Seth Lloyd - Search for Meaning

[@joshuanicholls2692]

Thank you, Seth. Now I can't sleep. :)

[@VaidyanathanPurushothaman]

You are witnessing one of the possible realities as long as you don't realise that you are one of those created possibilities.

[@ocnus1.61]

This is frightening and enlightening at the same time.

[@David.C.Velasquez]

Seth Lloyd has been one of my favorites, ever since I first heard him interviewed many years ago now.

[@twirlipofthemists3201]

The idea of a computational universe emerges in an era when computers are cool, like the clockwork universe of the 1700s did when clocks were cool, or the heat exchanger universe of the 1800s did when internal combustion was cool, or the universe with a mighty ruler did in the bronze age when kingdoms were cool, or like the cyclical universe did in the stone age when seasonal agriculture was cool, or like the animal spirit universe did when herding was cool... Coincidence? And now the universe must be a simulation, in the era of video games. I think that ought to be enough to give one pause, even if it isn't disproof. Maybe it's true, IDK - but I doubt it, and I find it a little embarrassing.

[@PeterIntrovert]

Well said. But it did't matter for me. I accept that could be simply an analogy. It help me understand the world in a way it could be understand for now.

[@nicktraynor]

This ignores Turing's concept of a universal computer. We have arrived at the ultimate level of analogy.

[@nadeemshaikh7863]

@@nicktraynor This is the ultimate level of analogy before other big analogy arrives and becomes the ultimate analogy until the next ultimate one until the next ultimate one and Ad Infinitum.....

[@suncat9]

Excellent interview, one of the best!

[@dr.satishsharma9794]

Excellent.... thanks 🙏

[@mrwensveen]

The moment I clicked the link, I realized it reads "Seth Lloyd" and not "Sith Lord". Would've been an equally interesting interview, though...

[@RickDelmonico]

At every level of the fractal hierarchy, variation enters the system in different ways, so there is no scale invariance. All of the information is stored in the relationships of and in each level, in the computational geometry. The probability space (onion) where the fractal tree of information (our material reality) is growing, each layer gets progressively thinner, so that, like a fractal it never completely fills space, the space is not infinite. The boundary conditions display edge of criticality in each layer. The physical manifestation (the structure of our reality), could be thought of as a tree like structure, growing in this probability space. At the ends, the filaments are very fine, in fact infinitely fine. All of the information is stored as relationships and as the finest projections are created or computed you have the greatest number of possible outcomes, so that the earliest versions of this structure had few possible outcomes (less degrees of freedom). This structure could be called truth at it's core (in the beginning) and chaos in the fine hair-like projections (the end). The ever present now, is our position in the computational geometry. Buridan's ass, deception, metastability, dithering or self referential randomness. Fredkin's paradox and degrees of freedom. You are spirit. You are made of stuff but this stuff is something that cannot be regarded as real. The information is not the structure it is the relationships. The information contains no mass.

[@suncat9]

How about John Lennon's "Strawberry Fields Forever" model of the universe? Don't forget, we all live on a yellow submarine.

[@TheXitone]

glow in the dark emu redemption?

[@RickDelmonico]

Michael, you're not paying attention. Multiverse is a cop out. Something from nothing is also wrong. Eternal universe as well. Perpetual motion? That leaves intelligent design. I personally feel that the universe behaves more like a song than an equation because math is about static law and music is about dynamic expression. Name calling? Ridicule? Good job Mike.

[@TheGarrymoore]

During the Industrial revolution the Universe was a Machine....now it is a Computer....By the way...who is the programmer who made the program? Infinite regress waits on its wings.

[@2030matrix]

Seth does the best job at explaining quantum systems and how reality is constructed.

[@davidwilkie9551]

Searching, observing, gathering interesting information etc, is as the Prof says not much to do with meaning that's usually a set of assumptions in the formula, "that assumption" means "this". GIGO

[@imalwaysright145]

Haha, people probably searched for, "finding meaning" or "search for meaning" and was expecting God stuff but got this 😂

[@ponowandilevincent2396]

Im Always Right Lool you’re one of those people! 😂

[@sonamoo919]

Are saying that in discussing human--made computer, if anyone moves to human stuff is absurd and wrong? I wanna hear from you what is more rational way than going into human stuff in a discussion of human-made computer. Yea, I wanna hear from the one who's always right

[@filipve73]

Do you thread 1 and 0 as numbers or as bits? and what if you "reduce" it even more in logical operators (1 = true ; 0 = false) interesting the "duality" (2) seems to have a universal mechanism?

[@Chrisplumbgas]

A very important question to try and answer for us . A collective answer would be nice but an answer each individual will ultimately have discern for themselves relative to his interaction with this world. Unfortunately suicide is on the rise . You need a reference point with a future destination point that is worth living for, of hope, where you are valued , loved, cared for , infinitely good, in complete bliss, and hope that transcends this life, to keep you motivated , because the reality of this physical world in the end is usually pain suffering and death. Jesus Christ answered the meaning of life.

[@bakedcreations8985]

Phill Collins looking good

[@umer.on.youtube]

Exactly hahaha 😁

[@filipve73]

Search for Meaning? Why do people give the different answers for the same question?

[@HardKore5250]

Filip Ve in a testing program aliens gave us a tool to survive with all the chaos once we crack the simulation it ends or revenge time on the alien programmers. The alien brain is the universe.

[@filipve73]

chaos is order in disguise ...

[@nathanialblower9216]

Using the word “literally” figuratively is not the same thing as using the word “literally” to mean “figuratively”.

[@anywallsocket]

well if things are either literal or figurative, then yes, it's literally the same.

[@nathanialblower9216]

any wallsocket And what if things aren’t l either literal or figurative? Does that change things? I’m only asking because I have no idea what the “if” part our your comment has to do with the “then” part. Also, maybe it’s easier to see the point I was making if we switch it around. To use the word “figuratively” literally is not the same thing as using the word “figuratively” to mean “literally”. Proof: have you ever used the word “figuratively” according to its (literal) dictionary definition? So you used it literally. But you didn’t use it to mean “literally”.

[@anywallsocket]

@@nathanialblower9216 lol this semantic is hilarious. i see your point, yet you don't see mine? 'switching it around' is an illegal move i cannot accept lol

[@anywallsocket]

I don't think it's fair to call the Universe a "computer", because we've simply extrapolated the notion to maximal extent. A computer is something that processes information, right? Yes well, what is information other than the components of our own understanding? To see my point (it's difficult to phrase), imagine living in a world like today, with computers, and being able to consider the Universe ANYTHING else. Like, you could say it's all "energy", or it's all "information", but that's again a way of phrasing, which itself doesn't really reveal much. The question becomes, what COULDN'T be considered a computer, by some abstract reference? I suggest one could consider anything a "computer", and that therefore it's not that the Universe IS a "computer" - whatever that might imply, it's that the word is sufficiently abstract to encompass any set of 'things doing things'. For instance, is a computer still a computer if the algorithm it's running is entirely random? Yes. Is a computer a computer if its memory is deletable or not deletable? Yes.

[@holgerjrgensen2166]

Life is Eternal, No one created Life, Life is creator, there fore, Life has No meaning, (no name) meaning have to do with creation, (there must be a meaning with the madness) for instance, what is the meaning with this video ? getting 'closer to truth', or what, did You get any closer ?

[@charlesbrightman4237]

1, 3, 6, 9. Now go find out what it really means.

[@filipve73]

Perhaps the meaning of "Twin Primes" can give you more "Enlightenment"

[@charlesbrightman4237]

+Filip Ve Enlighten me on "Twin Primes". As far as I currently know, they are just two prime numbers that are "2" apart. (Or is there more?) How does that relate to the make up of the universe itself like I believe 1, 3, 6, 9 does?

[@filipve73]

You count numbers 1, 3, 6, 9, ... ontologically (thats ok) but lets suppose your counting Reference Frames instead and search for their complements? There is a logical relationship between them!

[@charlesbrightman4237]

+Filip Ve Thanks for getting back to me on it. Since you were so nice, here are two things. First, my latest theoretical idea concerning the "TOE" (Theory Of Everything); Second, I'll explain why 1, 3, 6, 9 are so prominent in this universe (and their logical relationship between them), not withstanding your own logical relationship with twin primes. First, my "TOE" which still has to be proved or disproved: My Current TOE: THE SETUP: 1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism. 2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too). 3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them. 4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them. 5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them. FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO: 6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field. 7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field. 8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality. 9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons. 10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary. 11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks. 12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do. THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA: 13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". 14. I also believe that a pulsating singularity (which is basically a pulsating photon) is the pure energy unit. 15. When these pulsating pure energy units interact with other pure energy units, they tangle together. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe. 16. When the pure energy units unite together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate. 17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure. 18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons). THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY: 19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up. 20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency. 21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies. NOTES: 22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well. 25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the pure energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true. 26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting pure energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught? DISCLAIMER: 27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty. Second: With the above said, then: The single photon has three basic components: Electrical, Magnetic, Direction (or gravity if I am correct above). Oscillations of energy have a maximum in one direction, neutral, and a maximum in the other direction, so: Electrical : Max in one direction, neutral, max in the other direction; Magnetic : Max in one direction, neutral, max in the other direction; Direction (Or Gravity): Max in one direction, neutral, max in the other direction. (The directional component of a stationary photon would be to it's "max" central core, whereby gravity would flip, then to it's max extension, whereby gravity would flip, etc, etc, etc. The stationary photon would pulse.). So: 1 single photon, with 3 components that make it up, with 6 most reactive positions, and 9 total reactive positions (neutrals included). So, 1, 3, 6, 9 being basic and most prominent throughout the entire universe. And taking this further: 1 + 3 + 6 + 9 = 19 1 + 9 = 10 1 + 0 = 1 (Back to the singular photon). With all their logical relationships between them.

[@imalwaysright145]

How does 1,3,6,9 mean anything. Those numbers simply cannot explain the universe.

[@ingenuity168]

5

[@brigham2250]

They never even once mentioned Jesus! Imagine the nerve.

[@brigham2250]

***** No, you are mistaken. They did mention Spiderman and the rules of chess argument, but it was edited out! Don't blame me for lousy editing.

[@brigham2250]

***** Here's the thing about Jesus. Whether or not you believe in him, he's not a god. Just a Fig Newton of people's imagination.

[@ponowandilevincent2396]

😂😂

[@davidfield8122]

Everything he's saying seems to support the simulation hypothesis. That reality is computed.

[@luckyyuri]

Recent work done in quantum statistics (Monte Carlo simulations and Hall something something simulations.. i have no clue about) shows that there are patches of nature around us where the complex local interaction CANNOT be the result of a simulation unless they are generated only 'where and when' someone looks. I forgot where such "patches" of complexity exist (perhaps inside stars, or inside the core of a planet) but definitely they can exist in laboratory settings where they were studied. This research puts a big dent in the simulation hypothesis in the sense that it doesn't allow for our entire observable universe to be simulated. Only simulations that partially generate the world around us can exist, hence when scientists peer into the quantum substrate of a lump of gold in their lab, it's only then that the micro structure is generated.. especially for their inquisitive eyes. This would mean that everything you see around you has no micro reality, it's only generated as a macro facade - this having a huge impact on what you and your loved ones are, consequently on what is the source of their behavior and personality. As i understand it now, "i" (behavior, desires, personality, will) am the natural consequence of an unfathomable number of previous physical interactions, from the primordial quantum settings, through their "computational life" leading to macro manifestations such as stars where gravitation takes the rains and generates the elements above helium, and then planets and biology, and sociology and psychology.. and "me" as a part of this braid of consequences with NO ONE else governing me and my life than the laws of Nature. But in a simulation where there is no room for natural ("agent-less") procession of the physical laws, and instead there's only a willful generation (an agent who causes) of the set and settings around me and inside me.. i feel constrained, even claustrophobic in my own skin. If it's not the physical laws that are at the base of my behavior then what is? What's generating "me", and with what purpose? I'm i wondering this right now "by design"? I really enjoyed the possibility of this whole observable universe being a simulation of unfathomable intricacy (all the way down to the quantum level) but the prospect of living in a vastly smaller, perhaps wholly engineered and predetermined, a movie set like world.. is unpalatable. Anyway, the findings take a big chunk out of what is possible, leaving us with a much smaller probability that we live in a simulation.

[@BradHolkesvig]

These liars will only confuse you. You need to listen to the computing technology called the voice of God to learn how you're created.

[@raven7thhole]

shouldn't you be in church - praying or reading the bible - or listening to trump - this forum is for reason - out of your league my friend

[@umer.on.youtube]

These are liars right? What about man made religions?