN* Happy to see you again, professor Greene. Thanks Ri.

[@TSSuppository]

My favourite book of all time, science or otherwise, is *The Elegant Universe* by the good Professor. Beautifully written, informative and evocative in equal measure. I just love it - I've read it at least once a year since it was first published (in paperback!).

[@user-wu8yq1rb9t]

@@TSSuppository Yeah, of course, *The Elegent Universe* is also great.

[@bendavis2234]

@@TSSuppository I was just about to say that. One of my favorite physics books I’ve read. Also “Our Mathematical Universe” by Max Tegmark makes the list.

[@TSSuppository]

@@bendavis2234 I haven't read that one - I'll check it out! Thanks for the tip :)

[@fernandoneirapaz]

If your only knowledge of the world comes from science you can lose the poetry of inner experience. Very true and profound reasoning.

[@consciousnessinanutshell]

Brian is such a great teacher and communicator...thank goodness we have people like him

[@pezkinchemistry4969]

that last part ...i feel like crying .. "disintegration of matter"...and here dr.. green clearly knows something to be thankful about... thats extraordinary...again may God bless u.. dr..green..

[@joegeorge3889]

Brian Greene explains things as good as anyone could for people who are not savvy in science. You can only make it so simple because physics is very complex and he does a good job on explaining

[@erikziak1249]

59:24 Agreed. I can tell you a story, years ago, how I woke up in the morning, got out of bed, walked to the window, just to see a small kitten, driven over by a car, with it guts out on the street, still alive with is legs kicking, with the mother cat sitting besides it, next to my parked car.... All those thoughts I had, taking the lift downstairs, what I could/will do.... Lucky for me, the kitten was not moving anymore when I got to the car. But the mother cat sat besides it. Refusing to move. Forcing me to back up the car a couple of times to safely pass besides them...... That is life.... And death.....

[@senk2352]

One of the best interviews with Brian Greene. A very good encapsulation of the main themes in "Until the End of Time" by Brian Greene.

[@Jivanmuktaintraining]

Dr. Greene is a masterful communicator. Such a good interview.

[@ravikumar-usa]

Dr. Greene is incredible conscious communicator. Wonderful interview

[@intotheunknown8100]

Wow! Brian's look into reality is just so satisfyingly adequate. 💫

[@mastersoul9147]

His perspective about things is astonishingly amazing and he thinks at the border spectrum, Dr.brain inspires people to do some extraordinary work, he inspires me to marvel the universe just in a glance.

[@erikziak1249]

Great video. Thank you. I was sitting in my char, listening.... When I heard the applause. Artificial.... Well, Brian was right. No applause needed. I enjoyed it.

[@theyseemeloling]

So glad to be here early. I get to listen to this on my way to work.

[@hireality]

A 👍 already at 07:25 when Brian Greene expanded Jo Marchant's leading question on Reductionism at 05:15. Brilliant talk, thank you both 🙂

[@nurulalam3199]

A wonderful viewpoint to explain a universe that can never be contemplated.

[@ImmyYousafzai]

I started with an intention to listen for 5 minutes. Before I realised it was 45 min gone.

[@bilinguru]

One way of resolving the Hard Consciousness Problem, with regards to the story of Mary and whether she "learns something new" when seeing the color red for the first time, is to draw attention to the distinction between 'learning' something and 'experiencing' something. A baby doesn't consciously comprehend what colors or tastes are as much as they apprehend these sensations. If Mary is color blind, then there is a sensatory block of some sort, either in the color receptors in the eye or in the brain itself. It's a physical or experiential deficiency, not a cognitive deficit. One can make cognitive deductions that amount to conscious awareness without necessarily having access to the direct physical sensations attendant to them. Think of Helen Keller's deep insights, despite her physical limitations.

[@roberttatum2826]

extremely articulate!!....masterful explanation of our relationship to the actual world/reality

[@gillescoutlee2379]

Ernest Becker: The Denial of Death. A great book, a must read! As usual, thank you Brian!

[@godlessblessings7020]

I did a term paper in college English class on how one of the *beginnings of the theater* was in *churches* to "manifest" ( for example) Abraham's "faith" and have the audience *empathize* with the *actors* to better understand the "experience" and context by the *story* being presented *instead* of a sermon! (I had a pre-med major with a *theater* minor(?) ...WELL, I wanted a good bedside manner for my patients!)

[@Tularis]

Omg I Love Brian Greene ❤️ he makes science so easy to understand!

[@amreshyadav2758]

wonderful conversation, Brian you beauty. thanks.

[@kagannasuhbeyoglu]

Great content, great guest 👏 Thanks a lot the Ri.

[@gilbertengler9064]

Just excellent. My God, Brian, you explain the things exactly how I feel them. Thanks a lot! Concerning free will and consciousness; we have the “impression” to have free will just as we have the “impression” that we somehow feel that we are conscious, but this is just a feeling. A feeling or sensation is just a sum of a very large amount of different signals assembled in one package that translates into a particular value interpreted by our brain to correspond to a certain condition. If we would have no conscious feeling or sensation of free will, we would be able to do NOTHING with all the input information. It would be all “even physically” useless. However, I wonder why nature tends to create always more complex structures and why these stuctures finally end up in creating beings able to understand that nature. What is this “force” that drives this mechanism? Entropy is not enough and all the conservation laws neither. This “force” should also be fundamental and physical but mainly acting on complex structures. They day that we will stop overestimating our life, we will not need religion anymore to feel comfort. Understanding more and more about the physical universe does the job much better. Unfortunately to succeed in our society in this world, art and also science seem rather secondary and its all about giving a good but fake impression and making money. When will we finally realize that we are on the wrong track.

[@daveac]

Thanks for a great interview and discussion. In that thought experiment, Mary actually seeing the 'red' of the rose would be both an affirmation of the 'facts' & a also 'reward' for her endeavours - a large part of what makes life and self-awareness vital to the human condition surely.

[@Shinybadguy]

I love this man's work!!!

[@rhmcvay]

Brilliant interview by Jo Marchant.

[@pb4520]

Wonderul ! Thanks Brian!

[@tonib5899]

Thankyou Dr Greene.

[@tonib5899]

Thankyou Jo Marchant.

[@DJCornelis]

We become what we think about most. I think that's a big clue to our power.

[@clawsonsful]

Awesome video! Sir Roger Penroses view is the best.

[@ChrisChoi123]

yeah thats what i thought too, but it seems there are way too many holes in the theory. you're talking about cyclic conformal cosmology, right? it relies on proton decay, which we havent observed. also, for the original paper, there were a lot of refutations to it, casting doubt on the statistical analysis. but then he put out a 2nd paper to try to disquiet them, but it was again riddiled with errors and missteps in the fitting method.

[@frogz]

awesome video as always, thanks RI, thanks brian

[@erikziak1249]

19:23 Living self-aware steam engines that do realize they are steam engines, and realize at the same time that these steam engines are a product of natural laws over eons and eons. The laws themselves, as well as the process, are not sentient, not goal-oriented.

[@erikziak1249]

12:38 OK, so far I had some ideas, but this really kicked me. It is something I have been speculation at least since I read "The Big Picture" by Sean Carroll. I imagine the book by Brian to be something similar. Great, I have something to read! While I lack the rigorous mathematical skills to do the in-depth understanding of QM or General Relativity, I barely scratch the surface to be able to acknowledge the great minds who contributed to our understanding of the universe. While it remains sad that my own father is a conspiracy theorist and refuses to vaccinate for SARS-CoV-2, and he is by far not the only person I know, I see it inevitable and inseparable of our human existence to have people that simply refuse and reject the truth and build up their own. I would need a book to explain this thought in detail, this comment is certainly not the proper place to do so. But I want to stress one thing. I do not remember to what video it was, but a certain comment from a fellow KZbin commenter about entropy/free-will related topic made me think and I actually changed my mind. I updated my knowledge based on reasoning and am generally happy that this occurred and that I noticed it. It was years ago but I never did a public acknowledgement of this fact. So I am doing it now. This discussion, even being just 12 minutes in, is very intelligent and inspiring, it "infects" me with certain thoughts. I just had the urge to write this down. I am, after all, just a humble human being. Full of flaws, biases and "system 1" quick thinking schemes. We all are.

[@twt2718]

My parents are the same, and it’s sad because they’re both college educated. I’m going to check out Sean Carroll’s book... he’s done an awesome series of at home “lectures” that I wish I could remember the title to!!! If you search his page they’re easy to find

[@simonmasters3295]

I have struggled with Entropy (kLogW) all my life. Even after understanding the early universe to have an "entropic two-step" I can see that there are at least two types of order: Structure is Composition (the Frequency of two states, e.g. "heads" and "tails" should be 50:50) and Pattern (heads and tails regularly determined such that two heads follow a tail or some such Repetition). I have difficulty in seeing that Entropy, Evolution and Consciousness are somehow similar, and, I am told, fundamentally the same in that they are all Information Processing. I should read the book!

[@DJLiddle]

Can't wait to get this book!

[@ionagibbons9906]

Really like the ideas the thoughts and expressive quality of this Dr’s delivery. I like the idea around language almost being an algorithm for laying down a programme or structure that creates only certain shapes of ideas and if we lay down a different linguistic this could change the geometric frequency of a thought and so make impossible possible. If all thoughts are wave patterns 0s and 1s and these wave patterns create energy then new energy is created with new thought. Deep meditation is very time travel orientated that all who mediate experience on différent levels but maths is not calculated it is intuitively acting. How many times do meditators go into a zone of no time sensation of timelessness this is a frequent phenomena but there must be maths behind it! Thought patterns and time the wormhole in our minds.

[@YoungMeschaLakes]

I was reading reviews on Brian's new book and it seems the biggest issue people have is Brian's refusal to accept the idea of a god. So I purchased the book. Can't wait to listen to it. 🙂🙃🙂

[@onderozenc4470]

I think that he doesn't deny the concept of God, he says that he has never practised his religion until his father died. In my opinion, he is a deist.

[@crashsitetube]

Oh, there's a God alright and, it's a woman. Only a woman would make men they way they are and bicycle seats they way they are.

[@ramaraksha01]

1. He is a Scientist - they work thru facts - zero facts of any such magic being. If he believed in God, then he is insulting his whole life's work 2. With all the talk of virtual worlds, one day we could create a "God" in our computers who thinks he is all-powerful by being able to create a vast virtual world So if there is a God, it could actually be proof that we live in a virtual world

[@onderozenc4470]

@@ramaraksha01 No, not at all, we are not living in a virtual universe. Universe is real...as if emphasizing this fact, mathematicians use complex numbers as opposed to real numbers.

[@ramaraksha01]

@@onderozenc4470 I think you may need to do some more research on this - there is no way to prove that we are NOT living in a virtual universe Scientists actually think us living in a Virtual universe is more likely than living in a real one

[@jsp9884]

You know you've learned something when you're left with more questions than answers

[@kingsandassociates7176]

44:15...."we can respond"....determinism surely rules out response?

[@thomaslekhanya3888]

Awesome stuff!

[@rkdeka-jg8wf]

A salute to you, sir

[@AntonioSaracino7]

thank you

[@downhillphilm.6682]

solving the "hard" problem is what the ARTS do every second of the day! Art takes subjective thinking & emotions to create and for the observer to consume, thus to experience "feelings"....whether these "feelings" were intended by the artist or not....they are there. right? And amazingly most of us can agree on those feelings and also allow that others may experience something like those feelings but different feelings and thoughts as well and it is all good.

[@waynedarronwalls6468]

Art to me gives substance to feeling, it gives structure to feeling, feeling is the fundamental basis of art.

[@conorhoulihan]

1) Brian Greene 2) Neil Tyson 3) Brian Cox In that order for me, all 3 are great at making it simple for someone like me who is really interested in science, space, physics etc. yet avoided learning science as a kid 😆 Any other great people like these guys that I can check out?

[@selliott7043]

Sean Carroll, Lawrence Krause, Richard Dawkins, Leonard Susskind (if you can do maths); a world of geniuses out there waiting for you! Sir Andreas Schiff, Glenn Gould, Leonard Bernstein why not. Great communicators!

[@fredriksvard2603]

Leonard susskind as mentioned. Hawking and Sagan. Then there are a bunch in more niche areas, like Boström, Chalmers, Tegmark, Kurzweil, Godfrey-Smith, McFadden. Wish i could add some female ones. There are a bunch who give great talks on youtube.

[@EYDIMUSIC]

Made my day. Thank you.

[@yafy.5158]

mind blowing

[@jonmo111]

we are not the only creature that knows our mortality, every insect and creature knows it is alive and want to remain that way

[@Pr1marySourc3]

Hey Brian, check with David Deutsch on this! Constructor theory is your path forward, my friend. You’d help revolutionize physics by combining your excellent communication skills with the Universal Constructor.

[@Rabbit-the-One]

Ok so THAT'S what exurb1a meant when he said, "maybe consciousness is inherent to matter." Now I better understand what that means, and no longer have to wonder what he was smoking when saying that.

[@Faheemsnotes]

Great Love you sir from Kashmir

[@pezkinchemistry4969]

which means we are all heading to thanksgiving lol i like that

[@selliott7043]

My interest is music; instead of red think a perfect fifth! It holds an equally powerful emotional pull yet who can describe it? We are all mostly colour blind therefore. And that’s not to mention a diminished 6th and so on. Emotion comes down to dots on a page!

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

I never liked to live like a molecule, to copying myself or copying someone else’s ! I love to be myself only !

[@n1k32h]

Perfect timing

[@ionagibbons9906]

I have just got the book really enjoyed listening to your interview does actually help to hear this interview before buying the book as it helps to sequence where information is going. I had a big ponder on Mary and her red roses 🌹 There is something that came to me which is this idea of the symbiotic nature of the molecules happening on the internal the individual and the external the universe. I was thinking about how molecules would have a conversation or influence upon it each from these 2 relation points internal external. So how does this apply to Mary? Mary seeing a red rose has an external impact on collective consciousness as Mary is not alone seeing a rose as red. Her seeing it as red is another echo of seeing a rose red in the universe so forming the Rose is red chant that is also a bond molecule on molecules picking up the Rose is red code. But before Mary can see the rose as red there is a period of preparation. Not just investigating her brain before investigating her brain is her will or purpose to do so. This will is also a signal from the internal to the external. A call out the external molecules pick up on the code in the will. The investigation powers action energy to lead to result. However Mary with knowledge of brain function alone would not power through for the external world to allow Mary to see differently without the component of Will. What has made Mary have this will ? Her molecular coding it was inbuilt into her design to have this will, even if she arrived by another path to see the rose red she would always have to have started with the inbuilt will. What switched or activated the will? The external the universe seeking like bonds tuning into Mary having a molecular code power of attraction but molecules attracting molecules. Her red rose ability was always inbuilt not learnt but got switched on by her wanting the switch on. So Mary was already made and codified to see red roses did she change in terms of her pre built molecular structure no. Did she go through a process of bonding from internal to external yes. She as a made molecular structure always held inbuilt capability. The blue print of her design already laid down but without the forces of the external program the molecular universe she would not have achieved the requirement to convert will to action to result. Who made Mary to be able to see Red Roses ? The designer of the process the molecules themselves follow laws of attraction their attributes to do this have been pre coded.

[@mayflowerlash11]

For example when doing experiments involving quantum mechanical outcomes we can alter the outcome based on whether we observe said particles or do not observe them. Don't observe and quantum distribution rules the outcome, observe and the outcome collapses to one outcome.

[@rapauli]

Drat - I wanted to escape global warming by repealing the Laws of Thermodynamics. Looks like it is not possible. Thanks for this lecture.

[@Littleprinceleon]

You can't expell a global warNing! 🤫🙃

[@moriahgamesdev]

I don't think the rose would tell her anything she didn't know. Presumably she also knew precisely how it would affect her emotions and feelings as well so she wouldn't even be surprised. Although it is a new experience for her It would be exactly as she expected. Perhaps it is the unexpected that is the crucial part of experience.

[@jamesscanlon5733]

The free will arguments remind me of BF Skinner and my understanding is that he renounced his early perspective near the end of his life.

[@TheyCallMeNewb]

Wisdom is an odd thing for one to set out in pursuit of. Attainment though; comes with a standing interest in multifarious disciplines. Brian Greene is a wise guy.

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

There’s some intelligent, between us, which they can do , the design!

[@jmanj3917]

I'm confused. If we as a species have learned what we have through the use of infrared, ultraviolet, x-rays, etc., then how would it be that Mary doesn't learn anything from gaining color vision? Or am I missing the whole point? (Which I am sure is the case)...Anyone?

[@fredriksvard2603]

He elaborates in the book

[@rocketsurgeon1349]

Interesting stuff as usual. But so many of these covid era videos got terrible sound quality which i can understand, but atleast try to normalize the audio of different sources. Hard to watch when one person is much louder than the other.

[@fellsmoke]

Living bodies maintain the conditions, regulate...living processes...call it fine-tuning if you like

[@smlanka4u]

There are a lot of Quantum Fields in the universe. According to the Einstien's equation the both sides of that equation is interrelated to each other in a very complicated way. And same like that the dimensions and fields are interrelated to each other too. And it is like an effect which becomes a cause to change the cause of that effect too. The dimensions in a combined dimensional set are just moments within a moment. The dimensions make fields on interactions. According to Buddhism there are 4 fundamental natures in the universe called "Paramartha Dharma". Those four (4) concepts are known as Rupa (4 fundamental + 24 material phenomena in number), Chaitasika (52), Chittha and Nibbana (Nirvana State). According to Buddhist Abhidhamma the mind is based on fields (like beautiful paintings) called Chitta Bhumi. There are mathematical explanations about the Universe and life. I developed an explanation about the existence of the universe too. According to Buddhism there are 8 fundamental formations called Pure Eight, including 4 great fundamental elements (ghosts/bhutas). And there are 28 material phenomena in Buddhism including the 4 great fundamental material phenomena with 24 other material phenomena. According to my calculations there are 4 fundamental dimensional sets (elements) and 48 other dimensional sets which are 24 pairs on same dimensional structure in each 2 sets (two dimensional-sets behave like electric moments and magnetic moments) in matter area of my dimensional structure (my 1st standard model), so there are 28 material phenomena in my dimensional structure too. There are more things I can explain (Ytube Video id: Tb6MOo1dFH0), but I'm still developing it.

[@ALavin-en1kr]

In terms of seeing red for the first time it should be different than just knowing all that can be known about red (inference). We can know everything that can be known about sugar but we do not really experience (know) sugar until we taste it. Otherwise Greene is the best in clarifying it all for non-scientists.

[@virgilmccabe2828]

BRIAN! I am not just a collection of particles. I AM a collection of particles but my particles are arranged in a very particular order and have the ability to act in ways which are not perfectly predictable by the laws of physics as we know them.

[@mayflowerlash11]

How do you know that at the quantum level a consciousness might affect the outcome of particle interaction? We don't know. We need to make progress in knowledge.

[@ZeroOskul]

"So, zerooskul says: 'Brian Greene is a charlatan!' Thank you, zerooskul! I appreciate that!"~Prof. Dr. Brian Greene

[@neilhumphries2120]

To me consciousness is simply the product of a brain that can run simulations. We’re so good at solving problems because we can simulate the future. What we feel when we compare our expectations to what is happening in real time is what we call consciousness. This would be the case for any similar AI

[@entanglement385]

That's a unique perspective I hadn't ever considered before. Thanks!

[@fredriksvard2603]

Many disagree that consciousness is computation. Maybe the automated actions like how the brain creates images from visual input, but subjective experiences seem to be something different.

[@spnhm34]

I’m not sure why the assumption is made that we all share the same type of experience or thought process. Some see a dress as blue and black, some see it as white and gold. Some people report having no ‘mind’s eye’. It’s also pretty obvious that people react differently to the same stimuli, and that identical twins develop different personalities. Those with types of mental illness or injury also indicate very different responses to others. We can see therefore that there is no such thing as a common experience or thought process. Having taken that first step, the second becomes shorter. We know from things like optical illusions, phantom limb syndrome, hallucinations and illusory motion that the brain is capable of constructing the so-called ‘sense’ of something without that something actually happening. It’s therefore unreliable to think of experiences and sensations as being real. They are an artefact, an emergent phenomenon of the way the brain processes information in order to help the physical body interact with the particular situation it is in. It’s only hard or counterintuitive to think in this way because the process of creating these artefacts needs to protect itself. But just as it’s counter instinctive to deliberately stub one’s toe, it’s still possible to do it. So to answer the question of was anything learned when she saw colours for the first time: yes; the brain logged each band of electromagnetic frequencies in memory for future use. Some of those apparent sensations were recorded too. But the experience in the moment wasn’t real, it was simply a very effective trick.

[@spnhm34]

sorry slow reply. I’m fascinated by this, but I’ve not seen anything that persuades my that consciousness is something definable. And if it’s not definable as something to prove, how would we go about proving that it even exists? You seem to explain things in the same way that I do, to me it’s those things that seem definable and explicable, but there’s still nothing that goes toward saying that consciousness is “real”, any more so than temperature is “real”. It seems real, we can feel it, we can sense it. But there’s nothing objective to say that it is. The idea of a philosophical notion of self-knowledge is alluring, but history tends to favour scientific advances over philosophical ideals

[@jasethconnor6501]

I have been considering all things that either choose to reproduce or to attempt immortality. on a quantum level. I can't wait to get your book. Thank you all stay safe stay dangerous

[@JimJWalker]

We derive order from disorder because order is one possibility of disorder. The bigger question is what is the difference and why?

[@ThisIsLeeBird]

One would think that such a massive channel, they could afford a microphone for the host…

[@pezkinchemistry4969]

you know dr green use to say..".if that everything is wat we are persuing working out Gods Law...i would be happy to be a part of that journey too..." not many scientist like him could have said that....i personally feel so nice about him....but now i feel like he is "down to earth" into physical laws... (lawful), i will be so happy if he is able to figure out the puzzle .wat actually how physical laws can have an impact on inner world...

[@chrisholding2382]

Very orderly discussion amidst the 19 chaos 46 time 47 kamala. The Laws suggest entropy is going to carry on increasing?

[@mayflowerlash11]

I think Mary would learn something new. There is a flaw in the assumptions of the story. The assumption that Mary can learn everything there is to know about her brain is flawed. She might learn about the difference between red and other colours by knowing the frequency of light but when she can sense colour she has a new sensation of red. Also our knowledge of what constitutes a thought or a memory in the brain is so limited that we do not know what we will learn about thought in the future. This is one of the great questions and we are a long way from knowing the answer. Likewise the question of free will or determinism reigns, we must learn something about what causes consciousness before we can make a determination. There is a third option, a hybridisation between freewill and determinism. Don't discount this option.

[@TSSuppository]

Regarding the Frank Jackson story,: Mary would experience something new, so the question is more, "do we learn from our experiences?" - or, perhaps more accurately, "do we learn from *all* experiences?" I would argue that while she may have a *theoretical* understanding of the sensation of experiencing colour for the first time, the sensation *itself* would be new - she would learn what it feels like to experience colour, the emotional feeling of it (as evidenced by people who actually have gone through that experience). Whether emotional experiences can be considered "learning something new" I shall leave to the reader's consideration. However, much as I believe that there is something definitely "different" about consciousness, I concede that, in this case, it can be argued that all she has learned is what those particular chemical and physiological sensations *feel* like. It's a beautiful little thought experiment, in its way, but it doesn't actually *prove* anything. :D :p

[@erikziak1249]

44:50 That is our own fallacy of what we think of "freedom".

[@juliesmith3954]

Good stuff =)

[@robertmcclintock8701]

A human body is burly, gnarly and surly like a fractal.

[@SuperProtector]

Would AI explain consciousness? Excitement if the proof is delivered. Everything is physics. Thanks for the nice conversation

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

The consciousness, does exists, because, it’s, physics, and can be seen by our eyes, another words, if you found somebody’s, who’s, never study 📚 at the university, and understanding, mostly phenomenon at the far spaces and universes, and knowing about philosophy, biology, quantum mechanics, and most , unknowns, in our nature’s, so what we can call it !

[@tombesson7293]

On religion, Joseph Campbell would say that if your idea of god was metaphorical of the possibilities of human experience and fulfillment in a given society at a given time, then, of course, there is a god. However, if your idea of god is some sky spirit who created the universe and who knows everything about you and, in some religions, controls, or wills, your every thought and behavior, then he'd probably say, "Go ahead and pull the other one."

[@nicholas1460]

I had an argument with a blind person once about whether brown was warm or cool.

[@deeliciousplum]

43:42 I cannot tolerate Professor Brian Greene's aggregated mineralisms (aka Brian sees life as being far more complex with abilities that far exceed that of a rock, an object which is made up of aggregated minerals). Then he uses the example of kicking the rock! I lost it there. So much anger against rocks. I never! 🤣😊🥰 Thank you to Ri, to Jo Marchant, and to Brian Greene for creating and sharing this conversation. Jo and Brian, you both set fire to my curious about the world propensities. 🌸

[@mismass7859]

Scientists are wasting a lot of time refusing to accept that certain aspects of reality like consciousness for example are rooted outside physicality, singularities, eternities and paradoxes are the boundaries of reality that if nothing else at least consciousness can transcend. Our brains are augmented reality producers, so our individual consciousness can orientate itself in the particle soup that physical reality really is, but beyond that lies further forms of reality that consciousness at the moment at least can explore

[@JETLAGXXX]

Consider yourself in active dialog with another person. If determinism was in play then how would you explain that you both can have a coherent and meaningful conversation? If the conversation was deterministic then you were both destined to hold a debate many years after your birth that would be in perfect sync. Apply this to everyone and it is very clear that the probability that all our interactions are predetermined and they make sense is clearly an impossibility. Free will must be in operation.

[@fredriksvard2603]

A determinist would say its still just predetermined responses, cause and effect. You say something predetermined, and the other persons response can be predicted and so on. Then theres the quantum thing with several possibilities, which still doesnt have to incorporate free will as we think of it.

[@Reulbhad]

Is consciousness not just evolution at work in order to survive and to advance, consciousness would be inevitable in order to remain ahead of the game of life, top of the food chain and survival?

[@karlstenator]

For me, consciousness is about how many Doritos can I fit into my mouth before I can't fit any more.