Decoherence and consciousness - Max Tegmark

[@bjorntorlarsson]

Decoherence and increasing entropy are not only discussed in this lecture, they are demonstrated by how the lecture itself is organized! Tegmark is extremely bright and I love his ideas. But this lecture is like watching him talking to himself. A lecture must be produced by thinking about what a lecture is. Shape this mess up and we've got a winner.

[@prikarsartam]

well stated

[@prikarsartam]

Great seeing Max Tegmark extending, supporting, addressing thoroughly works of Wojctech Zurek. His ideas of pointer states, and environment induced selection process is very crucial; this deliberately hits on Why and how "I" emerges in an Unitarily Evolving Universe.

[@prikarsartam]

3:18-3:30

[@steveagnew3385]

Quantum decoherence is what drives the universe and so Tegmark's nice talk was very useful for me. Of course, Tegmark tends to use a lot of technical jargon like Shannon entropy and density matrices, but at least he does bring relativistic gravity into his discussions. These kinds of discussions are so close to the truth and yet still so far away. Space and time are very convenient notions that allow us to order the actions of matter, but really it is the actions of matter that order the universe in the first place. Once Tegmark gives in and uses space and time to describe decoherence, he is stuck in the same do-loop recursion as the rest of science. Action and matter do not exist in a continuum of space and time...space and time emerge from the actions of matter. Decoherence is a fundamental property of matter and action and there is a universal decoherence that is the universe. Although there are many complex reasons for decoherence, there is also a very simple universal decoherence rate as well. Decoherence is what drives charge force, which is local, and decoherence drives gravity force at the scale of the universe. The reason that charge and gravity differ by 1e39 power is that the universe is 1e39 larger than the hydrogen atom...

[@Bourne21]

Great explanation, Sir.

[@Bourne21]

Do you have any views on Many-Worlds interpretation and Simulation theory?

[@jonwo6092]

I have to concur with the idea that knowledge of systems state can't lower entropy. It simply introduces another source of unknown, and therefore adds to the entropy. You can't be certain that the knowledge is correct. The knowledge of systems status must exist independent of the observer for it to be objective, which makes the idea redundant.

[@alicepenney3985]

This is the beginning of the undergraduate studies of the Quantum.Its a Good thing.Gets over the burn out fom rich people with no studie descipline.But economics aside...Its a good thing.

[@TheVirtualban]

The need to know if a card falls face up or face down, or the need to know about other possible representations of the cosmos, or the need to know if a quantum algorithm will break the encryption or not... I think in 'time' we will be able to do all that inside the mathematical representative bits of our cosmos (photons, electrons and all other mass-energy forces and transfers). And it will be just as good and powerful as plants using fractal geometry to grow, and a form of self-fulfilling prophecy, which I hope our civilization will be ready for, but if not, some other civilization will be ready for.

[@flybennu]

thus a collective coherence seems to be growing in time

[@flybennu]

and we have a collective curiosity or need to understand our environment and we solve it together and communicate ideas. it's interesting how our technologies seem to have blown past our needs and here we sit still suffering, still needy of such basic things.

[@austinunterbrink9805]

Love this guy!!

[@SearchBucket2]

Listening only to the audio of this, I struggled with this interesting presentation, not because of the subject matter, but because for some reason the usually articulate Max seems to be in a "quantum state" of incoherence .... either that or he had a problem with his tongue that day! ;-)

[@Segismundo2011]

+SearchBucket2 He is using Powerpoint and so is the audience. It would solve your problem by looking at the lecture!!!

[@SearchBucket2]

Segismundo2011 You miss my point? We are used to seeing Max being articulate in slick documentaries. Knowing that, his stumbling in this live lecture is a distraction from the content.

[@ThePinkus]

I noted too, and thought this. There are three things, thinking, being enthusiast about what You are thinking, and communicating what You are thinking. Then You weight them with priorities, perhaps in that order, which is unconsciously biased already, and You realize, or maybe not, that You've not left enough weight for the last... What's the expected phenomenology of that situation? Mmmm, theory fits the data, I thought. I remember one of my Prof. at University, he was an enthusiast. Once he wrote an equation, he exclaimed something like "isn't it fascinating?" and then stood with open arms toward the equation, turned to us with the same gesture as if he could by that include us in his experience of that equation, turned back to the equation, back to us, he couldn't utter a word for a minute... he was great, he was loved! PS: Of course, he also explained the equation ;)

[@channel-ug9gt]

what is at the y axis at 9:31 ? what is the unit?

[@naimulhaq9626]

How the Feynman's quantum field can be conscious and how the parameter space is fine tuned, constitute the frontier of modern physics. This lecture do dwell on some interesting concepts but does not explain simulation of either consciousness or fine tuning .

[@TheRaNetwork]

so the environment does not include the object or subject? it isn't made up of objects? i would think that the environment is not interactive with it's parts but that the parts of the environment are interactive with each other. i would think an object is merely a hyponym of the environment and thus non interactive with it, as it is logically redundant.

[@TheRaNetwork]

furthermore, isn't subjectivity a function of objectivity? we are talking about tiers on the scale of existence here. The only real thing is subjectivity. Objectivity and the environment would be subjective concepts.

[@TheAverageJoe2014]

Bingo, only subjectivity exists.

[@flybennu]

who called you?

[@flybennu]

but my moment and existence is connected with all that stuff, very far out and not so relevant to me!! :o very interesting lecture!! thanks.

[@flybennu]

never tell me where this room is. ever. i never want to know. :o

[@nnd3062]

who's here for Westworld?

[@ktx49]

genious

[@KRT054]

If nothing exists, then I am not typing this! I exist, therefore I am!

[@mdbosley]

If whole civilizations arise and pass and no discernible record of their existence can be observed* (be made conscious here and now) then what proof do we have of their ever having had existence? The present, existence and consciousness are synonymous. That which isn't present in consciousness lacks existence.

[@bocelott]

Brilliant, Kevin.

[@Hotlooksamerica]

Mandela Effect explained