Roger Penrose on quantum mechanics and consciousness | Full interview

Roger Penrose full interview on quantum physics, consciousness, his career, and his idols.
Could quantum consciousness be the answer?
Watch Roger Penrose debate String Theory with Brian Greene and Eric Weisntein at iai.tv/video/the-trouble-with...
Watch Roger Penrose debate The Multiverse with Sabine Hossenfelder and Michio Kaku at iai.tv/video/the-mystery-of-t...
Join Nobel laureate Sir Roger Penrose as he outlines his views on quantum mechanics, Gödel's incompleteness theorem and consciousness. He also provides a glimpse into his visual thought process and scientific idol Galileo Galilei.
#RogerPenrose #QuantumConsciousness #QuantumMechanics
Sir Roger Penrose is a world-renowned physicist, best known for his work on general relativity and sharing the Wolf Prize for Physics with Stephen Hawking for their work on black holes.
The Institute of Art and Ideas features videos and articles from cutting edge thinkers discussing the ideas that are shaping the world, from metaphysics to string theory, technology to democracy, aesthetics to genetics. Subscribe today! iai.tv/subscribe?Y...
For debates and talks: iai.tv
For articles: iai.tv/articles
For courses: iai.tv/iai-academy/courses
00:00 Intro
00:24 On quantum mechanics and consciousness
14:05 Personal idols and friends
17:37 If you could meet anyone from the field of science, who would it be?

[@meows_and_woof]

This man is 92! And his mind is so clear!

[@giantpurplebrain]

Hawking was supposed to die young but defied all expectations and reached a respectable 76. Obviously he was in awful physical shape but perhaps there is something about the active mind and longevity.

[@meows_and_woof]

@@giantpurplebrain he’s 92 right now

[@PhysiKarlz]

@@meows_and_woof I don't think you read his comment properly.

[@hugh_jasso]

Biden is in negotiations for Penrose' brain

[@dejabu24]

92 wow like John Williams the composer , both still have a clear and healthy mind , hopefully for a long time

[@neensbeens1582]

I could listen to this man talk for days straight. This is the kind of person we should be idolizing not celebrity garbage.

[@aqu9923]

He's is the Saint of science .

[@sven888]

I prefer to idolize you man.

[@phealy02]

And he did not have sex with a 12 year old child, unlike the 'final prophet' of another religion...

[@mattstroker3742]

100%

[@Bigger-Circuitry-Bigger-SOUND]

no one should Idolise anyone/anything but for sure if this man would be listened more than the celebrity garbage, we would live in a better world

[@BlackbodyEconomics]

Roger Penrose is one of my favorite modern mathematicians/thinkers - he's humble, open-minded, curious, and brilliant.

[@MacBookForMe]

💖💖💖

[@giantpurplebrain]

with huge emphasis on the brilliant

[@Khomyakov.Vladimir]

Why does the channel need spammers? To hide the truth. Derek Bentley @derekbentley334 more than 10 comments making no sense. Why didn't the channel ban him?

[@hyperduality2838]

Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages, communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. All numbers fall within the complex plane hence all numbers are dual. Measurements, perceptions, observations or intuitions are converted into ideas or conceptions by mathematicians all the time. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Your mind converts perceptions into conceptions -- a syntropic process, teleological. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. "Perceptions are the product of an unconscious inference (prediction)" -- Helmholtz. The tetrahedron is self dual. The cube is dual to the octahedron. The dodecahedron is dual to the icosahedron -- geometry.

[@idegteke]

To me, it looks like he’s chewed his way through the cheese of math and has fallen out on the other side by now:D

[@MichaelDembinski]

PLEASE - as with 'Closer to Truth' - PLEASE give us the DATE on which the talk was recorded! This is historically significant; without knowing when these talks were recorded, it's hard to follow how a given thinker's thoughts have evolved.

[@genghisgalahad8465]

Based on looking through the website, this was during the festival in 2023, Hay or London...

[@Khomyakov.Vladimir]

Why does the channel need spammers? To hide the truth. Derek Bentley @derekbentley334 more than 10 comments making no sense. Why didn't the channel ban him?

[@Khomyakov.Vladimir]

Why does the channel need spammers? To hide the truth. Derek Bentley @derekbentley334 more than 10 comments making no sense. Why didn't the channel ban him?

[@eksffa]

May 2023

[@Khomyakov.Vladimir]

Why does the channel need spammers? To hide the truth. Derek Bentley @derekbentley334 more than 10 comments making no sense. Why didn't the channel ban him?

[@PADARM]

Sir. Penrose, one of the last great Geniuses of the 20th Century. A living Legend.

[@genghisgalahad8465]

21st century. It's 2024.

[@conelord1984]

@@genghisgalahad8465 He meant one of the last great geniuses born in the 20th century.

[@sidsuspicious]

@@genghisgalahad8465 Numpty.

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Kip Thorne is still around although he is younger, early 80s. But still very active, mentally and physically.

[@conelord1984]

@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 He has nowhere near the importance of Penrose.

[@kencory2476]

That chair leg an inch from the edge scares me.

[@daniel.mackin]

I also felt a bit of... uncertainty

[@marvinmartin4692]

Very observant!

[@marvinmartin4692]

Very observant!

[@creativecatalyst777]

Almost said it. You beat me to it👏👏👏

[@petetf7490]

I read your comment and was on the edge of my seat, worried it might go. Then 18:32 my heart pounded as was the most probable moment that chair leg was going to go, but didn’t thank god 😥

[@BelligerentChad]

He is 92 years old. Woaahhhh🤯 Looks 15 years younger. Stability in voice, no significant shaking, no spectacles, lot of hair on head, hearing perfectly well, doesn't look physically weak eithr . This man has done wonderfully well in keeping his body & mind healthy at this age also. I know there are genetic factors as well, but you stil need to put in efforts.

[@kittyhinkle3739]

People who get to live their lives doing what they love/loving what they do just somehow end up showing that in their entire being.

[@SadhuPrasanga]

Freeman Dyson was another such genius.

[@ironmurs6903]

I always feel like I’ve leveled up after listening to Penrose. He’s a treasure

[@JeighNeither]

I love the whole M.C. Escher/Penrose Tiles (someone discovered a new one just recently) loop/synchronicity. Imagine influencing one of the world's most beloved artist, penning cosmic inflation & parenting the singularity w/Hawking. He is the best of us w/o doubt.

[@spinaltapdwarf77]

Ha!

[@sunbeam9222]

Integration

[@tomasbertok3990]

Sir Penrose is amazing - still incredibly sharp. Thumbs up for this video.

[@WinrichNaujoks]

Sir Roger

[@genghisgalahad8465]

Razor sharp having practiced for decades now...stays sharp.

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Jordan Peterson interviewed him once, I got the impression roger found the questions a little annoying/ignorant. 😂 Peterson wanting to look into Penrose's soul, and Penrose just wants to talk about the physics of souls 😂

[@WinrichNaujoks]

@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 Which they were. Peterson is neither a physicist nor a mathematician yet he was trying to have a specialist discussion on those matters.

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

@@WinrichNaujoksYeah, off the bat when I read those two names together, I thought"Are they even compatible?" 😂

[@abstractnonsense3253]

I could listen to Roger Penrose speak for days

[@sharif1306]

So tell me how does understanding help us transcend the rules?

[@mystryfine3481]

a strong proponent of the importance of philosophy in the scientific method.

[@lasselasse5215]

Two fundamental different kinds of people: both very important for development: 1. Those who do not allow themselves to be distracted by any alternative hypothetic scenario, not based on what we currently know, when they focus on the matter and hand based on only what we currently know, almost in an autistic way (which is a good thing) 2. The ones who wants to look at the broader picture, wants to include ideas about what could be around the corner. In fact, when modern deep learning algorithms are made, there's often both Type 1 and Type 2 parts of the final AI solution: Type 1 is objective, Type 2 is speculative/creative. Type 2 is a randomness introduced in the algorithm to make sure the Type 1 part of the algorithm doesn't get stuck (in a local minimum/maximum)

[@Flum666]

@@lasselasse5215 the easy answer is no, I reject both

[@thrwwccnt5845]

@@Flum666 based

[@samlebon9884]

Because philosophy is the next step after pure science and empiricism. Then, when philosophy is unable to understand and explain reality, the last frontier that comes beyond knowledge and understanding is spirituality, the realm where reality is not understood but believed and accepted.

[@anderandersson5229]

Yes. A nice proportion of philosophy makes the !!! Into a satisfying ???

[@billshiff2060]

Such a likable genius. One of the greatest thinkers of our age.

[@ausomm]

Without God's word of Truth he's just another man with a bunch of doubts

[@robdev89]

Can listen to this man for hours. Hope he is around for a long time! Inspiring person.

[@synthclub]

To hear Roger explain the Emperor’s mind is a beautiful gift… the book is a very challenging mountain to scale.

[@carlosgaspar8447]

mostly just tedious, and probably why many critics did not bother reading it.

[@donnievance1942]

@@carlosgaspar8447 If they didn't read it, then they're not legitimate critics. You don't seem to have any critique yourself-- just something negative to say. I wish there was some kind of AI that would just delete all trolls. I don't believe for a second that you know Jack $h!t about who read or didn't read The Emperor's New Mind.

[@carlosgaspar8447]

@@donnievance1942 have you read the f'n book. i have for all it's worth. so lick my ass if that's what you call a positive comment on your part.

[@gautambhaskar336]

The more I look at this man, the more he seems to have God in him. Even at the age of 92, he is still in the world of education. I pray to God to keep him healthy .

[@david.thomas.108]

This is a particularly profound and detailed interview with Sir Penrose. Excellent and thanks for sharing.

[@MrPublicPain]

How many scientists does it take to mischaracterize the Schrodinger's Cat problem? Just about every one. Penrose never gets muddled. He's my go to for reality checking physics and cosmology and anything else he wants to weigh in on.

[@pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591]

It's not a problem its a story.

[@DrVonJay]

Yeah it’s really strange when people quote it at face value without knowing the backstory.

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

I like his CCC theory, Conformal Cyclic Cosmology. I see it as the serial equivalent of the parallel multiverse. The universes are not separated by distance or dimension or whatever, but by simple time.

[@hyperduality2838]

Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages, communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. All numbers fall within the complex plane hence all numbers are dual. Measurements, perceptions, observations or intuitions are converted into ideas or conceptions by mathematicians all the time. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Your mind converts perceptions into conceptions -- a syntropic process, teleological. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. "Perceptions are the product of an unconscious inference (prediction)" -- Helmholtz. The tetrahedron is self dual. The cube is dual to the octahedron. The dodecahedron is dual to the icosahedron -- geometry.

[@Dee-nonamnamrson8718]

​@@hyperduality2838 What is your point?

[@sMeLLwAtER]

Than you sir Roger Penrose. We are all lucky to have him

[@davidrobinson9507]

I'm not a scientist or mathematician. But I like how the noticing of anything has now seemed to be part of the quest for understanding more than we used to understand.

[@nevilleheffernan2362]

It’s an enormous privilege to have access to such an engaging person with a brilliant ,lucid mind.

[@ejenkins4711]

Looking well roger

[@merrilyneafrazeh6445]

19:33 @ejenkins gives the impression that Roger P is likely to be looking at these comments, so I decided that because I have no idea how to contact Roger P, I could leave a message for him right here now. My name is Merrilyne Huxley-Afrazeh and many years ago I was a member of 'Scientific and medical Network', in which Roger P was also a member too. One day , which I believe to be some time in the 90's, Roger P held a conference in London about ' Blackholes', after the conference I met with Roger outside to chat with him. But sometimes a quick little chat is quite insufficient to say what you really need to say , so we said our goodbyes and I left with a comment to him that I would try to put all in writing to him and send to him at his university. Well, this never happened , it was too detailed to just write about an experiential happening and I really needed time with him for expressing my story. This was forever on my mind always. (19:33) I followed Roger P😮 in his talks and research via ' You tube' and put his videos on 'Twitter' with comment but lately I have worried that time may be running out, I am now a few weeks off 80 yrs old and Roger P will be of similar age ...what then? No one will replace Roger Penrose and the truth about 'Quantum Theory' will never be revealed. Merrilyne Afrazeh Messenger (PM)

[@merrilyneafrazeh6445]

Yes it's true... QUANTUM THEORY IS INCOMPLETE

[@DanielJones-wj7mm]

"There is something outside computation in human understanding". Contra mathematization of everything including human nature. Thank you Sir.

[@binbots]

General relativity and quantum mechanics will never be combined until we realize that they take place at different moments in time. Because causality has a speed limit (c) every point in space where you observe it from will be the closest to the present moment. When we look out into the universe, we see the past which is made of particles (GR). When we try to look at smaller and smaller sizes and distances, we are actually looking closer and closer to the present moment (QM). The wave property of particles appears when we start looking into the future of that particle. It is a probability wave because the future is probabilistic. Wave function collapse is what we perceive as the present moment and is what divides the past from the future. GR is making measurements in the observed past and therefore, predictable. QM is attempting to make measurements of the unobserved future and therefore, unpredictable.

[@jmilnes2928]

Brilliant, and also could looking at x-rays to gamma rays be before the particles have decided the state to collapse into!

[@yinyang2385]

Interesting theory but I have a different spin on it. I believe the seperating factor is space not time. I believe that the subatomic universe is operating from a dimension of space that is seperated but overlayed and sychronised with the physical universe. Much like the way the physical modem router occupies the same local position as the wifi signal it generates but both exist in different observable spaces while working in sychrony. I believe this is the same reason why we haven't been able to locate dark matter. My theory is that this seperation came about during the big bang. Prior to that I believe there was only a universe that was void of all matter. Through the progression of energy accumulating and colliding lead to the first emergence of matter according to the equation e=mc2. If the universe at the time was abundant in anti-matter it could be this incompatibility that lead to a rapid split purging of its counterpart into a seperate dimension of space. That purging is what I believe was what we know as the big bang. That would explain why there is a lack of anti matter in this observable universe and why we are unable to see dark matter and why there is a seperation between general relativity and quantum mechanics. The answer to all three would be that those events haven't shifted, they've remained in same dimension of space as where they've always been. Off course this is all just a far fetched theory of mine

[@HARSHT0NE]

@@yinyang2385 the modem example makes sense. It could be our visual reality is our local modem, and that’s why we haven’t been able to observe other dimensions either.

[@SkotiM]

Roger Penrose is a joy to listen to, I understand almost nothing he talks about, but he seems to enjoy his subject so much that its a pleasure to hear him discuss it.

[@CraigMansfield]

I like (and appreciate) how he explains things in terms which I can follow. He must have almost infinite patience, or be very comfortable with a way of life which enables his studying. People like him are essential. I wish I knew everything 😊

[@stevedrane2364]

Wow fantastic. . I could listen to Professor Penrose all day. . Thank you.

[@DouwedeJong]

thanks for making this video, i learned a lot.

[@DJWHITE_]

This has serious rewatch value! Thanks!

[@amritsharma5373]

Sir Penrose- An epitome of humility and intelligence!! Always fond of hearing him.

[@terrycallow2979]

Thank you Sir Roger for that.

[@dntfrthreapr]

I read Emporer's New Mind and it made me obsessed with Turinv Machines which led to me becoming obsessed with 6502 assembly programming! Thanks Sir Penrose

[@donnareynolds7250]

That was inspiring. Wow, my mind is blown. Thank you

[@stevenarmstrong5116]

I love this interview. Sir roger penrose sitting in what I’m guessing is his back garden, discussing science, the river in the background with the canoe slowly passing by… There’s something so quintessentially english about the whole thing. Makes me proud to know that intelligence and peaceful tranquility can still be found in this country

[@3dgar7eandro]

Just amazing to be accurate to listen to this mini lectures! I just hope Sir Roger Penrose get to live at least another 20 more years 💪😁

[@RagingGeekazoid]

"accurate to listen"? 🤔

[@jdrosborough]

Please, please keep Roger Penrose’s innovative thinking going. We need someone to pick up the ball in ten years or so, as Sir Roger is obviously defeating time. He’s the best of the visionaries in the modern age.

[@abhishek-euphony-and-euphoria]

What an insightful and articulated view!!

[@CamiloSanchez1979]

Excellent interview, so nice to see Mr Penrose is doing well, I have read a few of his books.

[@Carfeu]

Love this man

[@robertfraser9551]

Simply excellent !!

[@metazock]

one of the greats

[@richardmarker786]

He sealed the deal for me when he described himself as a visual thinker. I used to think everyone was. My heart pauses at the thought of having an in-depth conversation with Sir Roger. Not only is this far out of reach, but the time needed to establish thoughts understandable to both would make it even more impossible.🐦 🐦 🐦

[@MarjanSI]

Bless you ❤❤❤❤❤ we need you

[@johncraig2623]

Wouldn't it be delightful to be able to sit and talk to such a charming profound thinker? He seems to be completely without condescension and have such intriguing thoughts.

[@florintripa7308]

I am in awe how people can be so smart. I couldnt follow most of what he was saying and had to rewind... great stuff, cant stop watching though

[@CraigMansfield]

Take heart that he's also saying he doesn't understand it 😊 That's the starting point of all science. What I got from it was that our description of what counting is, leads to what we currently accept as rules as conditions, but those standards don't seem to behave as they were expected to, under certain conditions. He's changing the philosophy towards certain mathematical situations, and trying other approaches, to find a repeatable theory and method of mathematics prediction or confirmation. The basis of prediction, using maths. I like it because it's deeply philosophical. It moves from basic counting 1,2,3 which is using words to explain physical amounts, to mathematical prediction based on a similar mind set, then finding out that all of a sudden, 1+1 isn't necessarily 2 anymore. And nobody knows why. That's my understanding of it anyway. I might be well off. My favourite book is Science a History. And I always give up in the quantum theory section, and the superstring part. I just can't understand it. I love the thought that in maybe 100 years, even children will have the understanding and think "how don't you know that?". That's human progression...... The passing of knowledge. Science.

[@Pegasus4213]

This is a lovely and timely record of a great thinker. But, for me, science and physics are missing the foundational reality of consciousness. It just cannot be excluded from physics, because it is an integrated aspect of all perception and consciousness is like the quantum level of reality and for me, is the very nature of God and is what reality is!

[@hyperduality2838]

Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages, communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. All numbers fall within the complex plane hence all numbers are dual. Measurements, perceptions, observations or intuitions are converted into ideas or conceptions by mathematicians all the time. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Your mind converts perceptions into conceptions -- a syntropic process, teleological. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. "Perceptions are the product of an unconscious inference (prediction)" -- Helmholtz. The tetrahedron is self dual. The cube is dual to the octahedron. The dodecahedron is dual to the icosahedron -- geometry. Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung.

[@notexactlyrocketscience]

glad he finally gets the recognition he deserves and we need. it's good that he is there to witness it all.

[@finnmacdiarmid3250]

Sadly the better voices are cyclically drowned out by loud mouth intellectuals like Jordan Peterson who offer actually very little outside of an emotional appeal.

[@Dee-nonamnamrson8718]

I mean, be won a Nobel prize. Doesn't get much more recognized than that.

[@notexactlyrocketscience]

yes, including that. he was being belittled and completely ignored long before that.@@Dee-nonamnamrson8718

[@eyeofthasky]

i enjoy him sharing his passion so much .. would love to be his translator to gallileo -- even if i surely wont understand half of what sir PENROSE is saying if they get down into the meaty stuff 😅

[@ryanprice9841]

I appreciate his clarification on his position on physicalism because i hear people come to the wrong conclusion after hearing him speak almost any time that comes up.

[@brianlebreton7011]

Love the interview. Love Rogers insights. It echoes my understanding of some of the problems not being dealt with, ie the inability of a machine to prove concepts that rely on infinite continuity of logical conclusions. For example, using real numbers, the infinite series of x+1 will always be consistent without limit into infinity. Or, 2 parallel lines, using a fixed system of geometry will never touch, ever. Although a computer in theory could run forever, it still relies on finite bits and therefore could never finish calculating a real number. If quantum systems are truly indeterminate and probablilistic curves and wave functions actually link reality to a ‘Real’ foundation then logic alone, and intuition in particular, should admit to the impossibility of machine solutions ever modeling comprehensive truth. Maybe quantum computing has a chance since its foundational qbits can be ‘Real’ components. Now we just have to figure out how to make ‘Real’ measurements. Since we’ll never be able to verify that a qbit’s ‘Real’ value is correct with a deterministic classic computer, it will take a quantum leap of faith to accept that the real values/real States are true at the infinite scale.

[@gyrogearloose1345]

Or as they say in Italian "issa verry comlicayted"!

[@sandro9uerra]

You are so right!!!

[@leefields2829]

A brilliant man 👏👏

[@elektronikk-service]

A good answer always generates 10 new questions

[@hyperduality2838]

Questions are dual to answers. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages, communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. All numbers fall within the complex plane hence all numbers are dual. Measurements, perceptions, observations or intuitions are converted into ideas or conceptions by mathematicians all the time. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Your mind converts perceptions into conceptions -- a syntropic process, teleological. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. "Perceptions are the product of an unconscious inference (prediction)" -- Helmholtz. The tetrahedron is self dual. The cube is dual to the octahedron. The dodecahedron is dual to the icosahedron -- geometry.

[@donnievance1942]

@@hyperduality2838 Stop spamming, troll. Reported.

[@bruce_omni]

Brilliant! 🔥

[@paulparry6308]

Understanding is direct experience of the thing.

[@markthnark]

There are so few physicists who display the kind of curiosity and determination to seriously question accepted solutions and willing to posit new ideas even at the age of 92.

[@englishjona6458]

I find the questions, very childish, but this guy keeps on coming up with fantastic answers Absolutely amazing, I could listen to him for hours

[@hyperduality2838]

Questions are dual to answers. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages, communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. All numbers fall within the complex plane hence all numbers are dual. Measurements, perceptions, observations or intuitions are converted into ideas or conceptions by mathematicians all the time. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Your mind converts perceptions into conceptions -- a syntropic process, teleological. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. "Perceptions are the product of an unconscious inference (prediction)" -- Helmholtz. The tetrahedron is self dual. The cube is dual to the octahedron. The dodecahedron is dual to the icosahedron -- geometry.

[@donnievance1942]

@@hyperduality2838 You've now been reported for a second time.

[@jimswenson9991]

Why? He has a point!

[@parvdize3968]

I wish there is more people like Penrose and Chomsky

[@aliharvey448]

We need more great thinkers working on the mystery of consciousness. I believe it'll open the door to a realization that we, humans, and our minds, are embedded into the universe itself in a way that consciousness is preserved.

[@mihabet]

I love this guy!

[@sunbeam9222]

Merci merci. Plus on réalise et moins on comprend. Une contradiction il semblerait mais ensuite tout prend place. La confiance est aussi une valeur importante. Il faut ce courage pour se lancer dans le vide, sans garantie mais poussé par une curiosité inébranlable, une foi certaine en la vie.

[@stigbengtsson7026]

You said that you have a lot more questions at the end of that talk, than what you had in the beginning. That is knowledge, as I se it, Not make answers, make the questions. Best whishes from Sweden.

[@aliefrat]

My favorite person ever.

[@majak.t.135]

This is great ! :) I just wish that Roger Penrose heard , or spoke to , Bruce Lipton and his amazement with discovery how do our cells behave, what goes on micro level that we didnt know before . I am sure that would broaden the road towards some real realizations . :) Thank you for this interview , I have utterly enjoyed it ! :)

[@david.hilbert1234]

I think Dirac is his most favourite physicist 🙌🏻

[@hyperduality2838]

Spin up is dual to spin down, particles are dual to anti-particles -- the Dirac equation. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages, communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. All numbers fall within the complex plane hence all numbers are dual. Measurements, perceptions, observations or intuitions are converted into ideas or conceptions by mathematicians all the time. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Your mind converts perceptions into conceptions -- a syntropic process, teleological. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. "Perceptions are the product of an unconscious inference (prediction)" -- Helmholtz. The tetrahedron is self dual. The cube is dual to the octahedron. The dodecahedron is dual to the icosahedron -- geometry.

[@sorlag110]

4:48 Imagine paddling along in a canoe on a nice day, randomly passing by Roger Penrose sitting on a deck talking about the transcendental qualities of understanding

[@rzalman96]

Only now do I think I understand what he means by consciousness transcends computation.

[@nUrnxvmhTEuU]

I think I see what he means, but I'm definitely not convinced by his argumentation so far

[@bluemotherfish]

is rationalized avoidance of quantum mechanic's proof of clairvoyance between us, aware or not, imo. -a

[@bkinstler]

More. Please.

[@take5th]

It’s like the difference between what we are and who we are. Classical physics tell us who we are; our properties, mass, inertia, how we react to forces, etc., as an assembly. Quantum mechanics describes what we are, how a waveform collapsed to determine the stability of atomic level forces that create the platform. We are related, connected, who and what we are, but we are not sure how.

[@AquilaEagleMoto]

In science, “incomplete” just means the theory doesn’t work and we don’t know how to fix it.

[@schmetterling4477]

In this case "incomplete" means that Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen, despite being relativists, didn't notice that their non-relativistic analysis was flawed. :-)

[@IWasAlwaysNeverAnywhere]

What a way to end the interview. Thank you

[@KT-en8pq]

Dr. Michael Levin has shown that the electric field about a cell can be manipulated which changes the signaling in the micrutubules. Maybe the collapse of the wave function happens within the electric field of the cell.

[@user-xs2si3zu9p]

4) Einstein's phrase "spooky action at a distance" was euphemistic for asserting non local hidden variables are TRUE. The incompleteness is based on the entangled hidden variables. 5) Wave collapse requires inner and outer i, so to speak, its an i/o feature of entangled root access. think of it like Admin permission on a Unix shell.

[@rh7686]

Would love to see a discussion between Penrose and Wolfram!

[@malikialgeriankabyleswag4200]

This man is a legend

[@AdrianCHOY]

It’s amazing that he can formulate his thoughts so clearly & coherently despite being above 90.

[@donnievance1942]

Age is not synonymous with dementia. Where did you even get that idea?

[@AdrianCHOY]

@@donnievance1942 I said it was amazing, I did not say he had dementia. Where did u even get that idea?

[@physt]

Him and Dr James Watson are probably the most legendary scientists alive.

[@capability-snob]

Nailed it. I don't think we will be able to divorce consciousness and how it works from QM and WFC.

[@5piles]

as he said there is zero progress on what the word even means. and it will continue being that was for so long as the magical thinking of physicalism persists. even in the age where we know the curvature of space affects mass-energy without 1870s physics interaction, and mass-energy affects space without 1870s interaction, they cannot understand this means physicalism doesnt exist since awareness affects mass-energy without the need for appealing to 1870s interactions either.

[@hogopogo123]

Dr. Subhash kak says the similar thing, specially about consciousness.

[@cykyewkongchang4109]

excellent

[@TravelBreakthrough]

Interesting point

[@Neceros]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 *🐈 Schrödinger's cat thought experiment aimed to show the absurdity of quantum superposition applied to macroscopic objects.* 00:29 *🎓 As a graduate student, Penrose took courses by influential thinkers like Bondi, Dirac, and Steen, sparking his interest in physics and computation.* 01:24 *🧩 Gödel's incompleteness theorems showed that our understanding transcends any fixed set of rules for proving mathematical statements.* 04:11 *🧠 Penrose argues that consciousness, not just following computational rules, enables humans to transcend formal systems.* 06:05 *⚛️ As a physicalist, Penrose consciousness must arise from known physics, suggesting quantum mechanics as a possibility.* 10:22 *⌛ Penrose theorizes that the quantum measurement problem, involving wave function collapse, cannot be computed and requires a new physical theory.* 12:26 *🧵 Hamerhoff's suggestion about microtubules led to Penrose's orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR) model of consciousness.* 14:14 *🌍 Dennis Sciama greatly influenced Penrose's understanding of physics, especially cosmology, despite Penrose's mathematics background.* 15:23 *🖼️ Penrose describes himself as a visual thinker, which posed challenges in algebra-focused math courses requiring written explanations.* 17:40 *🌌 If he could meet anyone from history, Penrose would choose Galileo for his groundbreaking physical insights and principled stand against authority.* Made with HARPA AI

[@gkelly34]

I’ve always thought that consciousness and sense of self was as a result of our brains interaction with fields permeating the universe. Similar to our eyes evolving to interact with the electromagnetic field

[@jenrim]

Interesting idea.

[@bulb9970]

Recently I've been thinking a lot about quantum mechanics, if their random nature could be explained by God or some other scientific force not understandable by us, and the consequences they have on our consciousness. This could explain if we do have free will or not. It's fantastic that I could find a real source about this exact topic right now.

[@javiej]

I think an interesting collateral aspect of "the understanding" being able to transcend the rules is that it gives Evolution a reason to favour consciousness development. Even if an advanced non conscious specie (or even an artificial neural network for the case ) could solve very complex tasks they could never get the advantage provided by "understanding". To me this can explain the devopment of conscoiusnes by Evolution. If there is an unknown resource in nature that somehow can permit to build self awareness and consciousnes with it, then Evolution will find the way to create it sooner or later, because it provides an advantage. Logically this doesn't explain how consciousness emerges, but at least it could explain why.

[@user-gr5tx6rd4h]

Or may be matter emerges from consciousness, which is fundamental? Matter being ideas of the consciousness, useful for systematic, logic thought. Look up Donald Hoffman, who has many wonderful videos on KZbin about this.

[@charlesflint9048]

If perceived reality is altered by conscious observation, then we must each exist in our own individual quantum world. The universe we think we live in is much weirder than most people can imagine.😊

[@johnnybickle13]

I have solved it for him, what is outside of these rules is our ability to reason.

[@alexbuccheri5635]

Mind-blowing to think that Roger got to attend classes by Paul Dirac

[@eveszokolai8939]

on what date was this interview recorded please?

[@society_for_praising_appli6261]

Up at top, first comment, same question. There was a reply saying May 2023. (just in case you missed it)

[@frankhoffman3566]

Well I may have to watch this a dozen more times to get it, but at least this time he discussed why consciousness in his concept is not computational.

[@wattshumphrey8422]

In that the rules of logical structures are undergirded by (or the same as...) postulates, which are take as "true by inspection", the logical edifice is, by construction (and definition...), based on an understanding outside of any rules.

[@hyperduality2838]

Truth is dual falsity -- propositional logic. Absolute truth (universals) is dual to relative truth (particulars) -- Hume's fork. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages, communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. All numbers fall within the complex plane hence all numbers are dual. Measurements, perceptions, observations or intuitions are converted into ideas or conceptions by mathematicians all the time. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Your mind converts perceptions into conceptions -- a syntropic process, teleological. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. "Perceptions are the product of an unconscious inference (prediction)" -- Helmholtz. The tetrahedron is self dual. The cube is dual to the octahedron. The dodecahedron is dual to the icosahedron -- geometry. Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung.

[@alexbarnett1461]

This is a really nice video. What a British treasure 😊

[@phildurre9492]

of course our understanding can be supperior to computing, how else would you catch a ball, if you need to compute stuff first.

[@gyrogearloose1345]

Prof Penrose mentions his respect for - and learning from - Dennis Sciama. It is interesting to note that Dr Alexander Unzicker's critical theory of relativity is inspired - I think it's fair to say - by the work of Sciama. See youTube 'Unzicker's Real Physics'. And odd perhaps, that Unzicker is himself a trained neuroscientist? Thanks to IAI for presenting tremendous material!

[@miguele.antonetti9999]

Of course it is.

[@sebastian.tristan]

Such an interesting person.

[@guilleibarra9664]

Que bien explica el flaco Menotti

[@michaelkoch6863]

Die Theorie von Roger Penrose , die eine menschliche Wahrnehmung berücksichtigt ist sehr interessant.

[@davecrupel2817]

I love this legendary man. Physically starting to go a wee bit. Just a teeny bit. (Understandably given his age) But mentally? He is 200% there. Moreso than ever imo! And his passion is also still at it's peak. Plus he is just a treat to listen to. Whether you comprehend the subject matter or not. ❤

[@threestars2164]

What definition of consciousness (the capacity for introspection) are we using here?? It's not quite clear.

[@schmetterling4477]

There is no useful scientific definition of consciousness. A machine can do introspection to any depth, at most it will run into the halt-problem of computer science. What-am-I-thinking-am-I-thinking leads to endless recursion. In psychiatry this is known as neurosis and worse.

[@ExistenceQuest]

Hopefully we will be able to uncover the secrets